All Systems Go As We Say Goodbye to the Old Inefficient 60-Watt Bulb on January 1

Noah Horowitz, Senior Scientist and Director of the Center for Energy Efficiency, San Francisco, CA

Six years ago, President Bush signed a federal energy bill phasing out energy-wasting light bulbs on a staggered schedule to ensure a smooth and successful transition to more efficient bulbs – and eventually save Americans $13 billion on their annual energy bills. All of the major lighting companies, including GE, Philips and Sylvania, support the changes and have upgraded their supply chains to produce the energy-savings bulbs. On January 1, the next chapter begins when the old, inefficient 40- and 60-watt bulbs, which represent over half the market, no longer can be manufactured or imported into the United States. 

This follows the recently completed transitions from the old 100- and 75-watt incandescent bulbs over the past two years, a process that unfolded very smoothly because there are so many better-performing options available. Consumers now have three major types of bulbs to choose from: new and improved incandescents that use 28% less energy, and CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps) and LEDs (light-emitting diodes) that provide energy savings of at least 75% and last a lot longer. (You can see the internal workings of the LED bulb to the right that only needs 9.5 watts to produce the same amount of light as an old 60-watt bulb.)

In fact, these standards requiring improved efficiency have led to more lighting innovation over the past five years than we saw during the 100-plus years since Edison invented the light bulb!

To be clear, incandescents are not disappearing at the first of the year — they’re just getting more efficient.

And technological advances — like the GE 43W bulb below that replaces the 60-watt incandescent — have already saved homeowners and businesses billions of dollars on their energy bills. The new standards eventually will save as much electricity as is generated by 30 large coal-burning power plants – and the associated pollution that harms our health and contributes to climate change – every single year.

Lumens, not watts

The new light bulbs use less power to give off the same amount of light. Therefore, consumers will no longer be buying bulbs simply based on their power, expressed in watts, and will shift toward buying  bulbs based on their light output, expressed in lumens. In the near term, manufacturers are including claims like “replaces 60W bulb” or “13 W = 60 W” for a 13-watt CFL that gives off as much light as the old 60-watt incandescent bulb.

The chart from NRDC’s light bulb buying guide below provides an easy way for consumers to choose the bulb with the amount of light they are seeking. For example, the new incandescents, sometimes referred to as halogen incandescents, that replace the old 60-watt bulbs, only use 43 watts.

 Bulb shopping tips

Some other things to know when shopping for a new light bulb:

• Not all CFLs and LEDs are created equally. To ensure you are getting a good one, only buy those that have the ENERGY STAR® label. These not only save you energy but will also perform well over time.
• CFLs and LEDs last 10 to 25 times longer, respectively. Even though they might cost more to buy, they will save lots of money over their lifetime as well as prevent the need to replace each of your light bulbs every year.
• Light bulbs come in different flavors. If you want the light to look just like it did with your old incandescent, buy one that says “warm white.” Those that say “daylight” or “cool white” will have a much whiter, almost bluish white light, which many consumers may not like.
• If you want a dimmable bulb, buy a LED or incandescent bulb.

Bottom line, our nation’s switch toward more efficient light bulbs is well under way and the shift from the 40- and 60-watt bulbs should go without a hitch. The manufacturers and retailers have really stepped up to the plate and we now have a great energy-savings bulb on the shelf ready for every socket in your home.

NRDC

28 Comments on "All Systems Go As We Say Goodbye to the Old Inefficient 60-Watt Bulb on January 1"

Makati1 on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 4:01 pm 



That happened here in the Philippines about 3 years ago. No incandescent bulbs available. I now read with a 10W LED bulb made in China. It replaced a 150W incandescent bulb. All of the light bulbs in my condo are LED or compact fluorescent. Totaling less than 100 watts for all of them. The 10W bulb cost about $8 US and has lasted over 3 years so far. Previously, the same lights totaled over 1,000W. So, you can see the savings when electric is about $ 0.28 KWh.

My 39″TV uses 63W. Mac-mini PC uses less than 20W + 50W monitor. Fridge is the power hog and also the A/C when on. Easy to switch to PV panels when I move to the farm. No A/C as the wind will circulate and a smaller fridge for necessities. <200 KWh per month should do it.

