image thanks moritz gieselmann
From previous posts regarding rough service availability to ordinary consumers, it was seen that this would be hard to stop anyway for the reasons given:
So effectively the EU are contributing to what they say they are against, since legal EU bulbs use more energy than their banned equivalents!
Regular readers will note that this is similar to the American situation.
The rough service bulbs last longer but are dimmer (the trade off).
Bell as mentioned in the last post seemingly don't give lumen (brightness) rating for their products, but as previously seen from the US discussion it is typically 100W rough service being equivalent to 60-75W regular bulbs in brightness.
So for a bulb of certain brightness, which is after all what you want, legal EU bulbs waste more energy than banned EU bulbs!
They also thereby cost a lot more in use of course, despite longer lifespans.
The predictable EU retort "Let them use energy saving bulbs!" (aka "Let them eat cake!") obviously does not apply for the light quality, appearance etc reasons one might choose such incandescents, also given that Halogen replacement types will also be "phased out" in the EU by 2016.