10 ms·

> why you view incandescent light-bulbs as being superior to LEDs. Is it solely because they are simpler? They certainly don't last as long and cost more to ope

> why you view incandescent light-bulbs as being superior to LEDs. Is it solely because they are simpler? They certainly don't last as long and cost more to operate. I've gotten in the habit of writing down the in-service date on all of my LED bulbs, because I don't think I've gotten more than two years out of any of them. Granted, still longer than incandescent bulbs, but I feel like the 10+ year lifespan I've been sold is a lie. Supposedly LED bulbs are a lot more sensitive to fluctuations in power quality (and it's not like I've been buying AliExpress bulbs, either). In either case, why a federal ban on incandescent bulbs? If LED bulbs are superior, the market will sort itself out. If it's really a market failure (which I don't think it is in this case), put an excise tax on incandescent bulbs to tip the scale in LED's favor. To ban it outright is just rude.

nemomarx 3y ago
My understanding is that they need more air flow for good operation, and lots of ways you can socket them won't provide that, especially recessed lights. The 10 year lifespan is in more ideal circumstances, I guess.
valleyer 3y ago
> In either case, why a federal ban on incandescent bulbs? If LED bulbs are superior, the market will sort itself out. Because part of the cost of the use of the incandescent bulb is externalized and therefore not subject to market pressure. Specifically, it uses (way) more energy, and the harnessing of that energy involves emission of greenhouse gases and depletion of non-renewable fuels.
silverquiet 3y ago
I was at my parent's house and turned on a bathroom light which popped and startled me. I was very worried about some electrical fault that might be dangerous. It turns out it was a quite old incandescent light (probably the last one in their house) that had simply died. I forgot that they did that because I haven't replaced a bulb in literal years.
ssl-3 3y ago
Because it won't sort itself out. An incandescent ban is the only thing that is going to keep people like my parents from using them. My father does not understand efficiency at this point in his life. "Why would I pay two dollars for a new LED light bulb, when I can get four of the regular ones for a dollar?" He does not understand that the inexpensive incandescent bulb is going cost him more a lot more than two dollars by the time it burns out. I've tried explaining it to him, and he seems to understand it very well each and every time, but he's old and he forgets. At least he has someone like me who will try (over and over again) to give him straight advice that will save him some money. But most people aren't like me, and they are not like you. They don't hang out here on HN. They may have no understanding of how these things work, or how efficiently works. They may even be misinformed and making decisions with bad information. So, no: The invisible hand of the free market will not and can not sort it out by itself, because the free market does not have good technical literacy. Meanwhile, the downsides to the ban are what? Rudeness? Sorry, but I'm not Canadian enough for that to matter to me.
- Amezarak 3y ago
  I find that LED bulbs have a much higher failure rate than advertised, even though I am buying a selection of what I think are quality brands. (Strangely, the only kind I have not had die are some weird Chinese brand I can only find on Amazon.) I haven’t done the math but given I’m replacing at least one bulb a month I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price, especially since I prefer 100w equivalent bulbs. Maybe my power sucks but I don’t have this problem with incandescent and that’s what consumers care about. I have power filtering for my desktop though and the reporting doesn’t show any issues. CFLs were much worse, I’m glad those are done with. It feels like I’m paying more for inferior quality.
  - tialaramex 3y ago
    > I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price This might feel intuitively plausible but it really isn't. In the lifetime of a 60W incandescent bulb here (1000 hours) it would use £15 of electricity whereas an LED which produces significantly more light would cost about £2.25 over the same 1000 hours. So even if incandescent bulbs were literally free and the LED lamp costs £10, the LED lamp is a significant saving even if it didn't last longer. If your LED lamps die much sooner than you expected, consider overheating. Unlike the incandescent which is designed to run hot because it's literally incandescent lighting, it is so incredibly hot that it glows white, LEDs don't like heat. If you have a fixture where the hot air is trapped next to the lamp it will reduce lifespan, consider different fixtures when they're next replaced, or placing lamps where heat would naturally be drawn away. Flaky power can be a problem but (presumably) there isn't much you can do about that, whereas overheating is very much an interior design choice that you can influence.

nemomarx 3y ago

My understanding is that they need more air flow for good operation, and lots of ways you can socket them won't provide that, especially recessed lights. The 10 year lifespan is in more ideal circumstances, I guess.

valleyer 3y ago

> In either case, why a federal ban on incandescent bulbs? If LED bulbs are superior, the market will sort itself out. Because part of the cost of the use of the incandescent bulb is externalized and therefore not subject to market pressure. Specifically, it uses (way) more energy, and the harnessing of that energy involves emission of greenhouse gases and depletion of non-renewable fuels.

silverquiet 3y ago

I was at my parent's house and turned on a bathroom light which popped and startled me. I was very worried about some electrical fault that might be dangerous. It turns out it was a quite old incandescent light (probably the last one in their house) that had simply died. I forgot that they did that because I haven't replaced a bulb in literal years.

ssl-3 3y ago

Because it won't sort itself out. An incandescent ban is the only thing that is going to keep people like my parents from using them. My father does not understand efficiency at this point in his life. "Why would I pay two dollars for a new LED light bulb, when I can get four of the regular ones for a dollar?" He does not understand that the inexpensive incandescent bulb is going cost him more a lot more than two dollars by the time it burns out. I've tried explaining it to him, and he seems to understand it very well each and every time, but he's old and he forgets. At least he has someone like me who will try (over and over again) to give him straight advice that will save him some money. But most people aren't like me, and they are not like you. They don't hang out here on HN. They may have no understanding of how these things work, or how efficiently works. They may even be misinformed and making decisions with bad information. So, no: The invisible hand of the free market will not and can not sort it out by itself, because the free market does not have good technical literacy. Meanwhile, the downsides to the ban are what? Rudeness? Sorry, but I'm not Canadian enough for that to matter to me.

Amezarak 3y ago
I find that LED bulbs have a much higher failure rate than advertised, even though I am buying a selection of what I think are quality brands. (Strangely, the only kind I have not had die are some weird Chinese brand I can only find on Amazon.) I haven’t done the math but given I’m replacing at least one bulb a month I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price, especially since I prefer 100w equivalent bulbs. Maybe my power sucks but I don’t have this problem with incandescent and that’s what consumers care about. I have power filtering for my desktop though and the reporting doesn’t show any issues. CFLs were much worse, I’m glad those are done with. It feels like I’m paying more for inferior quality.
- tialaramex 3y ago
  > I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price This might feel intuitively plausible but it really isn't. In the lifetime of a 60W incandescent bulb here (1000 hours) it would use £15 of electricity whereas an LED which produces significantly more light would cost about £2.25 over the same 1000 hours. So even if incandescent bulbs were literally free and the LED lamp costs £10, the LED lamp is a significant saving even if it didn't last longer. If your LED lamps die much sooner than you expected, consider overheating. Unlike the incandescent which is designed to run hot because it's literally incandescent lighting, it is so incredibly hot that it glows white, LEDs don't like heat. If you have a fixture where the hot air is trapped next to the lamp it will reduce lifespan, consider different fixtures when they're next replaced, or placing lamps where heat would naturally be drawn away. Flaky power can be a problem but (presumably) there isn't much you can do about that, whereas overheating is very much an interior design choice that you can influence.