75-watt lightbulb about to be permanently switched off
By Caroline Winter, Bloomberg Businessweek
The phaseout of traditional 100-watt incandescent lightbulbs in January – a move to meet new federal efficiency standards – struck panic in the hearts of some consumers.
Home Depot reported a nearly 20 percent spike in sales of 100-watt bulbs for 2011 as people rushed to stockpile. At least one Ohio woman made sure to squirrel away enough bulbs to last 50 years.
A month from now, on Jan. 1, 2013, traditional incandescent 75-watt bulbs also will go the way of the dodo, as the second stage of the federal lightbulb phaseout goes into effect. This time around, however, shoppers seem more relaxed.
“Last year we saw some consumers buying up product, but that’s really slowed down,” says Bill Hamilton, president of lightbulb merchandising at Home Depot. “Customers are beginning to embrace the new technology.”
Hamilton says the initial rush to hoard traditional incandescent bulbs may have resulted from a reluctance to learn about alternatives.
“We’ve done some focus groups and customers have basically told us, ‘I haven’t had to think about lightbulbs or lighting for the last 100 years – don’t make me learn about it now,’ ” he says.
These days, customers have gotten over the hump and discovered numerous alternatives, including LEDs, compact fluorescents, and even incandescent bulbs that meet the federal requirement of being at least 25 percent more efficient.
It also doesn’t hurt that the retail price of energy-efficient bulbs has dropped by more than half over the past year, as companies perfected their technology and rolled out mass production, says Hamilton.
Not everyone has embraced the government’s energy-efficiency standards, which passed in 2007. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., who once declared, “I think Thomas Edison did a pretty patriotic thing for this country by inventing the lightbulb,” has sponsored the Light-Bulb Freedom of Choice Act to repeal the phaseout of incandescent bulbs. And in July, House Republicans adopted a measure to halt the lightbulb-efficiency law.
“People are sick of the government treading where it just doesn’t belong,” said Rep. Michael Burgess, a Texas Republican who sponsored the lightbulb amendment that was added to a broader energy-spending bill.
The House measure is, in fact, an extension of a rider placed on the lightbulb law in December 2011, prohibiting the U.S. Department of Energy from using any funds to enforce the federal lightbulb law.
This means that, although such lighting manufacturers as General Electric and Royal Philips Electronics stopped making traditional 100-watt bulbs, there’s no guarantee that other companies would do the same. (The efficiency standards prohibit only the manufacturing and distribution of the lightbulbs, not their sale.)
“Some in Congress are willing to put U.S. jobs at risk for political positioning,” said Joseph Higbee, a spokesman for the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). “This is an example of a few politicizing lightbulbs at the risk of American workers and the economy.”
Higbee says manufacturers are, in fact, supporting the efficiency legislation, which NEMA estimates could mean $10 billion to $15 billion worth of national energy savings per year. Companies such as GE and Philips, he says, have invested millions of dollars in developing alternative products, and they resent being left in limbo because of political infighting in Washington.
Higbee expects the rider preventing enforcement of lightbulb-efficiency laws will be dropped in 2013, and that the phaseout will continue into 2014, when the traditional 60-watt and 40-watt bulbs are scheduled to be discontinued.
The biggest shift for customers, meanwhile, will be learning the new lightbulb lingo. Instead of thinking in “watts,” which measure the amount of power going into a bulb, they henceforth must think in “lumens,” which measure the amount of light produced.
Explains Higbee: “A more efficient bulb will require fewer watts to produce the same amount of lumens as a less-efficient bulb.”
If this doesn’t make sense, don’t worry. Home Depot has spent plenty of time and money over the past year training employees to help customers find what they need.
“Articulating what’s best – what the advantages are in terms of energy, light output, quality and color – that’s really our biggest weapon,” says Hamilton.
For those who just don’t want to give up their trusty Edison bulbs, there’s always eBay. Hurry, while supplies last.
An absolutely ridiculous overreach of government intervention and intrusion into our private, personal lives. Stay out of the light bulb business please government peeps and concentrate on reducing the debt, balancing the budget and helping the private sector create jobs.
“We’ve done some focus groups and customers have basically told us, ‘I haven’t had to think about lightbulbs or lighting for the last 100 years – don’t make me learn about it now,’ ” he says.
well? I am the only one that has a bit of a problem with this explanation? Maybe there are more centerians than I realize? And how the wacked out far-right has turned this into a constitutional rights issue defies the imagination. Exactly what constitutional right is infringed upon by energy standards that support less reliance on non renewable resources, muhc of it imported oil – unless of course these idiots think electricty is actually made by a light bulb, rather than in large part, from burning oil or natural gas? I give up…..I imagine if there are people out there that think Adam and Eve rode around on dinosaurs, I doubt if anything anyone could ever say or point out would make them rethink their cherished opinions :)
ljames, the whacked out far left forced me to install dimmer switches on all of my light switches in my new house. That is the code. That means I now have to pay $15 per cfl instead of $2 per cfl bulb. That means I am running incandescent bulbs, by force of law.
John – I dont follow your comments about the increased cost of a CFL and what that means “you are using incandescents by law??”
Anyway, the bigger picture, codes require certain levels of insulation, etc. Obviously, such things cost money up front but reduce your long term energy costs and conserve resources. Why is thinking of others and the effect you have on the general environment such a stretch for you, even if you have to be “coerced”? We dont vote on speed limits or whether you can drive through a red light without implications. No offence, this crap about “it’s a free country” is just that – it’s crap. Yes in general you are free, but only up to the point your behavior has negative effects on others and then it moves into the legitimate sphere of public policy and potential regulatory controls.
I think it’s pretty funny how folks in Tahoe, just 70-90 miles away from major cities and in a place with high-wise casinos try to convince themselves they are in the Alaska wilderness hacking it out on their own, where they should be unfettered by the constraints of contemporary American society? :)
ljames, here is the deal. California building code requires all switches outside of a kitchen be dimmable. They do make dimmable cfl bulbs, but dimmable cfl bulbs cost $15 on average. Yes you can get them for $10 but GE dimmables cost $18. With a dimmer switch you cannot run a standard CFL buld. I am not willing to pay $15 for a lightbuld. So the people who wrote the California energy code are making economically impossible to run CFL bulbs. A standard CFL costs about $2. Yes I would gladly pay $2 for a CFL, then it makes economic sense.
ljames, on another note. I built my house. My heating bill is about $20 a month even in the dead of winter. I paid about 2% extra for a couple efficiency items. I designed my own passive solar home. I walk the walk, but I am not willing to pay $15 for a darn lightbulb.
John, is that something new in the code? I never heard of a requirement for dimmable switches. We have one in our house, but put it in years after it was built. (10 year old house)
And the old incandescent lights, on dimmers, don’t actually save energy. You might notice some warmth at the switch when the lights are on dim. That’s where the energy that would have gone into brighter lighting goes.
As far as newer technology, I have no idea. But I really am curious if dimmers are now code. I hadn’t seen that.
Dogula it is a part of the code from 2007 I believe. I didnt tell the entire story: in new construction you can install fixtures without a dimmer that only fit florescent bulbs or you must install a dimmer switch. So in either case, it is really expensive. On the outside of the house you can only install florescent. Okay, so what happens…we ordered lights for the outside of the house and had them sitting in the house during our electrical inspection. We installed florescent lights outside for the inspection and then immediately swapped them out. Why? Florescent burn out up here during winter. It is horrible for the environment. Inside is another story, florescent cans cost $100 more each. So there is no swapping those out, we had to go with dimmable switches. So that means incandescent bulbs. I calculated the cost / benefit of swapping but it doesnt cost out. So I run incandescents. That is because of the California building code. The California building code forced me into incandescent bulbs.