Lamp Guide

Now that the market is being flooded with such a confusing profusion of different lamps to replace the incandescent bulb, it is more difficult than ever to find the right lamp for the right place.

Swedish national TV consumer program Plus last week tried to sort it out with the help of Kalle Hashmi at the Swedish Energy Agency, STEM. [1] My translation of his unusually informed and balanced recommendations:

* In closed luminaires it is not advisable to use CFLs as they get too hot which shortens their life. Where you have very short burning time, such as in a closet or the bathroom, the lamp life will shorten significantly if you turn it on and off a lot. In such a situation you could preferably choose a halogen lamp.

* If temperatures are too low [= outdoors in northern winters] the [CFL] lamp does not perform at its best. The lamp is made to function best in 25 degrees [C]. In such a situation we think the best option is to use an induction lamp. Very expensive but on the other hand it lasts 100 000 hours.

* When you get older, 60+, you need more light to be able to see, and our ability to distinguish colours and contrasts diminishes. Then we need to choose a light that solves all three problems.

* When it comes to contrast, for example, it is usually limited to reading text, black on white. Then you need to choose a CFL with higher effect, e.g. 15W and you can use a correlated colour temperature around 4000K, but only for reading.

* When in a situation where colour rendition is very important, where you need to match colours, then it is very important to use a mains voltage halogen lamp because it has much better colour rendering capacity. It can be a situation like cooking, where all colours seem matte to the eyes. So what an elderly person perceives as ‘brown’ may actually be burnt. With halogen you see better.

* CFLs are not the answer to all our prayers. When it comes to colour rendering they are not as good, and they also contain mercury. LEDs will be the dominating technique, but it’s better to replace low voltage spotlights with LED spotlights than replacing standard bulbs for general lighting.

My comments: Good advice all of it, except for the recommendation to use cool-white CFL for reading. Some research suggests that contrast decreases rather than increases with higher correlated colour temperature (blueness) and that certain blue wavelenghts may harm rather than help in cases of macular degeneration. [2] The small traces of UV which some naked CFL tubes emit may at close range may also worsen cataracts and skin conditions. [3] If you sit closer than 30 cm for more than an hour per day, the the British Health Procection Agency recommend that you use a covered CFL with an extra outer bulb. [4] I would instead recommend frosted incandescent or halogen for reading, as clear bulbs tend to give disturbing light patterns on the page and most LEDs are either too dim or too directional. Unfortunately, thanks to the European Commission, that’s no longer an option.

Replacing spotlights with LED is a better idea as LEDs are already directional by nature and perform better as reflector lights than as omnidirectional light trapped in a bulb – if you don’t mind the slightly lower light quality and paler colours which can be seen clearly in this comparison between ‘warm-white’ & ‘daylight’ LED and incandescent downlights [5]:


More tips:

* For those who prefer a daylight-simulating light despite the lower contrast, white LEDs are naturally cool-white and need no special phosphor mix like CFLs, or neodymium filter like incandescents, to achieve a daylight look. Daylight lamps usually look best in the daytime. At night the cold light can look and feel more unnatural when contrasted against the dark as we humans are traditionally used to fire light at night (though cultural and individual preferences may vary).

* Where warm-white incandescent type light with perfect colour rendering is needed, there exists no replacement other than halogen. No CFL or LED has that special sunny feel and warm glow which makes colours come alive. The next best thing after halogen would probably be metal halide HID reflector lamps, but they’re usually too bright to be used at home and require special luminaires.

* In traditional environments with antique furniture and art, CFLs and LEDs tend to look particularly out of place, whereas they may look acceptable with more contemporary designs, even if a bit dull. 

* When it comes to mood lighting of your dinner table, cosy corner or favorite restaurant CFL and LED have zero romance factor whereas the warm light of halogen or incandescent spots on dimmers will complement candle light and create an attractive, romantic and relaxing atmosphere. In rooms where you’re mostly sitting down and relaxing (like the living room), use many low-watt (7, 15 or 25 watt if incandescent) lamps placed low around the room, e.g. on walls, tables or in windows, rather than one bright ceiling light. Can be complemented with floor reading lamps and ceiling floodlights to be turned on when needed. Avoid up-lighters. 

