Trump Scraps Obama-Era Rules For Energy Efficient Bulbs

originally posted by: Metallicus
I support lighting freedom.

Everyone knows that LED light is sterile and soul sucking.

LED light comes in a range of temperatures (i.e., light colors). There are soft white as well as bright white.

I have an LED desk lamp that has a button that allows me to cycle through the "color" of the light. If I want soft white, which is more yellowish, I can have that. If I want a "daylighting" color, I can have that. If I want the cold sterile "ultra white" light, I can have that as well. Just cycle through.

originally posted by: TheScale

...personally i think ive changed out my led bulbs just as often if not more then incandescents since ive switched over. ...

Are you using those bulbs with a dimmer? You need a true "dimmable" LED if you have it on a dimming switch. The non-dimmable on a dimmer switch may still in fact dim, but they will also burnout very quickly.

I've changed all the bulbs in my house with LEDs when I moved in more than five years ago and I don't think one has burned out since.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Ah, that is a great point I hadn't thought of! Light dimmers use pulse width modulation to dim the bulbs, and that could cause a too-slow power supply to overdrive the LEDs. Even with the dimmer on high, there is still a pulse modulation going on, and that is enough to cause issues.

Star for you!

TheRedneck

Almost all of our lights are on LEDs. The ones that aren't are on incandescent still.

I refuse to have CFLs. Fluorescent lighting has those small flickers that can start to go bad and trigger migraines for me at the right frequency. Every other building in the world has those stupid fluorescent tubes, but I won't live like that in my own home if I don't have to.

a reply to: TGunner

CFL are horrible, I only buy LED now and they are great, new ones are good quality.

a reply to: ketsuko

Work triggers my migraines non stop because of the lighting.

originally posted by: smurfy
You asked how I got to Arsenic on LED'S,

Not really, I asked:
"How do you get to the arsenic and lead on an LED light bulb?"

To me that was you questioning as to those things actually being in LED's, that's why I gave the the links. It's actually funny as I come to think of it, so now I realise what you meant.

So, let's stop the bickering, and consider this link from 2011 though it is older than the 2018 pdf I posted,

I agree.

Extract; "Lead, arsenic and many additional metals discovered in the bulbs or their related parts have been linked in hundreds of studies to different cancers, neurological damage, kidney disease, hypertension, skin rashes and other illnesses. The copper used in some LEDs also poses an ecological threat to fish, rivers and lakes.

Ogunseitan said that breaking a single light and breathing fumes would not automatically cause cancer, but could be a tipping point on top of chronic exposure to another carcinogen. And -- noting that lead tastes sweet -- he warned that small children could be harmed if they mistake the bright lights for candy.

After reading part of Ogunseitan's paper I doubt he said any thing like that. From what I understood of it, the paper (available here) is about toxicity from LEDs in the environment, like in a landfill.

PS: according to the paper, from all the LEDs tested, only one had lead above the federal limit (red, low intensity) and the white LEDs (the ones we are talking about here) had no traces of arsenic.

PPS: They say "Among the LEDs tested, white LEDs seem to be the safest for the environment because of the absence of toxicsubstances such as arsenic and lead (Pb)".

originally posted by: smurfy
I'm not challenging anything you say, doping is part of the process, however what you bring up is the same as ArMaP's assumption, that of a tiny bit of hard plastic being indomitable..it isn't..tough as poly-carbonate is.

I'm making no assumptions like that, in fact, I know things are not exactly like that in today's LEDs light bulbs.

Here's a photo I just took of an old, cheap LED light bulb from some Chinese brand.



The LEDs are those small, flat, orange objects, with no plastic cover.

As you can see (I hope) in the next photo, I only removed the plastic cover on the light bulb that makes it look like a normal light bulb.

I love LED lighting. My entire home is filled with LED smartbulbs. I can change colors at will, any temperature of lighting, any color, put them on timers, schedule them, control them remotely, activate by voice, and more.

The thing is though, if not for that Bush era lightbulb rule, and CFL's being so awful that no one wanted to use them, we never would have had the market actually open up to bring us the current amazing lighting we have access to. I agree that we can probably repeal the rule at this point with no harm done. CFL's are dying, and incandescents aren't even all that competitive either. But, this never would have happened without government intervention as the light bulb companies themselves were effectively a cartel.

You can buy a standard non fancy LED bulb for $3 now, it will last for 5+ years and only cost about 10 cents to run over those 3 years. So they pollute less, cost less, and are safer. That law brought us what has effectively become a golden age for lighting.

originally posted by: Metallicus
I support lighting freedom.

Everyone knows that LED light is sterile and soul sucking.

Not to shill for a company too much, but I use these:

www.kasasmart.com...

