- Edited
photon78s Nasty lighting is everywhere now
I agree, and this is the part i don’t get, why is there such a push to ban incandescence light when everybody knows is the best quality source of electric light we have, ok maybe not the younger generation that grew up with cfl’s and led’s and maybe has never seen an incandescent bulb. But my question is, why do our political overlords want to discourage its use? The official narrative is because they use too much electricity and are not “efficient enough”. But this has many incongruences and does not stand for the least of logical scrutiny.
First incandescent bulbs are known to last for centuries, https://www.museumoflost.com/the-centennial-light/ , this was just course before planed obsolescence kicked in, https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-great-lightbulb-conspiracy which then made the filaments burn much hotter to reduce their lifespan, but you can still have centennial lasting incandescent bulbs at home if you just wire them in series, for example instead of having one 100w bulb shinning at full brightness, just easily wire two sockets to connect two 100w bulbs in series, meaning it will still use 100w and output same lumens, but the bulbs will shine at 50% each, giving a nice warm light that will last for generations. So in reality incandescent bulbs can be really efficient in a long lasting sense, much more than led’s, and because they are made of just glass and metal without any plastic, their disposal are much environmentally friendly than plastic led’s.
The second argument is about its electric to light conversion efficiency, that they use more electricity for the output lumens compared to led’s, and this is true, but they don’t say anything about photon and spectral quality because led’s are no match for incandescent bulbs in that sense. An analogy of their rhetoric is similar to somebody telling you that the only food you can eat is cereal, because the conversion of calories to energy is more concentrated by weight, and therefore its a more efficient mass to energy conversion food than other less caloric foods like for example fish. This is the narrative, that you should not worry about the quality of the food or photons you consume, because its energetic conversion efficiency is the single most important thing that matters...at least for light, because the consumption amount of electricity does not matter when it comes to electric cars, electric stoves, electricity devouring 5g celltower antennas, or to power trillion watt particle accelerators that nobody knows exactly how that is contributing to raising their quality of life. The political, environmental, and technical arguments against incandescent light use does not make sense from many points of view, or is there a hidden hand trying to ban incandescence?
