The law that’s supposed to take effect on July, 2028 will ban most light bulbs sold today (including LEDs). Most LEDs do not consume 122 lumens per watt unless it’s a 100W equivalent bulb (or greater). At this point, light bulbs may not be able to be manufactured at all.

It would be hard to design an LED bulb that efficient, especially a snow cone lamp, and if so, they’d probably still be dimmer.

Unfortunately, it might be the end of the light bulb era. We might just need to buy LED light fixtures after 2028. I don’t think it’s possible to make a 60W equivalent bulb that only consumes 4 watts for example.

After 2028, many companies may actually just stop making light bulbs. I know they are doing this to force us to use integrated LEDs that you can’t replace. Not to encourage people to use LED lighting. The 2023 legislation already forced people into LEDs, and most LEDs do not meet this requirement. I haven’t seen a single 40W replacement LED that used 125 lumens per watt or more.

Philips actually has an ultra efficient line as I know, but haven’t tested them, and those are all filament lamps.

I don’t think this law will affect fluorescent bulbs that aren’t screw in CFLs with a Edison base because those don’t classify as GLS lamps, so I don’t think T12s and T8s will be affected. I don’t care if CFLs get banned, they are an outdated technology anyways.

I think after this takes effect most manufacturers will just discontinue most of their bulbs and we will be forced into buying LED light fixtures. Maybe they’ll change LED bulbs and make them more efficient, who knows, but I don’t think most companies will. 40W equivalent lamps might be forced to get discontinued.

And, I think eventually they’ll ban all fixtures with a screw-in light base and then all new fixtures we get will have to be integrated LED.

And yes, I do know Philips’s ultra efficient line exists, but many retailers don’t sell Philips products and I don’t know if the other brands will follow suit.

I seriously hope companies will follow suit though and start making ultra efficient LEDs (which Philips thankfully did) so we aren’t forced into buying integrated LED light fixtures.

I think there still might be a market for fixtures that take screw in lamps that are made to look vintage. I have seen that there are some designer LED lamps made to screw into existing fixtures that might still be manufactured. I think IKEA’s Molnart lamps might be spared but not sure.

You know the Philips Ultra Efficient line is 170 LPW right? In Europe they are as high as 210 LPW. Last I checked, they are well above the 120 LPW level. So there will be bulbs in 2028 and beyond. I prefer a repeal on the incandescent ban though.

For a while, I have been struggling for years to find E26 base general purpose LED lamps that had an efficacy above 100 lumens per watt after Philips had discontinued their “classic glass” 7W LED lamps that produced 800 lumens before Philips developed their “Ultra Efficient” LED lamps.

What country are we talking about? I haven't heard about this anywhere yet.

I think this is in reference to the USA.

You know the Philips Ultra Efficient line is 170 LPW right? In Europe they are as high as 210 LPW. Last I checked, they are well above the 120 LPW level. So there will be bulbs in 2028 and beyond. I prefer a repeal on the incandescent ban though.

The problem with a lot of the ultra efficient LEDs is that their CRI and specifically R9 are pretty bad. The Philips UE 170lm/watt are 90 CRI about 50 R9 which is acceptable but not great. Idk what the European ones are but i know those are only 80 CRI which is total garbage. I would only use 80 CRI LED bulbs as security lighting.

Good LEDs like the blue pump Philips Ultra Def are like 100lm/watt. Truly excellent violet pump LEDs are even less than that.

Personally, i have a ton of incandescents and will continue to buy more as long as i can since it takes a $25-75 per bulb violet pump 2700K to match both the fluorescence and red light output of a $2 incandescent bulb!

I use a little less than half LEDs overall, which includes using only LED lighting outside. Indoors its a mix of LEDs and incandescents(a few T12s as well).

Idk about this specific law, but right now incandescent bulbs are still fairly easy to get. Cheap A15 40W appliance and candelabra bulbs are easily bought. More expensive JDD halogens or traffic signal bulbs can be used in some lamps and fixtures where high but not insane wattages are needed too. The traffic signal bulbs may be $15 each but they do have 8000hr lifespans.

These laws are pretty silly since there are gigawatt datacenters being planned which suck up all the power AND the water too. They need to let people have nice lighting.

You know the Philips Ultra Efficient line is 170 LPW right? In Europe they are as high as 210 LPW. Last I checked, they are well above the 120 LPW level. So there will be bulbs in 2028 and beyond. I prefer a repeal on the incandescent ban though.

Those 210lm/w things are REALLY bad for indoor lighting. Great for street lighting (they run very cool) where color shifts aren't a big deal or for cheaply lighting large utility spaces.

Although their CRI is 80 like most basic led lamps, the light is as non-neutral color wise, as an old warm white halophosphate lamp. It is very obviously greenish yellow. The datasheet reflects this, the color coordinates plotted on the chromaticity diagram are indeed shifted when compared to a different 80 cri, not particularly highly efficient Philips led lamp.

I have heard there is a new generation of those 210lm/w things, those may be better. Haven't tested those.

AFAIK the EU technically already has had quite strict efficiency regulations for a while, i think this mostly has the effect of all LED lamps available having the 'peaky' red phosphor instead of the smeared out yellow-orange bulge. The latter i have only found in LED strips these days, but all high CRI led lamps i tested have the peaky red phosphor rather than an extended shoulder hump.

LED lamps are kinda boring so i haven't bothered to buy more high CRI ones and grab their spectra.