Inexpensive, huge range of colors, smart appliance bonuses, and more. My oldest ones (their older model) are about 3 years old now, my newest are just a few months old. I use them for every bulb in my home. If you want to pay more there's some higher end brands too with more features like the bulbs Phillips produces.

These are definitely not sterile, they're absolutely fantastic. I even get to do fun things with them like holiday lighting like pink/purple for Valentines, orange/black for Halloween, red/green for Christmas, and so on. It's fun.

a reply to: TGunner

Oh Yeah , the New Bulbs are Great if you don't Mind getting Mercury Poisoning when they Break .........................

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: TGunner

Oh Yeah , the New Bulbs are Great if you don't Mind getting Mercury Poisoning when they Break .........................

LED light bulbs do not have mercury.

originally posted by: Admitted
Yeah...light bulbs.

I bought a pack of these new twirly-doo bulbs about 8 years ago...filled my house...they all still work. They were way more expensive to buy but...I'm pleased.

But, really, if our focus is on light bulbs? We're being distracted. This is just dumb.

If this is all it takes to distract us from being able to think about / process more important things, we are already doomed.

I have not found a bulb that I like since the IC's were banned. I have went through all of them, every iteration of CFL and LED I could find. Right now I have a mix of different temperature LEDs throughout my house to try and simulate the IC light. As soon as my beloved IC's go on sale again I will be filling my garage with two pallets of them...Thank you President Trump!

At least now we have a choice again

a reply to: TGunner

I support energy efficiency and saving the environment, but with things like light fittings this really should be market lead. Mke new bulbs more attractive, don't outlaw he old ones.

I'd go LED in a heartbeat if they lowered the prices somewhat.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Lightbulbs were a cartel, until that legislation hit there was no market solution possible. This is an example of a government regulation improving the market.

a reply to: Aazadan

This is an example of a government regulation improving the market.

I disagree. This is an example of a government regulation changing the market. I for one was wishing LED bulbs would come down in cost before the regulations happened. I was quite critical of Bush enacting them, if anyone cares to go back and check.

The result was that LED bulbs were likely commercially viable months, possibly a year before they would have been without regulation. However, those early versions were also plagued by issues: the glue used to hold the globe would in some cases disintegrate after a short time because the heating was underestimated; early versions did not filter the light to cooler standards; there were likely some early versions that did flicker, and caused the confusion I am trying to address above. As a result, there was one poster above who has stated that they will not use LED bulbs as soon as the incandescents are again available, and they likely never will. That is their prerogative; I will not debate them on it. Many people are initially unwilling to accept new technology, and trying to force them to feel otherwise is an exercise in futility.

Hell, I refused to buy or use CDs for years because of the way cassettes were thrown aside without thought.

LED bulbs were available when the regulations were enacted, but at a very high cost. That cost was going to come down, and without the regulations it would have come down at a lower pace, but without the quality issues. I skipped the majority of the quality issues since I was still unable to purchase while others were, but still caught the tail end. As an engineer in my forte, I understood what was going on, though. Most people don't. They buy the product and if it works they love it. If it doesn't they hate it and denounce the technology as unworkable. Again, a personal example: I do not trust voice recognition technology to this day, because earlier versions could not handle my accent.

Market forces always produce a more desirable product. Always.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

LED bulbs were not going to come down, like I said the lightbulb companies were operating as a cartel, there was essentially zero ability for any company to change that. The only reason it changed was that government forced the elimination of the product they were colluding on.

The role of government is to create the conditions for private innovation to thrive, and that lightbulb regulation was the right law at the right time. Without it, we never would have had the lighting we have now. That said, it doesn't mean the law is still needed as there's a good argument that the market forces it was attempting to create now exist and no longer need any sort of protection, so repealing the law now will further expand consumer choice.

Personally? I love that my home and work are both free of fluorescent lights. I have lights that can color correct, that can remove blue light at night time, that can change color or dim as needed, that I can voice control, that I can run remotely, that are extremely cheap to run, that are more environmentally friendly, that produce less waste, that can work in conjunction with motion sensors so I never need to fumble for a switch, that are safer, and more.

Lighting now is absolutely amazing. If incandescents never would have faced market disruption, the light bulb cartels never would have let these hit the market, at least in the US.

a reply to: Aazadan

LED bulbs were not going to come down

They already were coming down. Just like any product, initial costs are high due to research and the lack of the economy of scale. Also, the same companies who manufactured the majority of incandescent bulbs are still major players in the LED bulbs (and typically make the better quality bulbs). The early bulbs that had issues were made by the newcomer companies who had nothing to lose. Open the doors, sell a bunch of bulbs, get a bad reputation, close the doors and go home. That was the opportunity the regulations provided. The larger companies had a reputation from years ago to protect, so they were slow gearing up.

I do agree with you on LED bulbs in general, though. They are far superior to incandescent bulbs.

TheRedneck