Ghung on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 4:32 pm 



I recently purchased a case of 24 Phillips 60w incandescents for $3 at the big box home store. Being off grid, we use more efficient CFLs, now being replaced with LEDs, but incandescents make more sense in places like the wood shed and closets where lighting gets used only a couple of hours a year and CFLs take too long to come to full brightness in cold weather. No point in putting expensive LEDs in certain places. Maybe the old bulbs will be collectable someday, or provide a fallback when an EMP fries all of the electronic bulbs 😉

paulo1 on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 5:17 pm 



Plus, Ghung

We use incandescents for small heaters. In the pumphouse when the temp drops to minus and I worry about the pipes freezing, I just flip on the light switch. Even though the pumhouse is tied into the crawl space and well insulated, I simply cannot take a chance of frozen and broken water lines. I also have a small plumbing/storage shed and put on a bulb to keep my paints from freezing,as well as silicone and other caulkings. When wd-40 freezes it never expels the same when I need to use it. The same for silicone fluid film. When I can no longer get the 60s I might have to run a small ceramic heater instead.

This blanket ban could have been offset with better education and higher rates.

Paulo

peakyeast on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 6:42 pm 



They also got “outlawed” where i live. Now we can only buy incandescent bulbs as electric heating…

I wonder why that makes it much better…

DC on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 7:10 pm 



I guess everyone that ‘works’ for the NRDC must be only 20 years old, or else they would, or should know, that the very same corporations that are behind this scheme are in fact, the very same ones that suppressed and hindered innovation in lighting for a 100 years now.

If none of you have seen this before, I highly recommend this excellent documentary from Europe. Little short but manages to cover a lot of ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfzQzGNYaiU

But back to what we are ‘gaining’ here. What we are being sold as ‘progress’ seems to have less to do with a desire to save power, and more about a desire to expand power-of corporations.

The ‘new’ bulbs have two fundamental flaws which need to be addressed.

The first, is these bulbs, on average, do not last anywhere near as long as manufactures claim. This is not the ‘techs’ fault as such, but rather deliberately shoddy standards of construction. I myself have noticed this on many occasions, my expensive ‘high-tech’ wonderbulbs burn out long before their time, and long after any recourse of a warranty or return policy. Now some of couse, do go the distance, but a lot are not. This tends to nullif their ‘efficiency a great deal. Any true accounting of efficiency has to include an artifacts durability and service life-not just the very narrow definition of energy consumed at point of use. And I am sure I dont have to remind anyone here, we have been backsliding badly on the longevity part, even as out tech-NO-wizards come up with more ‘efficient’ but poorly made items for us to ‘consume’,

The other thing, one cant help notice, is what we are going to end with over this. A tiny globalist cartel with very INeffeicent global supply chains, will control their particular market. All the devices are built in Asia, not in North America and most of these lights will be marketed though the usual tiny clutch of US big-box retailers. ‘High-tech’ and efficient seems to imply, Global supply chains-expensive,fragile and highly variable quality, YMMV on the quality part.

The Phoebus cartel sure has come a long way since the 1950s. Well, actually its the same cartel, but now they dont even have to bother making all their designed to fail crappy incandescents here in North America. They’ve moved it all out to Asia and now well have even less choice now than folks did in the early 20th C.

eugene on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 7:34 pm 



Many yrs ago, a friend and I, were driving (pulling a boat) from Minnesota to Prince Rupert, BC where we would catch the ferry to Ketchikan and then another ferry to Prince of Wales Island. On the way, he said he would like to wash the plastic eating utensils instead of throwing them away as an energy saving. I agreed then reminded him we were driving 4000 miles (RT)to go fishing. The article reminds me a great deal of that incident. I agree that washing utensils and changing light bulbs is a step in the right direction but it’s really like pissing in the ocean in the scope of what needs to be done. I’d have to sit down and do some figuring but somehow I have my doubts this is really going to result in much of a cost savings. I do have a very solid hunch the profit margins on the bulbs are much greater than the old one. But it pacifies the masses that they are “doing something” to save energy. Decade from now some investigative reporter will state there isn’t any energy savings when one considers mining the materials, making the bulbs, shipping them around the world, etc, etc.

DC on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 8:15 pm 



The only true measure of a devices effieceny is the sum of three things

1) The power consumed at the point of use. This is about the only one people concernt themselves with, or even consider.

2) The embodied energy of the device itself. How much energy and raw materials go into producing, distrubuting and even recycling the device.

3) The service life of the device-how long it lasts. This one can make a huge difference. A low efficiency device that lasts for 50 years can end up being far more ‘efficient’ than a high-tech new one that is destined to fall apart in less than 18 months.

