Incandescent light bulbs are officially banned in the U.S.::America’s ban on incandescent light bulbs, 16 years in the making, is finally a reality. Well, mostly.

  • Coeus@coeus.sbs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve been in the industry for over a decade and I find it fascinating how much lighting has changed in that time. When LEDs were first available, they were $60+ per bulb. Now you can get multipacks for under $10. Also, CFL bulbs were almost universally hated by everyone (and for good reason) now we no longer sell them. We strictly sell LEDs for regular lighting and we still sell incandescent specialty bulbs. Also, when LEDs first arrived there was a lot of distain for them, especially by the elderly. They wanted their energy wasting incandescent bulbs dammit! It seems the majority of them have come around because they’ve learned that LEDs are better.

    • xradeon@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the main issue with initial Led bulbs was their color was wrong. Incandescent bulbs emit light at 2700K, a nice warm white. Early LEDs emitted light at more like 5000K or there abouts, which is a really white light. Same with CFLs. Elderly people didn’t like that at all. Honestly it wasn’t just them, lots of people hated them for their too white of light.

      Today you can get LEDs that are 2700K and/or are adjustable to what ever color you want.

    • EverStar289@citizensgaming.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is why I don’t support overreach in regulation.

      Put a tax on it or something, but a full ban seems excessive. Now that most people understand that LEDs are superior, they are cheaper, and there are more options, most people will make the switch.

      • qyron@lemmy.pt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        No really. A lot of people, even when shown proof, out of simple spite just double down on their position.

        When energy saving and early LED bulbs started to be deployed in my country, while the fade out of incandescent bulbs was put in place, we had runs for buying every single incandescent bulb available. The change was not welcome. Even if changing meant real, objective, tangible savings.

        People would put in large orders for bulbs, arguing they wanted to “have proper lighting as long has they lived”. Luckily, the stocks quickly ran out and some distributors simply refused to pass the stocks to the market.

        A government cutting off a product is not overreach: it’s forcing change that otherwise would not happen, for the better.

        • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          A lot of people, even when shown proof, out of simple spite just double down on their position.

          But is it enough to really matter? Especially after the market for incandescent shrivels?

          • qyron@lemmy.pt
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m sorry, I’m not following your reasoning. Can you elaborate, please?

            • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              People will bitch about the one guy buying all the incandescent bulbs but ignore the fact that everyone else isn’t.

              1 old dude isn’t enough to make a difference.

              • qyron@lemmy.pt
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                This wasn’t one or two isolated cases: it was a race to the stores.

                I was a kid then and my grandparents got caught in the wave and bought more lamps that they required to light the entire house. Which later proved to be of bad quality and aided me in making their transition to energy saving bulbs.

                People would line up in front of stores to get the precious, precious bulbs, making the exact same sort of conversation and observations we can read throughout this thread, criticizing government and politics in general.

                The store owners would chime in and add fuel to the fire, stating a lot of people would lose their jobs, as the factories would close (cute fact: there was precisely zero factories for those products in the entire country).

                People are stubborn and will not change ways unless no other option is available and even then grudgingly, while companies only shift practices if forced, be it by force of law or by cash flow and profit goals.

                Governments enforcing positive laws and regulations, even if unpopular, are necessary measures to move things forward in a modern society.

                • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Most people willingly migrated to LEDs when the circumstances shifted in their favor. There was absolutely no law required. The fact that most people are using LEDs before this was even enforced kinda proves my point. The number of holdouts is small enough to be ignored.