Say goodbye to the 60W GLS
The 60W incandescent lamp has become the latest casualty of the EU phase out of GLS light sources. As of 1 September, it is illegal to manufacture or import the ubiquitous lamp that was once so synonymous with domestic lighting.
The lamp followed its 100W and 75W counterparts into obscurity at midnight on 31 August when an EU-wide ban on manufacturing and importing the light sources came into force.
Consumers are still able to buy the product after this point but once stocks run out they will no longer be available.
Many manufacturers and retailers stopped producing and selling the products in anticipation of the ban but there is a small minority who have been stockpiling the lamps so as to be able to meet continuing consumer demand.
Commenting on the phase out of the 60W GLS, Richard Gunn of Osram said: “People need to remember that the GLS lamp is over 100 years old. Is it not time we upgraded our lighting? How many people do you know that still carry money to make a phone call or use a camera that requires a film?”
The manufacturer said there is a ‘good, better, best’ range of alternatives where Eco Halogen represents ‘good’, CFL represents ‘better’ and retrofit LED lamps represent ‘best’.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment.
Share
Readers' comments (1)
Kevan Shaw | 31 August 2011 11:08 pm
The point here is that the ban has become necessary to force people to use a worse product than that being replaced. There is no way a CFL is better than an incandescent lamp in any respect at all other than the single measure of Lumens per Watt. I would say that the Eco Halogen represents the best alternative offering a genuine 30% energy saving and absolutely no loss in light quality. CFL is worst in respect of light quality resource use and disposal problems and the jury is still out on the LED option as they are not comparable simply on grounds of cost.
One can argue that a digital camera produces less good pictures than a film camera however the quality is good enough for most people and the advantages of cost per picture are so great there is every reason to see this as a positive change. The argument about phone change is not the replacement of a product but the advent of a whole new technological solution, show me a lamp that doesn't need to be plugged in yet produces useful quantities of light for a useful duration then I might agree to that comparison.
To achieve a real upgrade then we need to abandon the Bayonet cap and Edison screw lamp holders, that has been possible for a long time but has not happened. if we want proper lighting technology change we need a genuinely better light source and infrastructure that works with it, I have not seen anything remotely resembling this yet, come on Lighting Industry lets see genuine innovation!
Kevan Shaw
Unsuitable or offensive?