Chuck,
I was watching a US TV news show yesterday with a story about this :)
They made reference to the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department's
incandescent lamp (http://www.centennialbulb.org/).
Australia has had a similar law for some years. The special-function
thing also applies. This was introduced in the name of being green, but
oddly, one can still readily buy cheap dichroic downlights with all of
their attendant waste (fortunately for my close-work desk lamp!).
I've already explained my experiences and opinions from both a technical
and user perspective regarding high efficiency lighting on list some
years back (I upset some people - again, I apologise unreservedly...) so
I won't go into that here, except to add that, unfortunately, my early
experiences with regard to lifetime, cost and (guaranteed) recycling of
used CFL devices are still valid.
I love the idea of LED technology (I have since the late 70s when I got
my first Radio Shack packet of assorted seconds - they smell BAD when
they explode...), and I do like well designed LED car taillights. That
said, I'm still yet to see a LED luminaire with the quality and
dispersion of a humble incandescent. As the colouration of the actual
chip is relatively easy to control at manufacture (and I expect with RGB
devices available it will be soon be controllable by the user), I hope
someone comes up with a half-decent diffuser sometime soon!
davidt
On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 09:59:18AM -0500, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Like many people, I suppose, I was a bit taken by surprise at the recent
> news reports of the death of incandescent light bulbs in the US. I
> "knew" that "incandescents" were being phased out but didn't realize
> that 2014 was "the end"... with 40 and 60 watt bulbs now being "banned".
> I was immediately concerned about some special lighting
> requirements... candelabra bulbs for our chandeliers, compact size but
> medium base 60 watt bulbs for our kitchen light fixture and, especially,
> 150 watt halogen bulbs used as modeling lights on my studio flash units.
>
> I had already realized that we were being poorly served by the media
> when I looked up the law itself and saw that there were many exemptions
> for a wide variety of special types of bulbs including candelabra base
> bulbs. What I didn't realize from reading only parts of the very
> opaquely worded law is that there is really is no ban on incandescent
> light bulbs. What the law covers is efficency, not lighting technology.
> The law only requires that, whatever the technology, that the lumens
> output of bulbs be 25% more efficient than ordinary incandescent bulbs.
> As the author of the link below points out, halogen technology already
> meets that requirement. A 43 watt halogen produces lumens equivalent to
> a 60 watt conventional incandescent.
>
> So, our expensive candelabra base chandeliers are still safe from
> obsolescence as are my studio lights. I'm still concerned about the
> kitchen light fixture because it take "medium base" bulbs (most common)
> which was the main target of the law. In addition to being very small
> (G16.5 size, 2" diameter) they must also be dimmable. AFAIK there is no
> other bulb that fits the requirement. But I will have to continue
> searching. Good luck with your own requirements.
>
> <http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/1/5263826/the-incandescent-light-bulb-isnt-dead>
>
> Chuck Norcutt
> --
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|