I suspect that you could turn out to be correct Eugene about many of these devices may turn out to be energy neutral, but costly at best. The article claims 13 billion in ‘savings’. Not chump change, but hardly a windfall either.

And this claim here is patently false.

Q/In fact, these standards requiring improved efficiency have led to more lighting innovation over the past five years than we saw during the 100-plus years since Edison invented the light bulb!

Watch the documentary I linked. It mentions patents for lights from 5000 to 100,000 hours being submitted in the 1950s and earlier.

Mike999 on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 8:50 pm 



Always fun to hear the old geezers talk.

But, I moved into my house, and replaced 12 100 watt bulbs with 12 25 watt CFL’s, plus, a new Energy Star Fridge. My local utility came out to check the line the next week.

Some some simple math: 12 * 100 = 1200 watts per hour = 1.2 Kilowatt. vs. 12 * 25 = 300 watts per hour = .3 Kilowatt. This kind of drop in electrical usage can put you under your local usage cap, if you have a two tiered system.

In other words you can save BIG MONEY.

Republicans need to stop being so DAMN LAZY and do some Math.

Secondly, in America we make Policy that benefits the NATION. And this will clearly benefit the nation.

3) Take your crappy CFLs back to Walmart or Home Depot, and demand your money back. As noted: Buy a CFL or LED that has an ENERGY STAR Label on it, to ensure quality.

Arthur on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 9:01 pm 



Innovations like described can lead to a global decrease in overall energy consumption of 10%.

http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/philips-tl-breakthrough-50-savings/

Norm on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 10:07 pm 



I HAVE GOT a great big stash of 60 Watt light bulbs, to get me thru this ugly era where a twisted dysfunctional government forces what type of light you will read your book by.

The CFL LED bulbs are the ugliest nastiest things I have ever seen. Look at all the stupid sheeple who hurry to fill their house with such an ugly unnatural source of light. Baaa! Baaa! Follow the crowd, obey the group. No brain of your own. Baaaa!

In the unlikely event you are an actual human being equipped witha brain, then I hope that you got your stash of REAL TUNGSTEN light bulbs too.

Oh, nuts, I forgot. Your government has decree’d that all citizens must be too stupid to sit in a reading room, and read a book. Reading a book is illegal now. This is why, you don’t need a tungsten reading lamp.

All Citizens smart enough to read a book, you will report to the nearest ‘Disintegration Booth’ immediately.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon

Whata bunch of stupid morons. And they think they put a man on the moon. No, that was your great grand daddy, and you are just a big ugly ball of fat, sitting in your monster truck waiting for the well to pump dry.

Ghung on Sat, 21st Dec 2013 10:44 pm 



Gosh, Norm, I’ve been reading a book under my little reading lamp into which I installed a new LED bulb a few weeks ago. I couldn’t be happier with its color and brightness. Same with our kitchen lights which were recently replaced with LEDs, formerly ageing CFLs. I certainly prefer them over the old incandescents, price not-with-standing.

I’m not particularly happy with the government forcing anything on the population, but am in tune with the level of situational awareness in the US. It sucks. Many people either don’t care, or aren’t paying attention to our energy conundrum. Our government is certainly doing plenty of things to get angry about, but forcing energy efficient light bulbs on people is at the bottom of my list, though, having just come back from the grocery store, I think it may make more sense to require horns and airbags on shopping carts. Just sayin’.

Norm on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 12:25 am 



Its about your stupid government pretending to do something. It would be like if you knew an auto mechanic, except he was a really krappy one. He would keep sending you the bills, but do no work. Oh, he would pretend to do work. He would say ‘polished the bumpers and tightened the rotivators’, but he probably didn’t even do that either.

This is what the US Government is. They send us the bills, but do no work.

Passing stupid light bulb laws, is for idiotic moronic fools (also synonymously known as, stupid greedy senators).

You can still buy a 40 Watt oven bulb and you always will be able to. You can read by it. So when they outlaw all the bulbs, there will be ways to get them. So even their dumb stupid law, serves no purpose. See, see, see the stupid senator. See the stupid senator fetch the ball. Fetch, stupid senator, fetch. And the stupid senator fetched the ball.

The real work, that should have been done (your auto mechanic should have cleaned the battery terminals, and changed the oil) that work did NOT get done. They just sent you a bill. And you paid it.