* Around children, I’d use only warm-white LED lamps (which are cool to the touch) or incandescent lamps in enclosed & shaded luminaires. CFLs contain mercury and can break and should therefore never be used around children or pets. Clear halogen lamps can get too hot, bright and glaring. One exception is IKEAs Snöig series of desk-, wall- and floor luminaires where the halogen lamp is well protected from curious fingers and eyes.

* For night-lights, I would use LED. Even if you only save 6 watts per lamp, they’re usually on all night, every night, and come in different colours. 

* Coloured lights, e.g. holiday lights, car and traffic signal lights, stage lighting etc. can be replaced by LED. LEDs come already coloured and are often ideal due to their smallness, low energy use and lack of excess heat. Paying for premium quality incandescent light only to filter out most of through a colored glass is truly a waste! 

More photo comparisons between different lamp types can be found here:
Snarkish Forum
Newest Lightbulb Tech Combines Advantages of Incandescent, Fluorescent, and LED
LED Tints

TreeHugger CFL guide:
Be Careful When You Shop For Compact Fluorescents

Lighting design tips:
GE Lighting Style
Philips Lighting for the Home
Philips Lighting Design tool

References:
1. Plus, SVT, 17 sep 2009 http://svtplay.se/t/102796/plus
2. Artificial Lighting and the Blue Light Hazard
3. SCENIHR: Light Sensitivity
4. HPA – Emissions from compact fluorescent lights
5. Picture from Breakthrough Design Cuts Cost of LED Light Bulbs by 40 Percent

The Bizarre Ban

Back to researching & blogging after a month of well needed rest…

The EU incandescent ban

The first phase of the absurd incandescent ban has now taken effect.

* As of this month it is now illegal to produce and import 100W incandescent bulbs and frosted incandescent bulbs. And frosted Halogen Energy Savers!

(Selling already existing stocks is still permitted.)

The regulation also includes requirements for new product information on the packaging for all lamps (which I think is a good thing that should have been required long ago).

Manufacturers support this phase-out. “We are very positive”, says Magnus Frantzell, CEO of the Swedish Lighting Manufacturers Association to Expressen. Well, what a surprise…

But it will not stop here. This is the full schedule:

* 1 September 2010: clear 75W (over 750 lumen) lamps will be banned (through minimum efficiency requirements).

* 1 September 2011: clear 60W (over 450 lm) lamps will be banned.

* 1 September 2012: clear 7W-40W (over 60 lm) lamps will be banned.

* 1 September 2013: tightened standards on CFLs and LEDs. No lamp type will be removed from the market, only lamps with poor performance. Possibly non-dimmalbe lamps will be banned.

* 2014: Review of the regulations by the EU Commission.

* 1 September 2016: tightened standards for clear halogen lamps. Only energy class B halogen lamps (C for some special cap lamps) will be permitted, which currently only the super-expensive IR halogen lamps with integrated transformer reaches. All other halogen lamps will be banned! [1]

Exceptions: “special-purpose lamps designed essentially for applications such as traffic signals, terrarium lighting and household appliances and clearly indicated as such on accompanying product information are not subject to these eco-design requirements.” Examples of special-purpose lamps: aquariums & terrarium lamps; germicidal lamps, lamps for display/optics; stage, studio, TV & theatre lamps; photo flash lamps; projection lamps, IR lamps; traffic signal lamps for roads, trains & aviation; car headlight lamps; oven & fridge lamps; temperarture- & shock-proof lamps; mirror lamps. [2]

Street, office & industry lighting

Somehow, without any public debate whatsoever, it seems that the EU Commission has also just snuck through a regulation on office, industry and street lighting. [4, 5]

* 2010: Phase out of T8 halophosphate fluorescent tubes (through minimum efficiency requirements).

My comment: This is good as they are not very efficient, contain more mercury, often flicker due to old type magnetic ballasts and the poor-colour-rendering light truly sucks. Should have been phased out decades ago.

* 2012: Phase out of T12 fluorescent (FL) tubes.

My comment: This is probably good too, although it will require many businesses to purchase new fixtures for the thinner, more efficient tubes with HF-ballasts.

