Incandescent Light Bulb Phase Out

Writer
User avatar
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 6:06 pm

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 8:17 am » by Love


This is news. :idea:

When the ball drops on New Year’s Eve, the year ends -- and so does the ordinary lightbulb.


“The government started phasing out incandescents in 2010, starting with the 100-watt bulb, and then followed by the 75-watt,” explained Melissa Andresko, communications director for lighting-automation company Lutron.

“Come January 1, both the 60- and the 40-watt bulbs are going away. And that’s really going to have the most impact on consumers because those are the most popular incandescent bulb types right now,” she told FoxNews.com earlier this month.


Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/12/31/end-road-for-incandescent-light-bulb/

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:08 pm
Location: The outlet by the light switch

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 5:23 pm » by Thebluecanary


Love wrote:This is news. :idea:

When the ball drops on New Year’s Eve, the year ends -- and so does the ordinary lightbulb.


“The government started phasing out incandescents in 2010, starting with the 100-watt bulb, and then followed by the 75-watt,” explained Melissa Andresko, communications director for lighting-automation company Lutron.

“Come January 1, both the 60- and the 40-watt bulbs are going away. And that’s really going to have the most impact on consumers because those are the most popular incandescent bulb types right now,” she told FoxNews.com earlier this month.


Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/12/31/end-road-for-incandescent-light-bulb/


They've been talking about this since 2010. We've been phasing out our "old" lightbulbs as they burn out since then…I was buying compact fluorescents because that was what was available, but they suck. So for the past year I've been buying LED bulbs, and even though they're expensive, they're better than the CF bulbs. And supposedly they last 10 years….we'll see.
Remember, in a real conspiracy, all players are pawns regardless of their rank.
-----Christopher Hyatt

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7330
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 5:26 pm » by 99socks


I agree, the CF lightbulbs suck.

However, I am still waiting for LED to come out in the weird sizes used in all the fans here. :?
I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


http://thethinkingapostate.ghost.io/

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 1891
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:08 pm
Location: The outlet by the light switch

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 5:30 pm » by Thebluecanary


99socks wrote:I agree, the CF lightbulbs suck.

However, I am still waiting for LED to come out in the weird sizes used in all the fans here. :?


They have some oddball sizes of LED at Target Sock. I was even able to get LED bulbs in tiny flame size to go in my ceramic Christmas tree from 1982 this year.

That's the problem with phasing out…they have to replace every single odd size of bulb with the new option, or it is going to cost people extra money having to replace fixtures.
Remember, in a real conspiracy, all players are pawns regardless of their rank.
-----Christopher Hyatt

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7330
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 5:37 pm » by 99socks


Thebluecanary wrote:
99socks wrote:I agree, the CF lightbulbs suck.

However, I am still waiting for LED to come out in the weird sizes used in all the fans here. :?


They have some oddball sizes of LED at Target Sock. I was even able to get LED bulbs in tiny flame size to go in my ceramic Christmas tree from 1982 this year.

That's the problem with phasing out…they have to replace every single odd size of bulb with the new option, or it is going to cost people extra money having to replace fixtures.



Target, really? Man, I thought I saw it all at Home Depot... :lol:
I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


http://thethinkingapostate.ghost.io/

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 958
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:28 pm

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 6:35 pm » by Naranja


They did that over a year ago here in sweden, LED is the shit anyway, except for old lavalamps...
Its still legal and possible to order any type of bulb in all eu countries due to a loophole in the law
because the ban is only on domestic use, not industrial.
Image

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 4176
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:11 am
Location: Earth

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 8:57 pm » by Shaggietrip


Did some research back in 2012 on this. Here is the thread from back then and some info on different lighting and pros/cons. Down 3 posts is some items. I have not looked into it since.

http://www.disclose.tv/forum/cf-light-bulbs-a-serious-health-hazard-t43172-20.html?hilit=cf%20light%20bulbs



:idea:
ImageImage[img]

Remember when a Harp was a good thing.

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:59 pm
Location: Surfin' on Titan, dude !

PostWed Jan 01, 2014 9:33 pm » by DarkHeart


Naranja wrote:They did that over a year ago here in sweden, LED is the shit anyway, except for old lavalamps...
Its still legal and possible to order any type of bulb in all eu countries due to a loophole in the law
because the ban is only on domestic use, not industrial.


The industrial ones are still available, although I buy halogen bulbs, which are both tungsten filament & more efficient, they look like the old bulbs with a car headlight bulb inside !
Image #1 contre les salopries d'existence

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 12:23 am

PostFri Jan 03, 2014 12:59 am » by Ishumble


Here are some beautiful and artistic lights


Upload to Disclose.tv


Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 7330
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 7:14 am

PostFri Jan 03, 2014 3:53 am » by 99socks


Shaggietrip wrote:Did some research back in 2012 on this. Here is the thread from back then and some info on different lighting and pros/cons. Down 3 posts is some items. I have not looked into it since.

http://www.disclose.tv/forum/cf-light-bulbs-a-serious-health-hazard-t43172-20.html?hilit=cf%20light%20bulbs



:idea:



:cheers:




Shaggietrip wrote:Thought I would revisit this thread. It wont be to long untill we are forced to all get these bulbs. I do not think there is a way to stop it. Even at the state level.


Upload to Disclose.tv









I am not sure of the alternative. I was thinking, well maybe led lighting. so I looked up the hazards of them.

Safety and health

The vast majority of devices containing LEDs are "safe under all conditions of normal use", and so are classified as "Class 1 LED product"/"LED Klasse 1". At present, only a few LEDs—extremely bright LEDs that also have a tightly focused viewing angle of 8° or less—could, in theory, cause temporary blindness, and so are classified as "Class 2".[82] In general, laser safety regulations—and the "Class 1", "Class 2", etc. system—also apply to LEDs.[83]

While LEDs have the advantage over fluorescent lamps that they do not contain mercury, they may contain other hazardous metals such as lead and arsenic. A study published in 2011 states: "According to federal standards, LEDs are not hazardous except for low-intensity red LEDs, which leached Pb [lead] at levels exceeding regulatory limits (186 mg/L; regulatory limit: 5). However, according to California regulations, excessive levels of copper (up to 3892 mg/kg; limit: 2500), Pb (up to 8103 mg/kg; limit: 1000), nickel (up to 4797 mg/kg; limit: 2000), or silver (up to 721 mg/kg; limit: 500) render all except low-intensity yellow LEDs hazardous.".[84]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_diode


ANSES highlights risks from LED lighting

ANSES, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety, has published a report entitled (in English): " Lighting systems using light-emitting diodes: health issues to be considered," which focuses squarely on potential problems caused by LED lighting.

The full report is available in French only, but the report summary (in English) says that risks have been identified concerning the use of certain LED lamps, raising potential health concerns for the general population and professionals. "The issues of most concern identified by the Agency concern the eye due to the toxic effect of blue light and the risk of glare," says the report, adding that the blue light necessary to obtain white LEDs causes "toxic stress" to the retina.

Blue light causes a photochemical risk to the eye, says the report, the level of which depends on the accumulated dose of blue light to which the person has been exposed, which is generally the result of low-intensity exposure repeated over long periods. "Blue light is…recognized as being harmful and dangerous for the retina, as a result of cellular oxidative stress," says the report, adding that 3 groups are particularly at risk; children, populations which are already light-sensitive, and workers likely to be exposed to high-intensity lighting.

The other main risk is from glare. The report say that, for indoor lighting, it is generally agreed that luminance higher than 10,000 cd/m² causes visual discomfort whatever the position of the lighting unit in the field of vision. Because the emission surfaces of LEDs are highly-concentrated point sources, the luminance of each individual source can be 1000 times higher than the discomfort level. The level of direct radiation from this type of source can therefore easily exceed the level of visual discomfort. Other risks related to the use of LED lighting systems have also been raised, but futher study is required.

The report says that the photobiological safety standard (EN 62471) seems ill-adapted to lighting systems using LEDs, and that the Unified Glaring Rate used for the other types of lighting is unsuitable for LEDs. Among various recommendations, ANSES says that only LEDs falling into risk groups similar to those of traditional lighting systems be available to the general public, and that the highest risk lighting systems be reserved for professional use under conditions in which it is possible to guarantee the safety of workers.

Manufacturers and integrators of lighting systems using LEDs are encouraged to use optics or diffusers, for example, so that the beams of light emitted by the LEDs cannot be seen directly, to avoid glare. Manufacturers should also take account of the progressive wear of layers of phosphor in white LEDs, which in time could lead to devices being moved from one photobiological risk group to a higher one, according to ANSES.

Source: http://www.ledsmagazine.com/news/7/11/13


The amount of harm from an LED, like any other lamp, is determined by the built-in protection of the product, in combination with reasonable precautions taken by the viewer. Specific to LEDs, the wider the field of light (i.e. size of the illumination source) and the brighter (higher luminance) of that source, the more potential risk it carries for the retina. Proximity to the light source is also a consideration. One should not, for example, gaze up close into a light box of blue (or even white) LEDs for longer than 100 seconds (the maximum recommendation from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection). On the other hand, a small array of white LEDs (which contain some of the blue spectrum) in a lamp used for task lighting would probably cause little problem.

More info on all lighting and source: http://www.mdsupport.org/library/hazard.html

So doing a little research I came upon this type of lighting.

Electron Stimulated Luminescence

Electron Stimulated Luminescence (ESL) is light produced by accelerated electrons hitting a phosphor (fluorescent) surface in a process known as cathodoluminescence.[1][2][3] The light generation process is similar to a cathode ray tube (CRT) but lacks magnetic or electrostatic deflection.[4]

A cathodoluminescent lighting system has a light emitting device having a transparent glass envelope coated on the inside with a light-emitting phosphor layer. Electrons emitted from a cathode strike the phosphor; the current returns through a transparent conductive coating on the envelope. The phosphor layer emits light through the transparent face of the envelope. The system also has a power supply for providing at least five thousand volts of power to the light emitting device, and the electrons transiting from cathode to anode are essentially unfocused. Additional circuits allow triac-type dimmers to control the light level.[5] The light has a rated color rendering index of 85.[6] The energy consumption is 70 % less than that of an incandescent light bulb. The 10,000 hour lifetime is five times longer than an incandescent light bulb.[7] Light is generated instantly when power is applied. The cost is estimated at 12 EUR per bulb in 2010.[8]

Incandescent bulbs produce light by heating a wire with current. Fluorescent lamp produce light by exciting mercury vapor in a plasma process which in turn radiate UV light towards a phosphor layer that converts the light into the visible spectrum.

ESL lamps do not use mercury in the lighting process [9] The first commercially available ESL product is a reflector bulb in the R‐30 shape which was briefly available through the manufacturer's web site but direct sales were stopped as of May 23, 2011, in anticipation of outsourcing this activity.[10] An A19-type "Edison" light bulb is expected to be ready for market by mid-2011.

Independent product testing and anecdotal feedback suggests ESL boasts better light quality than both LED and CFL bulbs, with full dimmability. Drawbacks included a slightly larger-than-normal base (which favors newer recessed "can" installations) and a slight delay in illumination when switched on, similar to CFLs.[11]


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_stimulated_luminescence

There are no toxic materials in a Vu1® bulb. While we encourage recycling of all consumer products where practical, the Vu1® bulb is household waste disposable – it can go in your “trash can” and will not impact your local landfill.

Source: http://vu1corporation.com/about.php

So if and when forced to change I may be going the ESL[Electron Stimulated Luminescence] route. Providing I dont find hidden hazards or hear of another alternative. Has any one else looked into what really is the best/safest bulb we could use at this time?




:idea:
I can't speak about how much of the Constitution is in effect anymore... But thank God we still somewhat resemble a Republic and not a democracy!


http://thethinkingapostate.ghost.io/



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook