Posts Tagged ‘light bulbs’

A reprieve for incandescent bulbs?

September 2, 2010

I still have hope that the Edison bulb will survive – in spite of all the do-gooders who want to be Nanny.

New research may provide the answer.

http://www.greenzer.com/blog/blog_image_store/2009/09/eu-bans-incadescent-light-bulbs.jpg

According to an article in The New York Times,

Incandescent Bulbs Return to the Cutting Edge

“Researchers across the country have been racing to breathe new life intoThomas Edison’s light bulb, a pursuit that accelerated with the new legislation. Amid that footrace, one company is already marketing limited quantities of incandescent bulbs that meet the 2012 standard, and researchers are promising a wave of innovative products in the next few years.

“There’s a massive misperception that incandescents are going away quickly,” said Chris Calwell, a researcher with Ecos Consulting who studies the bulb market. “There have been more incandescent innovations in the last three years than in the last two decades.”

For lighting researchers involved in trying to save the incandescent bulb, the goal is to come up with one that matches the energy savings of fluorescent bulbs while keeping the qualities that many consumers seem to like in incandescents, like the color of the light and the ease of using them with dimmers.

“Due to the 2007 federal energy bill that phases out inefficient incandescent light bulbs beginning in 2012, we are finally seeing a race” to develop more efficient ones, said Noah Horowitz, senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Some of the leading work is under way at a company called Deposition Sciences here in Santa Rosa. Its technology is a key component of the new Philips bulb line.

Normally, only a small portion of the energy used by an incandescent bulb is converted into light, while the rest is emitted as heat. Deposition Sciences applies special reflective coatings to gas-filled capsules that surround the bulb’s filament. The coatings act as a sort of heat mirror that bounces heat back to the filament, where it is transformed to light.

Despite a decade of campaigns by the government and utilities to persuade people to switch to energy-saving compact fluorescents, incandescent bulbs still occupy an estimated 90 percent of household sockets in the United States. Aside from the aesthetic and practical objections to fluorescents, old-style incandescents have the advantage of being remarkably cheap”.

There is still hope.

Low energy bulbs – something wrong here.

August 31, 2010

This is in favour of the simple, cheap, traditional incandescent light bulb.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/01/07/article-1108775-02F409FC000005DC-572_468x313.jpg

I just do not like the new low energy bulbs — they are slow and the light they emit is cold and creepy.

Their claims of 5 or 8 or 10 year life cannot really be tested (there is no guarantee of course and if you drop one its life is over immediately). They are generally bulky and ugly.

They seem to have health risks (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_news/Study_warns_of_green_light_bulb_electrosmog_.html?cid=8584642)

and emit more mercury. http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=aa7796aa-e4a5-4c06-be84-b62dee548fda

They are supposed to reduce man’s carbon footprint but this is a nonsense on three counts: firstly switching bulbs is almost insignificant in terms of reducing man-made carbon emissions which are in turn a very small part of total carbon emissions and  in any case the effect of CO2 on climate change is insignificant. This argument is not very convincing.

I cannot help feeling that somebody, somewhere is making a lot of money from this change of regulations and enforced switch to the new bulbs. My prime suspect is the lighting manufacturers and their bureaucratic symbiotes.