* 2012: Phase out of high-pressure sodium (HPS) standard quality lamps (only E27/ E40/ PGZ12 affected).

My comment: This is acceptable as long as there are better quality lamps of the same type available. Not acceptable if it includes the decorative frosted incandescent-like lamps used in parks and Old Town-environments across Europe. These are somewhat less efficient but are needed for sensitive environments. Quality vs quantity. It cannot all be about quantity of light, we also need quality of life.

* 2012: Phase out of less efficient metal halide (MH) lamps (only E27/E40/PGZ12 affected).

My comment: Again fine, if there are better lamps of the same type still available.

* 2014: Review of the regulations by the EU Commission.

* 2015: Phase out of Hígh-Pressure Mercury (HPM) lamps.

My comment: Excellent! Should have been banned decades ago, as soon as there were HPS or MH replacement lamps available for the same lumnaires. HPM lamps are most commonly used as street lights in cities. They give a truly horrid purple-white light which tends to turn green with age, contain more mercury than other lamps and are markedly less efficient than HPS, MH and CMH lamps.

The new warm-white Ceramic Metal Halide (CMH) are about twice as efficient and give a very incandescent-like light: truly great for street & park lighting.

* 2015: Phase out of plug-in/retrofit high-pressure sodium lamps (= direct replacement for HPM). Plug-in lamps must correspond to Super/Plus HPS level; almost all plug-in/retrofit lamps will be banned.

* 2017: Phase out of Poor performing metal halide (MH) lamps: (only E27/E40/PGZ12 affected).

My comment: Seems that the EU consultants and Commission are hell-bent on removing any light from the market that is remotely attractive and human-friendly. Warm-white MH lamps, and improved colour HPS lamps are the most incandescent-like alternatives after halogen. Phasing out these lamps may mean that there will be no frosted HID lamps left on the market, despite their usefulness commercially indoors. The Eco-design group does not care how the lamp is used, light quantity at all cost is their only goal.

It also means that every EU country will be forced to replace the whole street luminaire when stocks of replacement lamps run out. This will be good for the environment but may be more costly than some countries or counties can afford. Why not instead give special EU grants or other incentives to those who install the most energy efficient technology available, instead of removing whole lamp groups from the market??

Reflector lamps

As mentioned earlier in this blog, reflector lamps is the next group up for slaughter. [6] Preparation is going on currently and decision will be taken next year.

Halogen replacement bulbs for spotlights, floodlights and downlighters are at high risk of being recommended for phase-out, making millions of expensive desklights, spotlights and recessed luminaires useless as there are no CFL or LED alternatives for these tiny bulbs or tubes. Great for the luminaire market but not so great for the individual home owner who may have invested a gread deal of money into installing recessed fixtures etc.

Professional lighting designers despair at the thought, as should many galleries, shops, restaurants, hotels etc. as they will then no longer be able to create the uniquely luxurious and attractive lighting environments for their customers, made possible only with halogen spots.

If the lobbyists that keep pressuring the EU Commission into such follies have their way, we will be facing a very cold, dull and drab lighting future.

The logical thing to do would be to ban only the poorest performing lamps in each lamp group, since each lamp type has its own unique qualities that oftan cannot be replaced by another lamp type (the only exception being HPM lamps for which replacement with HPS, MH or CMH is an improvement both quality- and quanlity-wise).

* As no other lamps can replace small halogen bulbs for reflector lamps, neither quality-wise or size-wise, only the poorest performing in this class should be banned, not the whole group.

* As frosted incandescent lamps cannot quality-wise be replaced by anything but frosted halogen lamps, the ban on the latter should be lifted.

