# Here's a "bright" idea - Government Seeks to Replace Incandescent Bulbs

#### lightguy2k6

##### Member
Well since "technically" we use lamps I think we would be ok...

Alex

#### Chaos is Born

##### Active Member
I think by the time things actually start coming close to happening LED lighting will have taken some drastic steps to have a bright fixture...

This might end up happening a little faster if they actually go through with it (and expect a slow down in movies or a lot of movies that take place in other countries to come out)

#### JD

##### Well-Known Member
Gee, without incandescent lamps, how can we make performers sweat? Anyhow, I wonder how much of our nation's energy is really used for the theater and traveling rock shows? Come to think of it, most rock shows are pretty much HID already. Still, I would think that compared to home use, theater is only a fraction of a percent. (the ratio of homes to theaters.) I would expect there will be exemptions for theater. The bigger threat comes from the bulb manufacturers themselves who may decide to "go green" and discontinue production of incandescents. That ratio cuts both ways... How big a percentage is the sale of incandescent theatrical bulbs to the manufacturer? Still, I will miss the old PAR bulb and his friends. They served us well.

#### Chaos is Born

##### Active Member
But the problem is that in-home lighting doesn't require 750w lamps... people get by with less than 1/10th of that. LED Lighting is already that large of output, not really cheap yet but the price will come down as more people are making lights. As of now the price of LED to amount of light emitted, and the price of Incandescent to light emitted is getting close... however the problem is the number of LEDs that it would take to get the same amount of light emitted from LEDs as say a 750w lamp would take up more room than a 750w lamp and all fixtures would need to be replaced or have major modifications.

#### ricc0luke

##### Active Member
First of all, the bill in California is being introduced only to apply to strictly incadescents- not halogen lamps.

Second, there is a problem as people shift to lighting their common places with LED's. LED's are so powerful with so little energy because they only emit a very specific wavelength of light. When people are starting to light their entire houses and workplaces with them they are noticing eye problems are becoming more frequent.

For now, florscents are the answer.
Entertainment can still have it's halogens, but it's finally time to kick those old mongul based scoops.

#### icewolf08

##### CBMod
CB Mods
First of all, the bill in California is being introduced only to apply to strictly incadescents- not halogen lamps.
Halogen lamps, like the ones we use in theatre are incandescent lamps. So any action that applies to incandescent lamps would, by definition, include halogen lamps.

Entertainment can still have it's halogens, but it's finally time to kick those old mongul based scoops.
China built the Great Wall to keep the monguls (I know, I spelled that wrong on purpose), obviously there are a few scoops we are still trying to fight off...

#### gafftaper

##### Senior Team
Senior Team
Fight Leukemia
First of all, the bill in California is being introduced only to apply to strictly incadescents- not halogen lamps.
Lamp lesson time!!

The short definition of incandescent lighting is that you create light by running a bunch of electricity through a wire which then glows. If there's a glowing wire... it's incandescent.

Halogen is a gas used inside most high powered lamps that helps extend the life of the filament. The extreme heat boils away parts of the tungsten filament on a microscopic level. The Halogen helps to encourage those particles to settle back onto the filament instead of on the glass (or quartz). This prolongs the lamp life. Most lamps are made with Quartz instead of glass for added strength.

Last edited:

#### JD

##### Well-Known Member
Just reading a news article about the ban. The following is quoted:
------- (www.newstarget.com/z021587.html)
“Obviously we’re not going to have police going into 7-11s, searching for light bulbs,” said Edward Randolph, chief counsel to the Assembly Utility and Commerce Committee for Levine.
“There are only a few producers of incandescent bulbs out there, and they won’t be permitted to sell in California,” said Randolph, who envisions no incandescent light bulb black market.
LED (light emitting diode) and Halogen lights will still be alright,” said Randolph.
Incandescent lights are extremely inefficient, and they are ultimately responsible for over 20 percent of the total CO2 emissions in the US,” said Eco-LEDs founder Mike Adams, an advocate of LED-sourced lighting. “Cleaner, greener and more energy efficient technology exists right now; it’s called LED lighting,” said Adams.
--------
Sounds like Halogen will be ok despite the incandescents of their filaments so I suspect it is not a blanket ban. Still looking for the actual bill to read it. A light bulb black market! I am picturing some guy in a raincoat standing on the street corner "Hey, wanna buy some bulbs?"

