Mandated Change in Light Bulbs to Occur at Year's End

Get ready for some mandated changes in lighting, warns an energy expert in Penn State's College of Agricultural Sciences.

Effective Jan. 1, 2012, it will be a federal offense for any company, organization or individual in the United States to manufacture or import 100-watt incandescent light bulbs for general-use lighting. Dennis Buffington, professor of agricultural engineering, said California already has banned the 100-watt incandescent bulbs starting this year. The reason for the ban is the availability of other lighting alternatives today that are considerably more energy-efficient than the incandescent bulbs.

"You can continue using your 100-watt incandescent bulbs next year, and you can replace those bulbs with other 100-watt incandescents that you may have in inventory," Buffington said. "But you will be unable to purchase the bulbs after Jan. 1, 2012. In fact, you may not be able to find them in stores during the last few months of 2011."

Smaller sizes of incandescent bulbs for general use will be banned at later dates. Effective Jan. 1, 2013, 75-watt incandescent bulbs will face a similar ban; the 60-watt and 40-watt incandescents will be banned effective Jan.1, 2014.

"Specialty incandescent bulbs will not be subject to these bans," Buffington said. "Specialty bulbs include three-way bulbs, appliance lights, 'bug lights,' colored bulbs, vibration-service and rough-service bulbs, and bulbs used for marine and mining applications."

When searching for an alternative to incandescent bulbs, Buffington advised, evaluate the lights on the basis of lighting efficiency, expressed as lumens per watt. The wattage rating of a bulb merely indicates the wattage of electricity required for input to the bulb. The light output is measured in lumens. Thus, lighting efficiency is expressed as lumens per watt.

"The compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) produces about four times the amount of light that an incandescent bulb produces on a per-watt basis," Buffington explained. "An additional benefit is that the CFL has a life span of about 10,000 hours versus 1,000 hours for a typical incandescent. A disadvantage of the CFL is that the bulb contains both mercury and lead -- potentially hazardous heavy metals."

Although CFL bulbs contain significantly less mercury and lead than they did a decade ago, the bulbs still must be handled in a responsible manner for disposal, Buffington cautioned. Most "big box" home improvement stores now have drop-off sites for proper disposal of the burned-out CFL bulbs, he pointed out.

CFLs now are available in many different sizes, shapes and colors of light (soft white, cool white, warm glow, etc.). The typical CFL sold today is a coiled tube, although some are available with an outer glass shell that hides the coil. The bulbs with the covered coils look like incandescents but with the efficiency and long life of CFLs.

"CFLs that can be used with dimmer switches now are available," Buffington said. "Be careful though. Only the CFLs that are labeled as dimmable on the packaging will function properly when used with a dimmer switch.

"LED (light-emitting diode) bulbs are even more efficient than the CFL, and the life of an LED is longer than the CFL," he said. "LEDs are free of both mercury and lead. But I do not recommend LEDs today simply because they still are too expensive, although the prices have dropped in recent years. I anticipate significant reductions in the price of LEDs within the next five years or so, and then they may be feasible lighting alternatives."

Comments

Tue, Mar 15, 2011 Mark Michigan

It is all hogwash. We have all wondered why the government has to tell us what light bulb to buy. Follow the money is right. What other so called trivial decisions of no interest to the goverment are going to be taken from us next?

Mon, Mar 14, 2011 Jen

I tried converting to all CFL's but they don't work in enclosed fixtures (the heat build up melted the bulb's plastic housing) and the CFL equivalent doesn't provide as many lumens as an incandescent, so I end up buying a "100 watt" equivalent CFL to replace a 75 watt incandescent. Not to mention the fact that I need a hazmat suit to clean up a broken CFL. LEDs have been around for so many years, you'd think that by now someone would have figured out by now how to make them affordable.

Wed, Mar 9, 2011 Steve Minnesota

CFL bulbs don't work when it's cold. I live in Minnesota and have an unheated detached garage. When the temperature is below freezing you can barely tell if the CFL bulbs in the garage are even on. Nothing but a dim glow. I consider myself an environmentalist, but this is a choice that should be made on an individual basis. I'll be stocking up on incandescents.

Wed, Mar 9, 2011 Bill

Those CFL bulbs are overpriced. I will stock up on the others while I can. They last just as long and in some cases even longer. The life rating on the CFL is bullshit

Tue, Mar 8, 2011 Roger Tennessee

My family has tried to be "green" and use the CFL bulbs. No doubt there are energy savings but the rated life of the CFL bulbs is greatly exaggerated, 2000 hours is about the max we have gotten ( this is over 5 to 8 years of trials); and there are many fixtures they won't fit in. Due to the much higher cost of the bulbs and the need to change out some light fixtures there is little to no cost justification for converting to CFL's.

Tue, Mar 8, 2011 globalwarmingdenier South Dakota

Follow the money on this ban. How many of the decision makers are invested in the companies that make these non-incandescent products and the "clean energy" companies. It is not as it appears to be.

Thu, Mar 3, 2011 lighthouse

This unwarranted ban is not like a normal ban on an unsafe product like lead paint,
but simply to reduce electricity use:

Yet, even if there are electricity savings, citizens pay for the electricity they use:
There is no energy shortage including of future low emission electricity, that justifies telling people what they can use in their homes (and if there was, the bulbs could simply be taxed, covering subsidies on other bulbs to make them cheaper).

Even if if there was a shortage of the finite coal/oil/gas
energy sources, then their price rise limits their use anyway - without legislation.

Moreover: light bulbs don't give out any CO2 gas - power plants might.
If there is an energy supply/emissions problem - deal with the problem!

Why society energy savings are not there anyway:
http://ceolas.net website
with US Dept of Energy references = Under 1% society energy savings from regulations on incandescent lights.
The site also covers the unpublicised industrial politics and vested interests involved in the ban

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above