i don't mean to sound like i support any ban on incandescent lamps. i just meant that most of us here criticlized the idea of the incandescent ban 5 years ago because of the obvious reasons such as compact fluorescent lamps not being suitable for all applications, the mercury issue, problems with frequent switchings in such lamps, and dimmable cfls don't work well and are very expensive, etc. there was also no guarantee 5 years ago that alternatives such as high efficiency incandescent or halogen lamps would provide an alternative to cfls for those who don't like them. leds seemed like a long way off back then also and they were projected to be very expensive. also not enough evidence in how well they would be reliable etc.

now fast forward 5 years. things changed a lot in the lighting world. not only we now have a broad range of led retrofit lamps, they even now have fairly affordable ones such as the new cree A-line retrofit lamps. leds are supposedly more versatile than cfls. most are dimmable and they dim better than dimmable cfls, they are not affected by frequent switchings, and do not contain mercury. besides leds, the halogen energy savers indeed came out. halogen A19 4 packs are like a return to the old times in a way, they have as much shelf space in the bulb aisles as incandescents did in 2005.

so now there are leds etc do you think it is more feasible for most incandescent bulbs to be banned? would more members here support it or still criticlize the idea for whatever reason? remember i did NOT say I support it, i just want to hear your opinions on this these days.

No, for this : LEDs and halogens are generaly better than incandescents, there is no reason why would anybody use incandescents anyway - unless it is for application which speciifcally needs incandescents. For example retrofitting in old dimming fixtures not compatible with dimmable electronics, neding long dimmed lamp life (where halogens are questionable due to necking effects), and fixtures that make use of the heat of incandescents

If at any time (including 5 years forward) they refuse to die on their own it means that they are needed for some reason

Even when I'm convinced the icandescents are an economical light source except for some really special uses, I do not support and would stand against any kind of regulatory restrictions on their manufacture and/or use.
The incandescent sources would disappear from the market on their own, the ban only speed it up by few years, but even without the bans they would go away like e.g. carbon arc did (there was no ban on that technology, but when such system was last time used for something else than displaying the technology?)...

I'll disagree with the incandescent ban on principal, not technology. Even if new technology (such as LEDs) make incandescent lamps unneeded, I still want the choice to use whatever lamp I prefer. If new technology truly is better than incandescent in every regard, there will be no need for a ban as consumers will choose the new technology on their own. The very fact that we have to ban incandescent lamps to get consumers to stop buying them shows how at least some consumers still prefer incandescent lamps.

i agree with you guys there is no reason to ban incandescent bulbs. in fact it was never expected that incandescent bulbs would be banned. it was only because of campaigns such as the ban the bulb blog based in the uk and the movie "an inconvenient truth" etc. only for these to be driven up further by philips lighting.

@medved do you know how much led GLS retrofit bulbs will level off at? the ceo of philips lighting says leds will level off to around $5 in a few years, at least the 60w equivalent. he said it is due to limits in semiconductor improvements, which means at $5 they are still more expensive than CFLs and halogens (although I think utilities may subsidize them to cost less than $4-5).

@medved do you know how much led GLS retrofit bulbs will level off at? the ceo of philips lighting says leds will level off to around $5 in a few years, at least the 60w equivalent. he said it is due to limits in semiconductor improvements, which means at $5 they are still more expensive than CFLs and halogens (although I think utilities may subsidize them to cost less than $4-5).

The retrofit format would be always relatively expensive, inefficient and short living compare to purpose build fixtures.
I think the incandescent would "copy" the candles, kerosene, oil, or other lamp technologies lamps: Already a century the incandescents are used mainly in purpose build fixtures and not retrofitting e.g. kerosene lamp, although some such designs do existed...

leds leveling off at 5$ means pretty serious cost cutting, yet this still is not the cheap lightbulb you want for staircases and all the other "i want light for 0 cost" conditions

as for led-specific fixtures - thats generally better, but then we run into htis problem : lightning storms and surges etc happen. leds in non-retrofit formats are generally not user serviceable, so the usr will be stuck without lighting if the light is burned out and it is integral part of the building. so once again, an application that would demand incandescents

those applications are few, so as the leds take the place of "indoors" incandescents, those special applications won't be any significant part of the overall enregy use either and htey do need the lamps to remain available

A LED fixture could be build to withstand virtually any surge the wiring could handle, if there is need for that.
But such protection won't be so small, nor so low cost to become usable in the retrofit products ("magnetic" series choke for the current limiting with a thermal cut out, thyristor crowbar to bypass the LED's should an overcurrent spike happen in case the ballast get saturated,...).

And if a more severe surge appear, the wiring itself would become severely damaged and so the whole installation would have to be replaced anyway (e.g. direct "positive lightning" hit into the phase wire,...), damaging even the incandescent fixtures so, they would need a qualified electrician to repair...

But such protected lanterns won't belong to the cheapest and smallest ones, but rather to the "high-rel - harsh service" segment of the market...

So the most common installations will be permanently instaled, not user serviceable light fixtures without much surge protection....

The production cost of incandescent globes is hard to beat. LED's have a fair way to go in this regard from what I have seen.

The production cost of incandescent globes is hard to beat. LED's have a fair way to go in this regard from what I have seen.

Of incandescent lamps alone maybe, but the other types (fluorescents, HID,...) it won't be as difficult. And if you compare the complete purpose made fixture including the lamp, the LED's could be comparable and/or cheaper again (at least in the range below 1000lm) - lower temperatures allow you to use cheaper materials, while the lantern body offer itself to become quite good heatsink...

IMO...
If Replacement technologies like CFLs, LEDs, halogens, etc. get to the point of being about as good as their incandescent counterparts they replaced, then incandescent bulbs won't be bought by most people since they'll be using the new technologies instead.
Also IMHO, things like T-12 fluorescents, MV, and incandescent aren't being banned; they just won't be manufactured anymore.  To me the word "Ban" makes it sound like they're illegal to use...they just won't be made anymore. IMO EPACT was sort of the exception; that banned lots of older lamp types, like halophosphate fluorescents, etc.
However, I think it should be the consumer's choice...

I`m not a fan of GLS anyway, but the LED retrofit lamps that Philips are making are very good!
I bought one last week just to see what their all about, and now it gone into service at home.
Their very impressive for light output, looks and colour, something I wasn`t expecting, so yes, they can go ahead with the ban for me.

It HAS to be Philips though, for LED, as the cheaper China ones are a no no for me, (I have had poor usage from these in my kitchen).

Keep up your good work on LED Philips!

To me, the bans are still wrong. We should be able to chose what we want. I think bans and restrictions should apply only to things that are hazardous, such as known carcinogens. Plus, I buy as little China-made stuff as possible, so that basically eliminates LEDs for me.

Thats very true yes, some China stuff is well built, like Megaman, but I know what you mean.
I don`t know why lighting was picked on in the first place?, lighting makes up only a little of a typical household electricity use, why did they not ban 10KW power showers, or 3KW clothes dryers for instance?
These probably use the whole energy use of lighting in just an hour!!!!