1. New EU directive: Say goodbye to the light bulb (Osram summary)
2. EuP Directive About Non Directional Domestic Lighting (detailed slide show)
3. EU directive – special purpose lighting (Osram summary)
4. EU directive – street, office and industry lighting (Osram summary)
5. Commission Regulation (EC) No 245/2009 of 18 March 2009 (original document)
6. Spotlight and downlighter bulbs next to be banned by EU

CFL Analysis – Conversion Charts

European recommendations

In Europe, CFLs are often claimed to give “5 times more light” (or “up to” 5 times more, to cover poorer performing covered, reflector and decorative bulbs). Optimistic calculations on potential savings are almost always made on the nominal initial lumen/watt values of the best performing bare tubes. A typical European equivalence chart may look like this:

These recommendations are, however, quite misleading as those who follow them will get less light than they originally had! Astonishingly, this EU Quality Charter for Fluorescent Lamps accepts lower minimum initial claimed lumen output from an equivalent CFL than what a typical incandescent bulb usually gives (first two columns of this table):

As can be seen in the last two columns (which I’ve added for comparison) incandescent (“GLS”) lamps usually have a higher lumen output than minimum EU requirements for equivalent CFL! [1]

If a typical CFL does not produce as many initial lumens as the lamp it is supposed to be replacing, it cannot possibly be said to give “5 times more light” of incandescent energy use.

Light Reduction

As explained in under Life span, CFLs give even less light as they age. After 2000 hours, the EU Quality Charter accepts a 12% light loss for bare CFL tubes, 17% for covered CFL bulbs, and 25% for both types at the end of their life.

To illustrate how this works out in lumen output for various wattages, I’ve used lumen figures from manufacturer catalogues [1, 2, 3] for standard incandescent (GLS) A-lamps and a typical good quality CFL bare tube. In the following columns I’ve deducted the permitted 12% and light loss after 2000 hours and the actual mean light loss for recently tested CFL tubes of the same brand after 6000 hours [4]:

Here I’ve deducted the permitted 17% and 25% light loss for double envelope CFL bulbs (a real test showed 15% and 27% for this particular model). [5] In the manufacturer’s catalogue, it is sold as “saving 80% light” (= giving “5 times more light” than an incandescent) but as we can see here, it is less than with light loss included in the calculation.

To get the same lumen output as from an incandescent bulb, and to compensate for the expected reduction in output as the CFL ages plus the poorer light quality, one needs to choose a higher watt CFL than usually recommended (just like professional lighting designers often do when installing new lights, as they are well aware of these factors). This will, however, give a light that may be too bright and glaring in the beginning and too weak and dull towards the end of its life.

Thus, when used in real situations, an Energy Class A-rated, good quality CFL bare tube does not give 5 times more light, but 3-4 for some of the most effective CFLs on the market. Covered CFL bulbs give somewhat less initially and lose more as they age (a mean of 25% loss for Philips and Osram bulbs, and 30-100% for IKEA bulbs in 2008 test). [4]

1. Philips Lighting
2. OSRAM
3. Hawells-Sylvania
4. Råd & Rön 1/2008
5. Råd & Rön 7/01

North American recommendations

U.S. and Canadian ENERGY STAR requirements stay more reasonable and require a minimum initial lumen output that roughly translates to a 3:1 or 4:1 switch. [1, 2]

Again required initial lumen output is slightly less than incandescent output and light loss is not taken into account, despite General Electric being more open and giving mean lumen values in their online catalogues.

As can be seen in the above example, a fair switch is closer to 3 than 4 for the most effective bare tubes, and of course less for covered bulbs, globes, reflectors and decorative bulbs. Yet on the same page, it is still claimed that

“ENERGY STAR qualified bulbs use about 75 percent less energy than standard incandescent bulbs.”

1. U.S. ENERGY STAR
2. Canadian ENERGY STAR
3. GE Lighting

Summary

Based on manufacturer figures for initial lumens, with light reduction included, the best tubes give only 3-4 times more light in Europe and around 3 in the U.S.A and Canada. Less for covered, reflector & decorative CFLs, for CFLs used in the wrong luminaires, and for poorer quality CFLs of all types.

Consumers therefore need to be advised to choose a higher watt CFL than recommended to get as much light as from the original bulb and to compensate for the eventual light degradation and poorer quality of the CFL replacement. And the EU standardisation directive needs to be adjusted to reflect reality.

CFL Analysis – Light Quality

When it comes to light quality, there exists no replacement for the incandescent lamp, other than mains voltage halogen in retrofit bulbs – most of which are also being phased out!