These laws are pretty silly since there are gigawatt datacenters being planned which suck up all the power AND the water too. They need to let people have nice lighting.

I want you to re-read this... And then think.. What does forcing consumers to reduce energy consumption do for the data centers?

The bans are 1000% A form of tax on you. They take your quality of life in exchange for spyware powering data centers. every watt you don't consume can power some AI algorithms ability to process the 20+ photos that Flock camera you passed took of your car. Same reason for all the more efficient (but junk) appliances, and heating cooling systems. They would let old lighting NATURALLY PHASE OUT like it has done many times before with Carbon arc, incandescent, mercury, sodium.... but it would happen too slowly for the agendas at play. I am treading carefully to avoid politics or tinfoil hat territory.

This means that eventually they'll realize just how stupid the bans are and REPEAL 'EM!

 They can repeal the bans all they want . NO manufacturer is gonna invest in all of the capital required to replace all of the discarded lamp making equipment as well as invest in the skilled labor required to resume manufacture for a small percentage of people like us who want the old tech . Trump repealed the ban on water efficient shower heads awhile ago . Show me ONE that you can buy in your local home improvement store ! Thew only place I've even seen them is from specialty manufacturers online for insane prices !  Besides , the goverment can unban anything , the individual states can still keep bans in place.

 "The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) officially repealed the previous Biden-era regulatory definition of "showerhead". This repeal restores a standard where multiple-nozzle shower systems can each emit up to 2.5 gallons per minute (GPM), effectively increasing potential water flow and consumer choice.The repeal restored the looser interpretation of federal water efficiency standards. Key details and actions include:Executive Action: President Trump signed an executive order directing the DOE to rescind the Biden-era rule that limited the total flow of all nozzles in a multi-head fixture to 2.5 GPM.The SHOWER Act: The U.S. House of Representatives passed the SHOWER Act to codify this Trump-era definition, allowing each individual nozzle to flow at 2.5 GPM and preventing future reinterpretations of showerhead definitions.Practical Effect: While the federal limits on how much water can flow per nozzle have increased, many major manufacturers have not drastically altered fixture production due to continuing consumer demand for water conservation.State Regulations: Keep in mind that states with stricter local efficiency laws (like California, New York, and Colorado, which mandate a maximum of 1.8 GPM) remain unaffected by federal definitions.You can track the legislative details of this measure on the Congress.gov SHOWER Act Page or review the text of the enacted policy via the Federal Register Repeal of the Definition of Showerhead.14 sitesRepeal of the Definition of Showerhead - Federal RegisterApr 15, 2025 — Discussion. On April 9, 2025, President Donald J. Trump directed the Department of Energy to repeal the definition of “showerhead”...Federal Register (.gov)Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Makes America’s Showers ...Apr 9, 2025"   

There is still hoping that the “Don’t Mess With My Home Appliances” Act goes through and gets these bans lifted. The existing bans are already bad enough, I don’t know what we are going to do if this 2028 ban ends up going into effect.

@wide-lite 1000 I personally think it’s pretty likely that the manufacturers would start making incandescent light bulbs again, if given the opportunity. The whole problem with LED as a technology is that good LEDs are way too expensive for consumers to buy them and too long lasting to be profitable for manufacturers. That’s why so many are of such poor quality. Incandescent light bulbs work so well because they are cheap, don’t last that long (ensuring repeated buying), and produce elite quality light that just works. I think manufacturers would want to return to that reality, and haven’t some been lobbying the government to lift the bans for this reason? I feel like the main roadblock in the way of incandescent is the stigma that has been bred against them by all of the greenwash nonsense. Are people going to buy them again, or are they going to be hesitant because they now see them as a bad product? Honestly, there are a good number of people who wish light bulbs were as simple as they used to be, but there’s also a good number who now see incandescent light bulbs as inferior, so it could really go either way. I do wonder if consumers would naturally pick incandescent if such bulbs were made the default option at most stores (less shelf space for LED, maybe with LED on the bottom shelf, and/or LEDs that are actually good quality but priced highly)?

You know the Philips Ultra Efficient line is 170 LPW right? In Europe they are as high as 210 LPW. Last I checked, they are well above the 120 LPW level. So there will be bulbs in 2028 and beyond. I prefer a repeal on the incandescent ban though.

I know those lamps now, but not sure if other manufacturers will make them. I hope they will so we don’t have to buy fixtures.

Eventually they’ll ban screw-in light sockets from new fixtures though, I know it’ll eventually happen. Not sure when.

For a while, I have been struggling for years to find E26 base general purpose LED lamps that had an efficacy above 100 lumens per watt after Philips had discontinued their “classic glass” 7W LED lamps that produced 800 lumens before Philips developed their “Ultra Efficient” LED lamps.

Yeah, Philips discontinued the non-dimmable version of their classic glass lamps awhile back. Sylvania sold lamps using 6.5 watts for a 60W equivalent at one point, filament LEDs produced 800 lumens. I remember the lamps made in the U.S. from the St. Mary’s plant which actually exceeded the threshold.

I don’t think all bulbs will be banned I think every LED bulb will just begin using the filament design instead of the snow cone design.

I don’t think snow cone LEDs will survive since those are usually less efficient than filament LEDs are, but companies can make more efficient filament bulbs, filaments has ultra efficient filament lamps that produce like 200 lumens per watt or something.

The only bulbs being banned really is snow cone LEDs, CFLs, and less efficient filament LEDs.