James on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 12:25 am 



Well I have a few Amish friends who don’t use any light bulbs, in fact they use very little electricity. They seem to have all the light they need and use only what they need. They also tune their activities to the solar day, utilizing the daylight to get everything they need to get done when there is light outside. Inside, they use kerosene or soy oil lamps to light up their houses. They also use wood-burning stoves/fireplaces for some light as well. These people would be good to learn from.

jedrider on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 12:33 am 



Yes, the halogens have a better light, too and save 33% of the electricity. They cost more, but it is a very small step on the road to reduce energy consumption.

I always wonder when they will turn off Las Vegas (never been there, though) and Times Square.

Matt on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 12:56 am 



I use almost all 25-40 watt incandescents with LEDs for outdoor fixtures.

The problems with newer bulbs, especially CFLs, is that they have an unnatural spectrum which can disrupt melatonin production, sleep quality, and ultimately, our health.

Power factor is another issue with these ballasted bulbs that is completely ignored. Users of these bulbs may save a couple dollars a month, but there is significant wasted power that must still be generated and transmitted in order to power bulbs with poor power factor (or that are dimmed). You won’t see it in your kWh usage, but your rates are going up partially due to this increased line loss for which your utility must adjust rates to compensate.

Power quality is possibly the most important reason to keep using incandescent bulbs whenever possible. The harmonics and transients produced by these bulbs has made the wiring in our homes more toxic to our health than “clean” 60 hz AC and causes other devices to fail more quickly.

Has anyone tried F.lux? or use amber bulbs for increased melatonin production at night?

Makati1 on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 1:11 am 



As some above mentioned, we are adapted to the solar cycle. Sun up, get up. Sun down, go to bed. THAT cycle is coming back as the burp in energy is waning. Someday, you will only read when it is light outside.

So don’t say you cannot live without incandescents. Someday soon, you will live without any electric lighting or other electrical ‘conveniences’. Maybe it will be a solar flare that destroys it all in an eye blink or maybe man. After all, electric is not a right….lol.

baha on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 1:55 am 



I bought my first CFL in 1989 and wrote the date on the ballast cause I wanted to know how long it would last. It lasted 12 years! I bought two of the first LED lights available in 1999. They were only “night lights” and you just plug them into an outlet. They use so little power there is no point in turning them off during the day. I still have them, they have been running 24 hours a day for 14 years. Almost all the lights in my house are LED’s and I have yet to replace one. And no, I don’t buy cheap chinese crap. If you’re going to buy a light that lasts over 10 years why be cheap. My house is currently all lit up with LED Xmas lights on the eaves, around the windows and doors and my kilowatt meter says the whole shebang uses 52 watts! I would think even republicans like to save money. Unless they work for the power company:)

rollin on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 3:13 am 



I remember when street lights were quite dim and had reflectors around them to concentrate the light onto the street corner. This had a huge advantage over the modern street lamp which is more efficient but horrendously bright and puts most of it’s light on surrounding properties and in the sky versus roads and street corners.

LED’s and CFL’s are a step toward reducing energy use, but since indoor lighting is only a small percentage of electric power use they will not have much overall effect. Still every little bit counts, now if only these computers and servers could run on 1/5 of the energy.

Norm on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 10:53 am 



Appears that rollin is bringing up topic of ‘light pollution’. Yes, the light should be aimed down towards the ground, not blast out in a wash out towards the sky. Most fixtures of all types, blast the light into the sky as much as the ground. That is why you cannot see stars properly, in a city area.

Rather than design the light fixture correctly, its better to only sell dysfunctional light fixtures designed already,ones that blast the light everywhere using far too much power. That way the greedy fat cats who rule the system can cackle more loudly, while they count their money and sneer at the misery of the (ex) middle class, as well as they don’t have to redesign anything nor pay anybody for such work.

Close by, is a bank (major corporation) which recently installed ‘energy efficient’ LED lighting. Its fully one order of magnitude too bright. After dark, the brightness mimics a mid-sized nuclear bomb blast. Its insane. You have to cover your eyeballs. You have to scream from the pain in your retinas.

Its blinding, its nasty. Oh, but its ‘energy efficient’. Ya right, har har. At that intensity, nothing is ‘energy efficient’.

I have seen the same ‘upgrades’ at major corporate gas stations, not just banks. And the sheeple go ‘duhhhhh’ (or is it ‘baaaaah’, whats the difference).

Bottom line: If somebody designs a light source that is 5x more efficient, then the greedy corporate rulers will install it, at 5x the lumens output. In this way, the greedy corporate ruler makes sure, that the energy consumption is the same.

As such, its interesting to watch the mass stupidity. Are we at peak stupidity yet? No. It will go upwards forever, on a linear ramp. There won’t be any peaking phenomenon, when it comes to stupidity like tripling the light output on a light source that is 3x more efficient.

