Go Back   DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum > DIY Repair > General DIY Discussions

CLICK HERE AND JOIN OUR COMMUNITY TODAY...IT'S FREE!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-31-2009, 05:37 PM   #1
A "Handy Husband"
 
rjniles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Carolina Low Country
Posts: 3,888
Share |
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


I have read that incadescent light bulbs will be phased out over the next 5-6 years. Having installed several new ceiling fans lately, I see that most of the better fans use candelabra lamps or A or B base lamps. What is the plan for these? Will they be obsolescent or will there be CFL or LED replacements for thes type lamps?

rjniles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 07:20 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,264
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Essentially, it is only incandescent bulbs with the Edison MEDIUM screw base that are being phased out. Any type of bulb that can't readily be replaced with a Compact Fluorescent bulb will still be available and perfectly legal.

http://homerepair.about.com/od/elect...ergybill_4.htm

For example, after 2012 you'll still be able to buy "rough service" 50 watt incandescent bulbs and 40 watt appliance bulbs for fridges and stoves. You'll also still be able to buy the three way incandescent bulbs with the large Edison base.

__________________
Bashing my head against the walls in some of the internet's finest chat rooms.

Last edited by Nestor_Kelebay; 01-31-2009 at 07:27 PM.
Nestor_Kelebay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2009, 09:01 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 17,248
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


They are actually working on new incandescents that will meet the new requirements & be more energy efficient. They may very well be out before the ban goes into effect

Feb 23rd, 2007:

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/s...1109&vnsId=681

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007...nounces_hi.php

Quote:
GE just announced "advancements to the light bulb that potentially will elevate the energy efficiency of this 125-year-old technology to levels comparable to compact fluorescent lamps (CFL), delivering significant environmental benefits. Over the next several years, these advancements will lead to the introduction of high-efficiency incandescent lamps that provide the same high light quality, brightness and color as current incandescent lamps while saving energy and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions." The bulbs will come out at 30 lumens per watt (twice a conventional incandescent) and top out at 60 lumens per watt. GE says "In addition to offering significant energy savings comparable to CFLs, the 21st century version of Edison’s bulb provides all the desirable benefits including light quality and instant-on convenience as incandescent lamps currently provide at a price that will be less than CFLs."
Scuba_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2009, 08:48 AM   #4
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 22
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


My wife and I have been collecting tiffany lampshades for over twenty years and have no intention of screwing those ugly fluorescent things into any of our lamps. We are buying up a load of 15 and 25 watt clear bulbs, in the hope that our stock of bulbs will outlast us...
tommy potatoes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2009, 01:22 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,264
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


I expect that by 2012, lots of companies will be selling a Medium/Candelabra adapter so that you can screw a 25 watt chandelier bulb with a candelabra base into any Edison medium screw socket.

Me thinks it wouldn't even be hard to make such an adapter in your garage. Just take the brass base off an ordinary light bulb, the brass socket from a chanelier bulb holder, glue one inside the other with some epoxy putty, then connect the two brass pieces with a wire. Voila. Screw the adapter into the Tiffany lamp, the chandelier bulb into the adapter and you've got a 2012 compliant Tiffany lamp.

Or would such an adulterated lamp be considered "damaged goods"?
__________________
Bashing my head against the walls in some of the internet's finest chat rooms.

Last edited by Nestor_Kelebay; 02-02-2009 at 01:24 AM.
Nestor_Kelebay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2009, 08:23 PM   #6
A Man With a Plan
 
rperry2394's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Norther California
Posts: 7
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


I am thinking damaged good!
rperry2394 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 04:30 AM   #7
Too Short? Cut it Again!
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 9,635
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


The LED technology is getting better and the light is color true. Right now the arrays are not as bright as incadescents and the price point is scary but they are part of the future. You can get them in just about whatever shape you want including replacement for long florescent tubes.
user1007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 06:39 AM   #8
Mold!! Let's kill it!
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Central Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,830
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


And as the Chinese ramp up production like they did for CFs, the price will drop to be competitive.
Maintenance 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 07:03 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canonsburg, PA (Pittsburgh)
Posts: 429
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


I hope this is not changing the subject too much but I have to ask... Does a CFL really save that much energy? Most of the "wasted" energy is heat. Here in the north east that heat is not wasted most of the year. And, in the summer when it is waste, is the time of year we use lighting the least because of longer daylight hours. Most of the lighting in my home is CFL or florescent tubes and even some LED under cabinets but I have not noticed any difference in my total energy use when I adjust for average temperatures. I don't have the ability to figure this to the exact watt hour/MCF but I think I am pretty close.

So I am thinking with the higher cost of the bulb and since it is very likely it takes significantly more energy to make CFLs we are probably breaking even at best and maybe even losing money and polluting more?

All that said, In warm climates or for use outside it where any heat is wasted or pollution it seems reasonable to assume the savings is significant. But inside the home???

What do you think?

Rege
RegeSullivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 07:13 AM   #10
A "Handy Husband"
 
rjniles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Carolina Low Country
Posts: 3,888
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Al Gore just rolled over in his grave (Oh, I forgot he is still alive, he just looks dead).
rjniles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 07:51 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 17,248
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Quote:
Originally Posted by RegeSullivan View Post
I hope this is not changing the subject too much but I have to ask... Does a CFL really save that much energy? Most of the "wasted" energy is heat. Here in the north east that heat is not wasted most of the year. And, in the summer when it is waste, is the time of year we use lighting the least because of longer daylight hours. Most of the lighting in my home is CFL or florescent tubes and even some LED under cabinets but I have not noticed any difference in my total energy use when I adjust for average temperatures. I don't have the ability to figure this to the exact watt hour/MCF but I think I am pretty close.