What is so unique about incandescent light then? * Unlike other light sources, incandescent and halogen lamps are tungsten black-body radiators, a version of fire-light which humanity has evolved with since fire was discovered. Like sunlight, incandescent light has the highest possible colour rendering (CRI 100), due to naturally continuous spectrum, and a warm-white, human-friendly light which radiates and makes colours come alive.

Update 25 june: Lighting designer Ed Cansino in a recent, highly informative interview:

“…if I were forced to choose the best lighting for residential overall, it would have to be incandescent. I feel that we as humans have had a deep connection to flame for many thousands of years. It’s almost like it’s in our DNA. It’s interesting that as time moves on, people are still drawn to sitting around the camp fire, a fireplace, even a barbecue. Think of a Yule log. It’s just that this particular quality of light is ingrained in us. You can even get a screen saver of log flames. Incandescents with their glowing filaments are a form of flame and are thus an extension of this inborn affinity that we have for fire.”

* When dimmed or used at lower wattages, the light colour gets proportionally warmer and more like candle light. Increase brightness and it gets whiter again. This is how a natural light source behaves.

* Incandescent light is the standard against which all other types of light is measured. This is why the lighting industry has put so much effort into trying to copy its light colour, colour rendering capacity and other qualities.

* CFLs are based on a completely different technology, and LEDs on yet another. Even if the industry can now mix phosphors to decently emulate incandescent light at a superficial level in some of the best brand models, FL/CFL or LED light is no more the same thing as incandescent light than a gold-coloured alloy can be called real gold, or synthetic microfiber real silk. Both have their respective uses, but in many cases a substitute just won’t do. CFL light is a composite light, an artificial replica of the real thing that just doesn’t feel the same and does not behave in the same way. When dimmed, for example, it just turns cooler and more grey and dull, not warmer.

See this interview with a pro-CFL professor explaining the quality problems with CFLs: Why Efficient Light Bulbs Fail to Thrive

Here are spectral distribution charts (from Osram) for different light sources, which illuminate the quality differences very clearly:

Incandescent light with continuous spectrum and full colour rendering (CRI 100).


Example of standard FL/CFL with uneven spectrum & limited colour rendering (CRI 82-85).

White LED, a smoother curve but peaking in the blue end of the spectrum instead of the red.

Ron Rosenbaum describes the difference more poetically:

“I’ve tried the new CFLs, and they are a genuine improvement—they don’t flicker perceptibly, or buzz, or make your skin look green. There is a difference, and I’d be in favor of replacing all current fluorescent bulbs with CFLs. But even CFLs glare and blare—they don’t have that inimitable incandescent glow. So don’t let them take lamplight away. Don’t let them ban beauty.

“Don’t get me wrong, this is not a plea for Ye Olde Times, for gaslight and quill pens. It’s just a plea not to take for granted the way we illuminate our world. Not all change is improvement. Why do I put such a premium on incandescence? For one thing, I am a bit romantic about it. A lamp fitted with an incandescent bulb and dim translucent shades casts a lovely, painterly glow on human faces, while the light of fluorescents recalls a meat locker.

“Why do you think there is such artistry to so many lampshades? They are the lingerie of light.

“But the appeal of incandescence is not just a matter of romance. I suspect there are also answers to be found in the physics and linguistics of incandescence.

“I’d speculate that it has something to do with the different ways light is created by incandescents and fluorescents. Incandescent light is created by heat, by the way an electric current turns a thin metal filament (usually tungsten) red then white hot in a transparent or translucent globe filled with an inert gas that prevents the filament from burning up, allowing it to give off a steady glow. (That explains the warmth: The fact that incandescence emanates from heat creates warmth, distinguishes it from the cold creepiness of fluorescence.)

“Fluorescent light bulbs, on the other hand, are coated inside with chemical material that lights up as energy reaches the tubes. (It’s a bit more complicated than this, but that’s the general idea.) Fluorescents sometimes appear to flicker because alternating current brings that energy to the bulbs in pulses, rather than steadily. In incandescents, the hot filament stays hot—and therefore bright—despite alternations in current; it can’t cool fast enough to dim or flicker.

“The new CFLs pulse faster than their ancestors, so the flickering is less perceptible, but at some level, it’s still there. CFL manufacturers may be right that the new bulbs are an improvement, but there is still something discontinuous, digital, something chillingly one-and-zero about fluorescence, while incandescent lights offer the reassurance of continuity rather than an alternation of being and nothingness.”

Who wants to have a romantic dinner in the dull gloomy light of a CFL? Why do lighting designers of usually choose halogen, incandescent, high-pressure sodium or metal halide for shops, hotels, restaurants etc. when they want to create an attractive environment, and so rarely CFLs?

Most likely because they are well aware of the fact that even the best incandescent-mimicking warm-white CFLs give a dull, non-radiating light which makes colours look pale and dead due to lower colour rendering (CRI 82-85), spiky spectral distribution (lacking parts of the spectrum – check this out for yourself with the back of a CD and see the spectrum broken up into 3 blocks with all the wavelenghts inbetween more or less missing) and lack of radiance and glow.

And that’s not mentioning all those odd coloured ones which still dominate the lower end and some of the high end of the CFL market (according to recent consumer tests).

Lighting designer Gad Giladi, D.E.S.A., M.F.A. FPLDA, explains what happens when wavelenghts are missing:

“Not only are the quantities of light of CFL ‘equivalents’ not equal to those of the planned replaced incandescents but also the quality of the light greatly differs. This is due to the fact that the spectrum of the incandescent is a continuous one, i.e. has energy in all wavelengths of the visible electromagnetic spectrum while the spectrum of the CFLs, like all discharge lamps is a discontinuous one, i.e., depending on the composition of the phosphor coating of the tubes will present a lack of or a deficiency in energy at certain wavelengths of the visible spectrum.

“This characteristic is not immediately visible to the human eye until the emitted light falls on a surface or an object: the energy in each different wavelength corresponds to a colour perceived by the human visual system. If that colour does not exist in the light, its corresponding pigment in materials cannot be perceived by the eye; if the energy in a specific wavelength is deficient, the corresponding pigment in materials will be perceived as dead, washed-out and distorted. (…)

“That means that where colour perception is important, i.e. everywhere the human being lives and spends time, the replacement of incandescents by CFLs is going to inevitably create dull looking spaces, distort colours of architectural finishes (stone, marble, timber, paint, stucco etc.), of furnishings – curtains, carpets, upholstery, furniture finishes, artwork etc.), warp the colour of skin (people are continuously going to look bad/sick in their mirrors as well as in the eyes of their partners).

“Incandescent lamps are close to theoretical ‘point sources’ which allow for the design of precise optical systems around them to direct the light in an accurate manner. This permits the creation of accent lighting, a means to create visual interest and drama in spaces. CFLs are diffuse light sources and no engineering will truly make a diffuse light source into a ‘point-source’. Gone is accent lighting!”

Lighting designers against incandescent ban (for both light quality and environmental reasons):

IALD – International Association of Lighting Designers
IALD Statement

Jeff Miller, President-elect IALD, Director of Pivotal Lighting, statement

PLDA – Professional Lighting Designers’ Association
PLDA Statement

Kevan Shaw Lighting Design
Summary of points against the CFL

Michael Gehring, Principal of KGM Architectural Lighting
Gehring statement

Scott Yu, Principal, Chief Creative Officer of Vode Lighting
Yu statement

Summary:

There are both visible and measurable differences in quality between incandescent light and the light from even best CFLs and LEDs on the market.

Banning a top quality product in favour of a totally different and quality-wise inferior product is like banning wine with the argument that “wine-lovers can just as well drink cider: practically the same thing” because both are mildly alcoholic beverages with a superficial similarity.

FL/CFL light may have its use where lamps are left on all day and quantity matters more than quality, e.g. at work, in public building corridors etc, but not necessarily in retail, hospitality and domestic environments where consumers expect a more attractive and/or relaxing light.

Light is like air, food and water – it’s essential to our well-being, and quality matters!

Lighting is also one of the most powerful mood-enhancers, can markedly affect how environments are perceived, as well as both comfort, well-being and health.

For this reason, I’m sure many would be willing to pay a little extra for top quality light just to still have choice.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.