Other guy was spot-on, about power factor concerns. The lack of power factor correction, on CFL’s, is more reason why they are a malicious, dishonest, scam.

I have watched technical people put multimeters onto a CFL bulb, and say ‘gee this is drawing way more than the nameplate rating, whats going on, why do they call it a 14W bulb when its drawing 22W, paraphrased.

The answer is, the power factor is so lousy that its throwing off the multimeter, and in a bad power factor situation, the wattage drawn becomes meaningless, what matters is you are putting a junk load onto the grid, which is a no-no.

So what’s the next big scam? Hurry and find out. That’s what Americans are always searching for, is the next big scam, so they can profit from it. Find the scam, and invest into it. Hurry up! Time’s a wasting.

DC on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 11:34 am 



baha, you are a TEXTBOOK example of the rebound effect in action. A strong case of Jevons effect if there ever was one. So instead of installing efficient lights, and only use them sparingly, instead, you just leave them on all the time. Now imagine that Jevons-like behavior multiplied by 100s of millions of consumers and businesses. See where this is heading? Total energy consumption goes up across the board-not down. And the light fixtures themselves are far more expensive than the old ones you *used* to turn off when not in use.

baha on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 5:44 pm 



@DC – Funny how you locked on to the one thing you felt you could criticize in my post. So let’s do the math. Those night lights use .02 watts (which I measured with a multimeter without issue) .02 x 24 x 365 x 14 = 2453.8 Watts used in their entire lifetime. Where I live that equals about 24.5 cents of electricity. Now 2453.6 / 60 = 40.88 So a 60 watt light bulb will use the same power in 41 hrs. If everyone used them 24 hrs a day this obviously would end the power company not the world.

baha on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 5:52 pm 



I should also point out that the CREE LED light shown in this article is made right down the road from me in Raleigh NC. There’s nothing better than keeping our money here at home.

Bob Inget on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 6:52 pm 



WE should save the comments above, not to be reopened for say 20 years.

I’de love to be around to see how this group’s attitudes, opinions are modified
by two decades of experienced ageing.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats

Mike999 on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 6:53 pm 



I’m still laffing at you old geezers. You ONLY bought a case of bulbs that generally burn out in 3 months?
You should have bought the damn Factory.

I will NEVER buy this Old Inferior Tech again.

You old geezers should actually buy a CREE LED before you open your uninformed mouths.

Mike999 on Sun, 22nd Dec 2013 6:57 pm 



Republicans haven’t learned anything since they’ve been in high school. Nothing is going to change in 20 years with this group.

There should be a good medical study in the aged Republican brain, there may be Mad Cow in America, or onset Old-Timers disease. They’ve lost their ability to think logically or to learn anything new.

Norm on Mon, 23rd Dec 2013 12:39 am 



And LED Christmas lights are butt ugly. Look worse than a blinking neon tavern sign. Pathetic all the brain dead culturally tasteless fools that think they accomplished something by tossing out their tungsten strings. Oh ya and the greener than thou liberal tossed em into the dump. No way would you recycle the copper, dont know how and dont care to learn. Then the deranged self righteous conformist runs his LED Christmas strings 24/7 cause he too stupid AND apathetic to use a timer. Correct solution is tungsten on a timer. Run them 6 hours a day and save 75%. And then it actually looks like Christmas.

steveo on Mon, 23rd Dec 2013 1:08 pm 



DC – “The first, is these bulbs, on average, do not last anywhere near as long as manufactures claim.”

I’m glad I’m not the only one to have had this experience. I’ve lost 2 of those $15, 100000 hour, LED bulbs this year, I know I haven’t had then on for 11 years continuously since the fixture they are in has only been in place for 5 years or so.

I knew a guy who worked at the Sylvania light bulb plant in Lynn MA before they shipped it to Mexico. He said he could build a bulb that would last more than 20 years, if I was willing to pay for it. It’s all question of what gas was in the bulb and how pure it was. Fill the thing with argon and it will last literally forever.

Kenz300 on Mon, 23rd Dec 2013 2:55 pm 



Save energy and save money………..

LED bulbs are great……..

As production of LED’s increase the prices continue to fall. They are becoming more available and a good choice to reduce those energy costs for the long run.

I buy 2 LED’s a year and have already replaced the most used bulbs in my home with LEDs. I have seen my energy costs reduced and will only buy LED bulbs in the future.