So I am thinking with the higher cost of the bulb and since it is very likely it takes significantly more energy to make CFLs we are probably breaking even at best and maybe even losing money and polluting more?

All that said, In warm climates or for use outside it where any heat is wasted or pollution it seems reasonable to assume the savings is significant. But inside the home???

What do you think?

Rege
A CFL saves a LOT of power...100w bulb replaced by a 23w
One person they use hydroelectric power & in the winter re-install incandescents to assist in heating the house
This to avoid using heating oil VS very low priced electric that is being produced 24x7 pollution free
Our electric cost is higher & not worth it to swap out the CFL's

Our kitchen had ~320w of lightijng & it was terrible
I installed (7) recessed 13w CFL's & changed the fan light to CFL
I installed a 10w LED rope light & 4w under cabinet lights

Usually we use 4 of the CFL's & the LED undercounter = 56w
That's a big decrease & a lot less heat in the summer
The kitchen has the largest radiator as the door to 2nd floor is off the kitchen

I buy my bulbs usually for free after instant rebate at HD
$3.25 for a 4 pak, $4 instant rebate
On my last purchase they took the extra $1.50 off the rest of the stuff I was buying

Electric rates here have dropped quite a bit in the past year
But still pretty high
Scuba_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 08:02 AM   #12
Old School
 
Willie T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. Petersburg, FL Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond them.
Posts: 3,634
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Quote:
Originally Posted by RegeSullivan View Post
I hope this is not changing the subject too much but I have to ask... Does a CFL really save that much energy? Most of the "wasted" energy is heat. Here in the north east that heat is not wasted most of the year. And, in the summer when it is waste, is the time of year we use lighting the least because of longer daylight hours. Most of the lighting in my home is CFL or florescent tubes and even some LED under cabinets but I have not noticed any difference in my total energy use when I adjust for average temperatures. I don't have the ability to figure this to the exact watt hour/MCF but I think I am pretty close.

So I am thinking with the higher cost of the bulb and since it is very likely it takes significantly more energy to make CFLs we are probably breaking even at best and maybe even losing money and polluting more?

All that said, In warm climates or for use outside it where any heat is wasted or pollution it seems reasonable to assume the savings is significant. But inside the home???

What do you think?

Rege
Unfortunately, I think we all know deep down inside that it is more than likely the usual case of...

Product "A" has been perfected too much, so not that many of them are being sold anymore despite the fact that prices (that's "price point" to you guys who like to type extra words. ) have been lowered to reasonable levels.

So.......... Introduce Product "B", and either regulate or humiliate (peer pressure... read: "green") people into switching over.

There is hardly anything in this tired old world that cannot be matched to its basic dollar value. If it doesn't sell and make someone rich, it doesn't last. Been that way since time began, and it will probably stay that way till time ends.
__________________
"True eloquence consists in saying all that is necessary, and only that which is."
François Duc de La Rochefoucauld
Willie T
Willie T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 08:04 AM   #13
Too Short? Cut it Again!
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 9,635
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


My gallery clients still have to use, mainly halogens on the artwork, but I switched them all to CFL for the lights in hallways and overhead lighting in general spaces.

Last time I swept through I replaced the bulbs in all exit lights with LED arrays for my commercial clients.

Switching to CFL or LED may not seem like winning the lottery but my clients do notice the difference. And the bulbs themselves last so much longer. The fire department inspections have not found a failed exit light in two or three years now either which sort of screwed an income stream for me I suppose.
user1007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 08:20 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Boston, MA
Posts: 17,248
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Quote:
Originally Posted by Willie T View Post
Product "A" has been perfected too much, so not that many of them are being sold anymore despite the fact that prices (that's "price point" to you guys who like to type extra words. ) have been lowered to reasonable levels.

So.......... Introduce Product "B", and either regulate or humiliate (peer pressure... read: "green") people into switching over.
Are you serious ?
You think incandescents had been "perfected" too much ?

Quote:
Incandescent light bulbs have remained virtually unchanged since Thomas Edison invented them in 1879.
Perhaps if they HAD made improvements to them we would not have needed CFL's
CFL's last years, I was lucky to get 6 months out of a lot of the reg bulbs
The filaments became thinner over the years to save $$
They have an original bulb burning in a firehouse & the filament is pretty thick

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/set/lightbulbs.html

I've actually added lights & have brighter rooms with CFLs
I use daylight bulbs = 6500k which are a much better light then the incandescents

The problem is the changes they tried to make came TOO late
The CFL had alredy hit the market place
The "energy saving" new bulbs they came out with only save 30% VS the 75% saved with CFL's
GE actually scrapped their plans for energy efficient reg bulbs after spending a lot of $$
http://greenlightingsolutions.blogsp...andescent.html


I also can use a 23w CFL in my bathroom light (rated for 100w)
If I used the 100w bulb it was rated for it would overheat
Scuba_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2009, 08:42 AM   #15
Old School
 
Willie T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St. Petersburg, FL Minds of moderate caliber ordinarily condemn everything which is beyond them.
Posts: 3,634
Default

Incadescent lamp phase out question


Hey, as long as you're convinced....

__________________
"True eloquence consists in saying all that is necessary, and only that which is."
François Duc de La Rochefoucauld
Willie T
Willie T is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3 phase power phase question jelliott Electrical 16 12-20-2008 03:21 PM
120/208/1 phase wiring questions JohnJon Electrical 11 08-31-2008 11:28 PM
Fluorescent lamp flickering Ash Electrical 11 08-03-2008 07:35 PM
3 phase panel question curse21 Electrical 2 08-18-2004 10:17 PM




Top of Page | View New Posts

Copyright © 2003-2014 Escalate Media. All Rights Reserved.