[RD (OP)]

Looks like TNS will have to change the "New Theories" icon     [ Invalid Attachment ]

From September 1, it will be illegal to import conventional pearl or frosted bulbs of any shape or wattage. Traditional incandescent bulbs of 100 watts will also be banned under European law aimed at reducing energy bills and carbon dioxide emissions. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk

[Variola]

All I have to say on that it...

FFS!!!  [] [] []

[RD (OP)]

Pssst wanna buy a 100 Watt bulb ...

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

[lyner]

Now, I do know "FFS".

[RD (OP)]

Presumably the dinky incandescent bulbs in my fridge and microwave oven will be exempt from the ban,
 otherwise I'll need a torch (flashlight) when I want a cheese sandwich.

[Don_1]

It's all very well getting rid of these bulbs in favour of energy savers, but they take some time to reach full effect, and even then just don't do the job as well as the old fashion bulbs.

Who will foot the bill for all the accidents caused by poor lighting, like when I go arse over tit down the stairs one winters eve?

[glovesforfoxes]

the planets' welfare is much more important than the individuals.

[Variola]

the planets' welfare is much more important than the individuals.

Unfortunately banning light bulbs is a toothless dragon exercise and only pays lip service to the problem of energy use.

[rosy]

<fog>Which planet besides Earth is involved in this?</fog>

Also, this Daily Mash article made me laugh lots.
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=774&Itemid=59

But in any case, banning incandescents seems like an odd move. For myself, I find them just as satisfactory in all respects as the incandescents - sure, they're often not quite as bright and take a little longer to get started, but equally they don't fail nearly so often so I don't need to spend so much time standing on a chair (how do we trade bulb changing injuries against tripping up because the bulb hasn't warmed up enough injuries, Don?)
On the other hand I know at least two people who can't tolerate the degree of flicker you get from the compact fluorescents and, whilst in one's own home one might be able to change the fittings to take halogens or something, in the shared, rented accomodation occupied by the majority of my mates that isn't an option.

Taxing the hell out of incandescents seems to me like a more sensible option, leaving the choice open but unfavourable.

[Don_1]

Taxing the hell out of incandescents seems to me like a more sensible option, leaving the choice open but unfavourable.

AGHhhhhhhhhhhh...... Don't give Gordon 'can I tax the air' Brown any more ideas on how to filch our money!

[RD (OP)]

sure, they're often not quite as bright

Does anybody know where I can get an adapter to connect three 20W fluorescents into the socket where I used to plug a 60 watt incandescent ?.

how do we trade bulb changing injuries against tripping up because the bulb hasn't warmed up enough injuries

Trips* down the stairs are far more frequent than trips up a ladder to change bulbs.  [* pun intended]

[that mad man]

RD.

A 60w incandescent lamp should produce around 800 lumen's and a 20w CFL around 1200 lumen's so you shouldn't need 3. The only problem I have found with the CFL's is that most will not fit in some of the older light fittings.

[Bored chemist]

"It's all very well getting rid of these bulbs in favour of energy savers, but they take some time to reach full effect"
Want a race?
My LED lamp vs your tungsten lamp?

My problem with these lights is that they don't conduct electricity (no, I haven't gone mad).
My light has a timer switch which is run buy a tiny current that flows through the lamp.
It doesn't work with a fluorescent lamp.

[RD (OP)]

A 60w incandescent lamp should produce around 800 lumen's and a 20w CFL around 1200 lumen's so you shouldn't need 3.

OK I'll compromise, a "T" or "Y" shaped adapter so I can use two florescents where previously one 60 or 100 watt incandescent was used. Even when the fluorescent reach full brightness, after about a minute, I don't think they as bright as advertised, e.g. "equivalent to a 60 watt bulb".

[Make it Lady]

This is all very well but what picture should we use for "new theories?" A drawing board would be good. What did inventors of the drawing board go back to when they were inventing the drawing board?

[RD (OP)]

This is all very well but what picture should we use for "new theories?"

What about one of the earliest naked scientists: Archimedes in his bath...

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Archimedes_bath.jpg

Or given the content of "New theories" a photo of a collection of nuts  [].

[John Chapman]

(Warning. This post carries a Grumpy Old Git alert and includes high levels of ranting)

Being a bit of an environmentalist, I changed all my bulbs about 3 years ago, before they became cheap. I paid 12 quid each for six GU10 fitting bulbs and another 30 quid for 4 x 80 LED spots in my kitchen alone! That’s about three times as much for the bulbs as the fittings they fit. And that was from a really cheap place I found that posted them from Ireland!

Anyway, the point I was going to make is, I don’t know whether CFLs have improved in the last 3 years but the ones I bought are sh1t! In the kitchen, for instance, the GU10s take about a full 2 mins to brighten, which often means I have left the kitchen before I can see. As a consequence, we now tend to leave the kitchen lights on all evening, massively increasing our carbon footprint. Sort of defeats the object. And despite glovesforfoxes’ sentiment, I quite value the welfare of my arse and my tit when one falls over the other.

And another thing. I thought they were supposed to last 10 years. I bought my mum some and cheerily told her I would probably inherit them back of her before she ever got to change them. But I buy a new CFL bulb probably once a month. And don’t get me started on the bloody dimmable ones. I went through three in our bedroom in about 12 months and now have a halogen bulb, which is only marginally better than a tungsten. I have a pile of non-working CFLs in a drawer somewhere because you’re not supposed to put them in the rubbish and I always forget them on the rare occasions I go to the municipal dump.
 

[JimBob]

I do not know about the UK replacements but the ones we are urged to use here in the US, halogen bulbs, are as bad environmentally as the incandescent bulbs - they contain mercury - so what is the advantage here ? less CO2 but more Mercury in the environment???

[Bored chemist]

Halogen bulbd don't have mercury in them- they have one of the halogens (there's a clue in the name).
The Fluorescent lamps (whether you are talking about the new ones or the older long tube ones) do contain some mercury.
However, all the bulbs in my house have a lot less mercury in them than I have in my  teeth.
The bit of mercury in the bulbs is less of a problem than the CO2. Also, of course, there's a significant side benefit to the bulbs- they raise awareness of the issues.

There's also the mercury emitted by fossil fueled power plants to consider.

[JimBob]

I respectfully disagree - I am aware halogens are noble gases and perhaps I am in error amusing the bulb shown below is a halogen bulb even though that is the way it was marketed. The problem lies in what I read on the packaging of HALOGEN bulbs - see below.

The mercury pollution IS a problem - "Birds and mammals that eat fish are more exposed to methylmercury than any other animals in water ecosystems. Similarly, predators that eat fish-eating animals are at risk. Methylmercury has been found in eagles, otters, and endangered Florida panthers. Analyses conducted for the Mercury Study Report to Congress suggest that some highly-exposed wildlife species are being harmed by methylmercury. Effects of methylmercury exposure on wildlife can include mortality (death), reduced fertility, slower growth and development and abnormal behavior that affects survival, depending on the level of exposure. In addition, research indicates that the endocrine system of fish, which plays an important role in fish development and reproduction, may be altered by the levels of methylmercury found in the environment." -- http://www.epa.gov/mercury/eco.htm

Humans fall into the 'mammal' category. As top of the chain predators, they get concentrated amounts of mercury.  The concentration map below for the US shows levels of mercury potentially damaging to humans who eat fish and drink the water. See map, bottom.






the image below is from http://www.epa.gov/mercury/eco.htm as well.