If energy needs to be saved, there are good ways to do it.
                                                               Government product regulation is not one of them

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Resource News Update

 

  #   #   #   #   #   #

Update Tuesday January 10:

(Last update... will return with a new fill of resource news in a week or two, as appropriate!)


Peter Stenzel has noted (translation) the Aero marketing of 20 000 hr life incandescent bulbs
As he says (somewhat adjusted and corrected from the Google translation)
According to their website, their 20 000 hours bulbs have the following advantages:
* Extra-durable filament
* Additional protection against vibrations
* Extra-strength to absorb surges

1 pack of 6 bulbs costs only $ 11.99.

Aero-Tech Light Bulb Co. was founded in 1987 by Ray M. Schlosser as a company producing special lighting. They have over the years developed a complete line of 20,000 hours bulb in many shapes and sizes, from 11-200 watts, and the company is the only manufacturer of 20,000 hours bulb that is still left in America.


More from Halogenica

LED drawbacks
"summary about solid state lighting a.k.a. LED and what has transpired over the last couple of years"
Observations on different LED types, and lifespan and safety issues


U.S. Incandescent ban – will it save the planet (and my economy)?
A good updated rundown from a household savings perspective.

One might add, when looking at this from the viewpoint of whether regulations are justified or not, that society regulations are, or should be, about society savings - not individual savings
(unless "interference in people's lives" is a primary government objective!).

On that basis the percentage electricity and energy savings are even smaller, since household use is only a relatively small part of grid electricity use.
(and see from the blog post that I could decrease the overall 1-2% grid electricity savings I keep referring to!)



Update Monday January 9:

Also good to see Halogenica back in action, as always with an insightful blog post.
The latest, yesterday, covers a Q & A about the US incandescent ban, on to what extent it is a ban, the lamps affected, about halogen replacements and where to get them, and background issues to the ban.


Excerpts, adding to information previously posted here
(the original text also includes a lot of useful links regarding the below text)

If you want incandescent you can still buy 72 watt tungsten halogen Energy Savers and get as much light as from a 100 watt lamp (see my Halogen Energy Savers review). If you can find them. Amazon sells them, Home Depot only have reflector lamps, Lowe’s have more flodlight reflector models, but they can be hard to find in regular stores (ask for them)....
....just a few days ago IKEA proudly announced that they will not sell any incandescent lamps (spinning more-$$$-for-IKEA-from-new-$14-LEDs to sound like “IKEA-saving-the-planet”). More retailers may follow, regardless of how the dispute ends.

Also, regarding the "Blame Bush" jibe at Republicans... the ban was a bi-partisan job
back in 2007:
The original light bulb legislation was written by Fred Upton (R-MI) and Jane Harmon (D-CA) says CNS News.

“In 2007, Harman and Upton introduced bipartisan, bicameral legislation–which became law as part of the Energy Independence and Security Act–that bans the famously inefficient 100-watt incandescent light bulb by 2012, phases out remaining inefficient light bulbs by 2014, and requires that light bulbs be at least three times as efficient as today’s 100-watt incandescent bulb by 2020,” explained a 2009 press release put out by the two House members.

The bill was passed under the Republican Bush administration and signed by president G.W. Bush in 2007. President Obama and the Democratic party have embraced it. However, Upton later changed his mind, as did many other Republicans (and many didn’t think it was a good idea in the first place).



As a comment, and as I also tend to leave out, less common 75 Watt bulbs are also banned from Jan 1 2012 in the Act (in fact, any regular incandescent over 72W, Energy Dept info).

//
Post update correction: Halogenica was right.
The absurdity, that 75 W "dim" bulbs are allowed but 75 W "bright" ones are banned!
This is because the regulations are based on lumen (brightness) rating, rather than energy usage.
The above Dept of Energy link seems to indicate a 72 W maximum, but several other official documents clarify the legality of regular 75 W bulbs, until 1 Jan 2013.
See updated comment to USA regulation on this http://ceolas.net/#li01inx
//


Also, as Halogenica says the above is only about the first phase of the ban, the Halogen replacements will effectively come to be banned too, in the less well known second phase after 2014 that also forms part of the Act, on the 45 lumen per Watt end regulation (they typically only reach 22-25 lumen per Watt), as covered before in this blog.


  #   #   #   #   #   #




I am going to do a weekly or so look at what others are doing, particularly the linked resources...see how it goes.
(May update somewhat, ahead of the next relevant post)


Howard Brandston will soon have an article on the lack of logic in targeting mercury thermometers, yet not doing anything about CFL mercury (as I understand).
In a coming Mondo magazine article (probably either this or this link)

Kevan's blog is as seen just updated, looking at Lighting Regulatory Landscape for 2012, with a European perspective (extract, my highlight)
2012 will also see the beginning of [European Union] consultation on the first revision of the Ecodesign regulations for domestic lamps part 1, aka the Incandescent Lamp Ban.

It is vital that the Lighting Design Community engage with this process and do not get left out like we did at the beginning of the first round of this legislation.
From what we have seen and learned it is now vital that we secure the future of the Halogen energy saver lamp.

At present we are beginning to see the problems I and others have forecast with the disposal of CFLs. We are also seeing increasing numbers of people with non specific photosensitive disorders coming forward. These people can not live with CFLs or LEDs and so far there is insufficient research to understand what this apparently broad range of disorders are caused by though all seem to be able to live with incandescent light.
...good point about saving halogens, also on a practical note as to what is achievable.

Trishah at Light Bulb Choice covering the latest delays in Canada as well as how the Republican amendment affects, or does not affect, the 2012 situation.

The Montana permaculture people has an extensive 2 hour podcast on CFL issues
- interesting, coming from avowed environmentalists...

Send Your Light Bulbs To Washington report on a humorous take on CFLs, with a mock CFL sales campaign, a spoof that nevertheless also shows up several problems with CFLs that don't often get highlighted.

Peter Stenzel's Gluehbirne site, news section (translated: from German, here) also covers the Canadian ban delay, and has LED test report information.

 

2 comments:

Halogenica said...

Oh, I missed the 20 000 hour bulb! :-o

Had a look at their website now... A can be expected, a 60W lamp gives only 575 lumen (about the same as many 11W CFLs) so you need a 75W to get as much light as a short-life 60W.

Still sounds like a good tradeoff where one needs a long life bulb and wants it incandescent. (I could use some of those illuminating my sloping gravel driveway that's such a precarious hassle to change.)

Peter T said...

H: re "my sloping gravel driveway"
- yes that sounds awkward!
As per other posts about it here, it's really only the ban that might justify buying those very long life bulbs...
However, as the Phoebus cartel shows
and in Halogen etc formats the bulbs could be made up to 5000 hrs or so without brightness tradeoff.

I have a number of Halogens with around 2 year lifespan and also better brightness per Watt performance (to put it colloquially), but I have seen that longer lasting ones drop off
in relative brightness.
I quite like the Halogens, bright 70 to 105 W types also often being smaller than regular incandescents, for certain fittings and lampshades.
It is rather petty in terms of overall savings and choice to ban also these in the USA, EU, Australia etc.