#### gafftaper

##### Senior Team
Senior Team
Fight Leukemia
Sounds like Halogen will be ok despite the incandescents of their filaments so I suspect it is not a blanket ban.
Again a Halogen lamp is incandescent and if I understand the problem the theatrical lamps are far worse of a green house gas problem than the home use lamps. I bet two or three theatrical lamps do more damage in an hour than most homes do in a day... (What do you think SHIP?)

What they seem to be saying is that (as an example) Phillips and Ushio simply won't be legally allowed to sell HPL 750's in California. And you local dealer won't be able to sell them.

The Halogen gas in the lamp is not going to save us. The only hope is a provision in the law that exempts industries where there is no suitable alternative. California isn't going to kill the movie industry. They will work this out.

Also as a side note I'm no chemist but I wouldn't be surprised if HID lamps aren't even worse of a greenhouse gas problem.

Last edited:

#### fredthe

##### Active Member
Here's an exceprt from the California bill (highlighting is mine):

(d) (1) On and after January 1, 2012, a general service
incandescent lamp shall not be sold in the state.
(2) For the purposes of this subdivision, "general service
incandescent lamp" means a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp
that is intended for general service applications and has all of the
following:
(A) A medium screw base.
(B) A wattage rating no less than 25 watts and no greater than 150 watts.
(C) A A-15, A-19, A-21, A-23, A-25, PS-25, PS-30, BT-14.5, BT-15, CP-19, TB-19, CA-22, or equivalent shape as defined in the American
National Standard Institute C78.20-2003.
(D) A bulb finish of frosted, clear, or soft white type.

So, stage lighting is mostly safe.... but you won't be able to get bulbs for the dressing rooms Stock up now.

Full text is at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_0701-0750/ab_722_bill_20070222_introduced.html

Last edited:

#### gafftapegreenia

##### CBMod
CB Mods
Hmmm,

Their definiton has a few interesting points.

First it states that a lamp must have ALL of the points presented to be illegal. Thus is seems colored lamps will be safe.

Second, their definition does not include PAR or R type lamps, so those seem safe too. Additionally, many of the more 'decorative' shapes are not included in this legislation.

This is what I thought they were doing-making a bill banning the more 'household' lamps. We will survive. So what if an A-19 100 watt will no longer be available.

#### JD

##### Well-Known Member
if I understand the problem the theatrical lamps are far worse of a green house gas problem than the home use lamps. I bet two or three theatrical lamps do more damage in an hour than most homes do in a day...
The average home without central air uses 25kw per day TIMES 100 million homes! A 1k theater bulb uses 1kw each hour, but is usually only on for an hour during the show. So, if you work out the Kw per hour prorated across the day and month, it's not that bad, in fact, the "house lights" at a theater may use more electric only by virtue of the amount of hours they are on. Of course the big factor is how many houses there are verses theaters!
As for the old Scoop Bulbs, it looks like they are safe in their mogul bases for now! (Same with the tried and true FEL, sitting on it's bi-pins!)

#### lightguy2k6

##### Member
Well thats good to know that theatrical wattage builds will be safe. Not sure what we'll do about the dressing rooms. Flourescents aren't great, but they would be wonderful for the actors to dress under.

#### ship

##### Senior Team Emeritus
Think I have lost interest in the concept in general. I’ll cope and adjust with what basic household lamp is no longer on the Home Depot shelves and still be able to get what is as a designer an efficient lamp. Do a study into the ‘1986 IMACT terms and conditions and how such would effect the theater/movie industry in general. It did some but also forced some improvements. Halogen is not a gas - no such thing, it’s an effect. There is a combination of gasses that when combined have this effect commonly called halogen gas. Your scoops are not going away, the 1Kw DKZ lamp is already halogen and there is 500w and 300w versions of these Mogul Screw lamps available in both halogen and special incandescent versions that like the above will no doubt get exempted. You can still get a 150w PAR 38 lamp for instance, just not the normal incandescent versions. Go long life, dichroic color lensed, Cov-R-Guard, Saf-T-Gard, 130v/HRG, Krypton, Halogen, Cool Beam etc. in 150w. This much less a Watt Miser lamp was available from way back - crappy lamp replacement for the 150w lamp which got followed up by the higher in luminous output 120w halogen PAR 38 lamp and lots of other versions of the simple PAR 38 lamp. The industry will not have had so many choices in replacing the 150w incandescent PAR 38 lamp standard to the industry were it not for the government stepping in out of energy efficiency to discontinue domestically a line amongst other lines of lamps. Heck, your standard T-12 40w fluorescent lamps might not have had their improvements were it not also for IMPACT efficiency standards which puts us these days up into the 32w T-8 90+ CRI range.

It’s all about either halogen good and bright, verses incandescent bad.. after all for J.R. public - it’s what they know and what they know and what exciting new technology will fight this - compact fluorescents given away at WalMart will solve the problem to the extent they understand... Put a halogen lamp into a standard incandescent fixture and you might have a fire. Put a compact flourescent into a standard incandescent fixture you fight CRI amongst other things. This including phase harmonics and on/off times really screwing up the lamp life of the compact fluorescent lamps which than puts more trace elements of mercury back into the ground by way of direct disposal and costs one heck of a lot more in lamp replacement. Got compact fluorescents all over where I work. The maintenance people are constantly complaining about replacing the same 20,000 hour lamps on a monthly basis. Granted work with huge lighting rigs never did isolate and condition their power system as recommended a few years ago by me which will have about solved that problem. Phase harmonics screw with stuff like cordless tool battery chargers and batteries, computers, fluorescent lamps etc. This much less messes with the power supplier if a large enough loading... but I digress in now that I have 55gal. Drums for fluorescent and HMI lamps, paying $1K each to properly dispose of them at least quarterly. This as opposed to paying the import tax on HMI lamps to the government that is supposed to pay for my throwing them in the normal trash can which I’m still paying. Greening up the atmosphere in exchange for greening up and making the ground full of mercury. One thing that is not mentioned in all this once demand becomes larger for compact fluorescent lamps is that the price most likely won’t go down for compact fluorescent lamps due to the volume market for them. Instead prices will most likely stay the same due to there only being so much mercury available easily and the more lamps you produce, the higher the price for it due to demand. Thus some household that say makes like$12K per year, and say lives down the street from a welding shop is gonna have to pay like $6.00 per lamp instead of like$0.40 per lamp to light their closet or bathroom. This for a much lower CRI lamp as a start which causes health issues. The more they strike their arc in the compact fluorescent, the less lamp life they get out of it. Also due to phase harmonic issues of say that welding shop up the street, their lamps also might not live up to their expected lamp life. Great news, you pay more for your lamps, throw out your lamps in causing the ground harm or paying to dispose of them, all in solving global warming.

Or as the PR people trying to keep a politician in office say it, just go green.

Lots of problems in going green - good things about doing so also, lots of details. Details I’m not going to worry about yet, I’ll adapt and overcome just as normal for our industry. Most likely the normal lamp will be all that is effected and to some extent this will be a good thing. A good thing similar to setting the thermostat at say 78 degrees and not going lower would also be a good thing but less simple thus less sexy. One cannot win an election on saying smelly people are sexy due to them fighting global warming. Instead one wins elections due to replacing heater lamps with ones that don’t cause as much heat. So you can keep your thermostat set at say 76 instead of 78. By way of just replacing the light bulbs the elected official has saved the planet and kept you within your comfort zone. Just like a war and tax cuts at the same time. Anyone attempted to buy cable of late? Every time I have attempted to buy feeder or any other type of cable in the past couple of years has resulted in my supplier stating the current price of copper and warning me to buy more than I am asking for. Every time he is correct as it’s already over $4.00 per foot for 4/0 feeder cable what was only$1.50 per foot four years ago. That’s a war, think of what the price of mercury futures will look like if these laws go into effect. Is there even a mercury futures market?

Don’t fall for what hype the news papers spew out and elected officials want you to see in voting for them. No your HPL lamps won’t go away, nor will even your 40w incandescent lamps go away if you go with a more efficient version. Just gonna cost more for efficiency as it is probably right in doing so as opposed to having a disposable product society. While those who only make at best $12K a year will seriously be hurt if it’s a question of buying a light bulb or bread (yes I say bulb instead of lamp - those most hurt by all of this terms), as a socially contious type of thing, paying more for more efficient lamps is something that could be important. Now is we can get say the corner grocery store that sells lamps and some day sells compact fluorescent lamps to also recycle them. Put out a multi-million or billion dollar educational add campaign to save your local waters and landfills from all the accumulated mercury that will now be deposited in them. Even those areas with trash sorting will now be having problems due to mercury exposure to the workers - it’s going to become more expensive to even “Blue Bag.” Me, I don’t worry much about what’s going to replace the standard incandescent lamp, as posted in other topics, there is lots of technology out there and under development that the market not congress is coming up with. This not to say I’m a market sider and a push from the politicians doesn’t help bring about the change over from the standard household lamp, only that I tend in this issue given I have above a fifth grade reading level where it comes to lamps, and already lived thru one earth shattering change to the entertainment lighting market (IMPACT 1986 -), I know it will all be fine and perhaps while more expensive possibly push the market towards better things. Anyone remember the 85 WattWatt Meiser” PAR 38 lamps? Really crappy and didn’t last very long as “the alternative.” Instead of forcing say compact fluorescents on the country as the headlines might infer, instead there will be other things more efficient and cost effective TBA have no fear. Such hype about having to fit something LED into your S-4. Isn’t gonna happen for at least a few more years have no fear. If it could be done yet, it would be. Since it cannot be done yet it’s not something that can be mandated for replacement. What one should more worry about given they would also no doubt be exempt is #4515 pinspot lamps. Just at a wedding in ‘middle of nowhere Wisconsin over the weekend. They had four lamps in addition to what the DJ was using to light his own over the control table mirror ball in his own lighting rig. Sometimes it’s a halogen #H4515 that’s little to no better in quality, mostly it’s a straight incandescent lamp with very limited hours of lamp life. Gee a 100 hour lamp, now there in addition to many other DJ type lamps is a really inefficient lamp, but one that really doesn’t seriously effect the air conditioning much. Sonlite is the only brand I’m aware of that makes a long life version of this lamp. This granted they don’t list how many CB candlepower the lamp puts out as opposed to the standard incandescent or improved halogen versions of the lamp. So panic, your local bar and club or wedding place, much less party places and DJ’s will no longer be able to lamp their mirror balls... Ain’t gonna happen. If you can still buy a mirror ball lamp at your local mall or guitar shop, you will be able to get HPL lamps that have a wee bit more Luminous efficacy. This much less if it were that California were to pass such a law about lamps in not being able to sell HPL lamps, you would see places like Bulbman, Bulbtronics and even Ushio pulling up steak and moving across the boarder to Nevada in still now a question of “interstate commerce” selling to their customers. Next day delivery 6PM FedEx cut off time becoming the norm for next day as opposed to send a runner if in the area will be lived with. You are talking major interstate commerce issues anyway for say a HPL lamp and such details once any such seemingly sweeping law is passed will be fine detailed out or there would be real trouble. Gee, what would happen if them elected officials in doing a fund raising dinner could only be lit by way of compact fluorescent lamps - and store bought crappy ones at that? Would take a lighting company and designer with some balls... Some also bad CRI LED fixtures thrown in also perhaps but “totally green” not just in fund raiser concept in lighting but how the candidate looks on stage also. That would be cool to make such a statement, heck, would be cool to light their press conferences with green lamps also. Have no fear, ain’t gonna happen. On the other hand, every year I walk about the shop with the various lamp manufacturers and we discuss what might be advantageous to develop for lamps. One of the things last discussed was a more efficient$4515 lamp, amongst other lamp/fixture type lamps that could be improved. I get such visits yearly by all but from GE whome I have never met a rep. for, this much less met the head of Photo Optics in. Give them ideas, some times such concepts of what to improve go way up the chain of command and are TBA hush hush to the market, other times, yep... we really made a mistake in that lamp I get out of them in talking frank. Other times, I send a sampling of say 150 bad lamps back as a random batch to find out what the heck is going on here, and it might lead to a industry improvement in something I’m noting but the industry has not yet.

Such lighting manufacturers really in general love to push their LED lights for the OEM market. Every time I meet with most of them, I’m looking at some sample of how bright the LED lamp has got. It’s still not replacing a halogen/incandescent lamp yet however given the point source of light concept. More realistic will be the advance to the lighting industry in general once ETC loses it’s patient on the HPL lamp. This both for the advancement of the HPL lamp and for the industry in general.

Is it time to replace the scoop with say a Color Blast fixture? The Ovalite did get replaced by the scoop, perhaps with time especially since the Color Blast has upgraded to a stage version instead of fragile and not very safe architectural version it’s getting to become a time when the scoop can be replaced. Still there is the Color Rendering Index concept of doing LED verses filament as a design issue. Sure, you can go IW blast for white or Color Blast (amongst other brands) for wash light and they will light the stage but are they lighting the stage in the same way by way of CRI? Are they a new paint brush or direct replacement? I’m sure such a question was asked 20 or30 years ago on stage with the advent of the halogen over incandescent stage and studio lamp. Such a intensity and blue light off the halogen lamp and now these days off the S-4 and HX-600 over what the designer/audience is used to is different and fake “real” lighting. It’s a cross roads type of thing in many ways I expect. I certainly as a designer have no use for LED exclusive lighting design given it’s very different and not persay in my opinion full rendering of the full spectrum of light. It could have effect but still need supplement to make realistic.

These days I have more and more shows going out without any not just HPL lamps but without any filament type lamps at all. In some ways I fear for my future in being as it were the lamp expert where I work. This given arc source lamps are not going anywhere and that is still half my field. Still, more and more shows are doing LED, got it’s own department and it keeps growing. Still in the end, when one lights the corporate manager in spotlight at the podium, while moving light arc sources can be tasked to the job and adjusted, to a certain extent, it lacks a certain reality factor to lighting this person a filament lamp adds. Same with just plain doing a cyc in my opinion. You can wash in say LED but it lacks some essence of depth and other than fake reality for me.

The filament lamp in general is going places, don’t get all stressed out, other than if the politicians make their sweeping laws in a way that effects what is a micro part to the industry. Such won’t work out... Beyond the draping of the “Nudes” at certain Ashcroft press confrences early in the ‘administration’s press confrences in certain rooms that just happened to have statues, doing away with filament lamps will make for ugely politicians, much less what won’t work in that technology is not ready to replace stage and studio lamps yet. Believe me, the stage and studio market in general is a micro part of the lamp market for all manufacturers, A few tens of thousand lamps of any type for stage and studio means very little to other than that division of the company than say what the household and industry section of the market buys in lamps per day.

I don’t worry much about what’s debated for the headlines to become a Law for Votes. General concept, let’s ban the standard incandescent lamp. There is use for it but such uses given even Reveal’ lamps (which theoretically would also become exempt) would also survive the ban, this along with even the growing market for turn of the last century “nostalgic” lamps is going away quickly. You got say long life lamps for places not very important, compact fluorescent for places you want to light a room over an extended period of time, than special lamps in general to do what’s important such as the Picasso your politician has hanging in the hall which couldn’t be LED or flourescent lit. Devil is in the detail, they have to make a 5th grade educational level statement which will help get them re-ellected, this much less safe the Earth in some small step that is theoretically viable even if it hurts the under classes they protect, yet still have to allow for what’s necessary or will cost them money, much less grind a valuable industry to a halt. Phase in periods and no doubt some political consultants advising upon such laws, hoping to high Heaven that the “greening up our houses” campaign such politicians espouse doesn’t rotate back to “now that we saved the atmosphere, we just really screwed up the land, much less our voters cannot afford to buy a light bulb given prices didn’t come down.... Yea, the “energy task force” early in the Cheney meetings with them did what...? This president would not do such a business GE owns NBC hurting type of thing anyway should such a law come up. Supreme court has it’s also leaning majority. I wouldn’t expect any major lamp choice changes to come up for a few more years. Let’s not jump the gun here. Wait for it, what’s on the horizon will be amazing.

Ushio don’t really make incandescent lamps by the way, they will be fine. Also, I wouldn't be opposed to replacing say the the FHM with a 650w HIR/FHM version once it comes to market. Be really difficult to switch, but once forced to it would be better, also the market would be forced to switch.

AS for the replacement for the FEL above... don't get me starte in what a waste of light such a lamp is now, na we really don't want me to do that. FEL, yep get me to congress and that's first on my punch list for removing from my pain in the rear for lack of efficient lamp list.

#### ship

##### Senior Team Emeritus
Here's an exceprt from the California bill (highlighting is mine):
(d) (1) On and after January 1, 2012, a general service
incandescent lamp shall not be sold in the state.
(2) For the purposes of this subdivision, "general service
incandescent lamp" means a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp
that is intended for general service applications and has all of the
following:
(A) A medium screw base.
(B) A wattage rating no less than 25 watts and no greater than 150 watts.
(C) A A-15, A-19, A-21, A-23, A-25, PS-25, PS-30, BT-14.5, BT-15, CP-19, TB-19, CA-22, or equivalent shape as defined in the American
National Standard Institute C78.20-2003.
(D) A bulb finish of frosted, clear, or soft white type.
So, stage lighting is mostly safe.... but you won't be able to get bulbs for the dressing rooms Stock up now.
Full text is at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_0701-0750/ab_722_bill_20070222_introduced.html

So it’s “General Service” only. That as with my past post and other ones by my opinion is fine with me and possibly about time to do so. This given a question of why five years... why not say three years?

“All of the following” This leaves a lot of loop holes, this much less the combination of lamp types fitting within the definition of it is extensive and almost silly. Funny, never seen a PS-30 lamp under 150w. Must be one, I won’t miss it. On the other hand, you mean a CA-22 lamp is gone, gee who the heck sells a swirl flame shape 2.7/8" dia lamp anyway? I had at best stock up in this type of shape. BT=14.5 lamps, them’s fairly small for most BT lamps given most BT lamps are arc source type only and we are reaching in having a list to have a list, many lamps on the list one just will never see anyway. Yet still it’s a list and the more lamps we can exclude, the better the list looks. Hmm, “no greater than 150w...” When is the last time one saw a PS-25, this much less a A-25 lamp in a smaller wattage than 150w? This also given a TB-19 lamp I only attribute to either a halogen or krypton lamp. Nice rugged lamp bulb, really drop resistant. Not aware of a incandescent version and a shame if the halogen version is not available but it’s no doubt much of a seller anyway? Anyone else have a TB-19 halogen lamp in their drafting table lamp?

Again not worried, long life and 130v lamps are not general service, nor are colored lamps and other types.

The lack of language or definition in halogen as a concept is slightly concerning say in that I like my TB-19 lamp but this also given it’s probably also already long discontinued as a lamp type. The list of what’s up for removal is not all that shocking. Go with it and adjust, much less fight it out with interstate commerce laws in the Federal Government in a states rights verses interstate commerce issue. Should be fascinating - this all in a “bulb” issue.

#### jfitzpat

##### Member
Ship, I'm not going to go through your two long posts point by point, but the materials in the light source are statistically insignificant when compared to the amounts of mercury, HCs, and NO being released in the production of the power.

Remember, in CA we not only burn a ton of coal, a number of our plants are currently running extremely 'dirty' (a side effect of our foray into 'deregulation' of an essential public commodity). Here in SoCal, we have also been struggling for decades to meet air quality laws.

Having taken only small steps over time, including elliminating incan lighting, I can personally attest that there was no real financial hardship, no agonizing headaches or eye problems, and we now have a better fridge, brighter lighting, clearer monitors - and an electrical footprint that is nearly 40% smaller (the pool is still a biggie, but that is a larger capitol investment to modernize).

It has reached the point where the macro economic complaints are not compelling to me at all. Obscene prices and corporate doom and gloom did not come to pass when the state cracked down on auto emissions, nor charcoal lighter fluid - in fact, those changes became largely uniform across the country. The reality is that in CA, where almost 40 million people drive roughly the 6th largest economy in the world, the true economics of pollution and waste is harder to hide. When you are forced to look at public health care costs and have alternatives like making a multi trillion dollar investment in power plants and energy delivery infrastructure - things like shifting to less wasteful bulbs are hard to argue against.

We don't have to even consider green as a moral issue - we don't give every home in Glendale a recycle bin because of love of nature, it is the simple economics of landfills and trash management. But the moral and self survival issues should not be overlooked. I found it pretty disheartening that a candidate for President insisted the other night that a stack of reports written in crayon by lackeys seriously countered the volumes of science concerning global warming. When you find yourself to the right of Chevron on climate science, a level headed person might at least question his/her grasp of reality...

-jjf

#### ship

##### Senior Team Emeritus
EC&M's ElectricalZone Newsletter - June 29, 2007 Issue
just came out. Have to pay to publish it so I won’t. Good read in general and won’t hurt to free subscribe on line to it or their “Code Watch” newsletter. Had an article I found intersting,“California's Assembly Passes
Light Bulb Efficiency Standards.”

Basically, what was passed was a pass the buck but feel good legislation. By 2018 Assembly Bill (AB) 1109 requires the state to set energy efficiency standards for light bulbs. Urr, gee you next generation are required to deal with this problem. Note the wording of requiring the state to set energy standards for light bulbs by 2018. This bill requires indoor lighting reduced by 50% and outdoor and commercial lighting loads by 25%. Lots of wording that at some point in the future, what it will all save but a statement that it’s requiring a future government to make the standard that sufficiently complies with what they want that future generation to comply with.

Oh’ how much green house gasses this future generation if they comply will save the planet it goes into by way of article, yet it as an article only cites that dad is requiring son as it were to do something eleven years from now.

At the time of the posting, the govinator has taken no stance on signing or not the bill.

Next article in the E-Mail was about Florida’s recommended energy policy. Interesting at times this publication. “San Francisco Launches Solar Mapping Web Portal” - ok, some times not so intersting.

So my 55gal. drum in recycling arc lamps is now full thanks to my girl friend the Leko dpt. manager that recycled a bunch of PAR 64 lamps into it. They have been removed in time for the storage building’s bad lamp replacement swap which should fill it up sufficiently in exchange. I’ll be doing a separate 55gal. Drum for halogen and incandescent lamps - not the leading edge in necessity but the proper thing to do amongst other drums for fluorescents, aluminum and copper/brass. Don’t really have one for steel but the welding shop does so, as is the electronics repair shop in theory at least doing circuit boards and monitors. We already do paper and Cardboard by way of dumpster, and recycle thru normal means aluminum and plastic soda bottles.

It’s as green a house as we can make it and believe me in a few weeks when my $1,000.00 bill for recycling the arc lamps in the 55gal. Drum goes sideways thru the purchase order system in the big boss saying ??? it’s going to be a hard sell in doing this first drum. We discussed this concept at some point a few months ago but once it got down to cost he stopped replying. His ignoring such stuff means for him desirability in as it were wasting the money above what we already pay in Tarriffs to pay for disposal of the lamps by way of government import fees that in part pay for The War. For me it means he knows it’s going to happen, do it - it’s the responsible and necessary thing to do, he just does not want to worry about it further until he gets the bill for the disposal. Unfortunately I’m like 6 months behind in my arc lamp inspecting, that means on the low side 600 more arc lamps to recycle in the near future. That’s about at least given the size of most of these lamps at least another 1/4 full 55gal. Drum. This not including normal arc lamps of larger bulb sizes, xenon follow spot lamps and even compact fluorescents stored in the same drum that tend to bulk up such a drum easily. Yep, going to be really expensive to recycle rare earth lamps, and even halogen or incandescent lamps but it’s a responsible thing to do. Osram domestically in theory is working on a recycling program of it’s own that might be cheaper than by way of lamp recyclears but it will take some time to get rolling and that’s the only hope so far. Heck, in recycling even energy efficient T-8 lamps, they don’t quite fit into a 55gal. Drum. The heck short of a$3,000.00 fluorescent bulb shredder does one recycle such lamps beyond my recycler telling me to just put them into a drum and they will pick them up. This after some amount of fighting about origional cardboard packaging for the lamps... urr, gee me storing anything from fluorescent to especially some of the Phillips boxes for their moving light lamps would become super huge expensive fast. We finally agreed upon the 55gal. drum concept in that I won't shread the lamps or attempt to compact them, and they would just recycle such a container for a set price no matter what was in it. Normally recyclers are used to things like ED-37 lamps which are a wee bit larger than that of a HMI 1200w/S lamp. Entertainment lamp recycling to date is not really something done. The lamps say not to throw them out but they are. You pay extra for the lamps by way of the U.S. Government realizing this landfill problem for you but in taking the money accepting it's only a problem. As if the extra charge would limit the amount of lamps bought. This but not applied to any recycling programs I'm aware of by way of money collected for a good reason, not being spent to solve the problem this money was collelcted was for.

Yea, I might not be for the politics behind much of our politicians concepts for greening up our houses, the standard incandescent lamp is a heater element which both wastes energy and increases air conditioning costs and effectiveness, but it plays a in-direct role overall in why a billion houses are contributing to green house gasses. I’m not a fan of compact fluorescent lamps on the other hand due to medical reasons, economic reasons and disposal reasons. The market on the other hand is well on the way towards replacing the standard incandescent lamp by way of science not junk politics in getting re-elected by way of standing for some broad issue in theory at least that those voting will poll well for them in. This but not solve the problem, or at least solve in part the problem but not provide a solution that doesn’t cause other problems. Gee a billion compact fluorescent lamps in use, what even if micro amounts of mercury in each added to the land fills, does this add to the environment.

As for what a few hundred lamps in a theater will do to green house gasses or the environment, remember that there is say at best one theater per 100 or 500 houses. What a house by way of second hand problems does to the environment will always be more so than what a bunch of houses will do. Yes, clean up your house but the theater, just as the politician’s office will always be outside the fight as long as what’s expedient for getting re-elected by way of headline solution of the problem is the overall concept. Your theater is not much in dispute or much the cause of the problem. 98.5 degree people put out more heat than a lighting load on an air conditioning system. Even if the lighting load were reduced by 1/3 at best, you would still have say 1,000 homes per one theater in causing more damage to the environment by way of energy. This no matter what lamp is in use. Solve the houses by way of technology by way of some pushing by laws but not politically expedient mandates, and the theaters with technology will follow the line in also having it.

Even for the what I taught as cool even if simple technology Reveal lamps are in use for me would survive a few weeks ago I learned different about them. I chat with the vendor reps. who bring in tow the engineers for the lamps when they visit at least once a year with most manufacturers except GE of whom even if having an account with them, I’m yet to get a visit - ever. Lots of the meetings is all about taking notes in types of lamp improvements I’m interested in if not even complaining about crappy packaging, but after a point in them doing the sales pitch and me telling them what I think, it filters down to stuff like even the GE Reveal lamp in my own house. Yes, I know it’s just a normal lamp with a filter what I didn’t know and got a laugh over by way of the Ushio engineer (who by way of in Ushio not making incandescent lamps had no vested interest in such technology) he was laughing about the Reveal technology. Something about taking the lest efficient lamp they make and putting this coating on it. Certainly not much an improvement even if by way of color correcting it seems that way.

Meant a lot to me this little tidbit of info. No doubt I’ll still use the lamp but as opposed to a concept that as technology improves so will the energy efficiency improve Replublician type supply side economics concept, we need scientific guidence in making laws that help the market produce a good produce. The meat industry didn’t clean itself up before laws, or make what the pubic would buy before it became necessary. On the other hand... we can’t follow politics in just say banning the incandescent lamp as per those that make the laws might like by way of votes. Needs to be a balance and one that is realistic even if it gets the job done rather than just gets votes. That’s why I’m against such sweeping generalization in politics. This much less phase harmonics, start up cost and the land fill end results of what is politically safe now but not something we want to do.

Last edited: