So, needless to say the results of the election aren't going the way I hoped they would, and among my concerns one of the big ones is that, with whoever ends up actually becoming president, there might be even more lighting regulations hidden in this Green New Deal thing. Has anyone really looked into this? I have bigger problems with it than lighting regulations, but I wouldn't put it past them to try things like banning sales of non-LED fixtures and lamps.

Anyways, I tried to not get too political with this thread so it's probably best if we keep it that way. I know there's generally a "no politics" rule but the way I see it this could be related to lighting, so I'd like to know what everyone else thinks. 

As long as we don't get carried away; wait until we hear something definite, let's not speculate or get involved with arguing our own or others' political leanings.

Who would decide to ban all Non-led fixtures and lamps even though some HID lamps are more energy efficient?

Who would decide to ban all Non-led fixtures and lamps even though some HID lamps are more energy efficient?

Some can’t simply realize that. It seems the focus is fossil fuels.

Who would decide to ban all Non-led fixtures and lamps even though some HID lamps are more energy efficient?

Well, one thing I do know is that some T-12 lamps with certain kinds of phosphors were banned despite being more efficient. I don't know much about this, maybe someone else can fill in. But my point is, it's not about how effective a light source is or how good it is for an application. It's about restricting it's use because it's deemed "inefficient" or an "environmental problem".

I've noticed that since modern HID and fluorescent (HPS/CMH T8/T5) is already more efficient than older light sources that got banned on a efficiency basis (Incand/MV T12) they seem to be pushing the mercury content in past years as a reason to switch the LED and probably to ban them after.

Well, one thing I do know is that some T-12 lamps with certain kinds of phosphors were banned despite being more efficient. I don't know much about this, maybe someone else can fill in. But my point is, it's not about how effective a light source is or how good it is for an application. It's about restricting it's use because it's deemed "inefficient" or an "environmental problem".

Yeah I've noticed that the higher lumen low CRI T12 lamps are no longer allowed and instead you have to get high CRI T12 lamps which are both more expensive to buy and have less light output. I never got the reasoning behind that TBH, seems kinda backwards to me.

The intentions behind lamp bans have little to do with environment protection. They are there to direct the market to the wanted product (This is not a secret, all the official documents of the bans say this). The environment is a cover story for other reasons why would anyone want this driving, some of which are political too. Here are a few :

Drive the market to a product which is far more profitable to make : LEDs are manufactured by the wafer, which makes them extremely cheap to manufacture. Yet they can be sold at a premium just for being LED

Drive the market to a technology which is out of reach of small manufacturers. (Making Incandescent and even discharge lamps is not out of reach for small manufacturers, but making semiconductor devices is), to push out existing competition and raise the barrier for any new players. (I am talking about the light source itself, not just assembling anything with LEDs sourced from one of the big manufacturers)

Drive the market to follow a scheme in which arbitrary new requirements can be added at any point in the future. For example, ever rising efficiency requirements to exactly follow the specs of new products from the "big companies", so never letting any competition to catch up

Drive the market to a product which is virtually only made in China, some recent technologies and patents (so, still active ones) for which are held by China, supporting Chinese and "globalist" economy. At the same time punish local manufacturing, which represent the opposite political agenda

Make precedents for more extensive bans outside of the lighting business. As example, remember the California attempts to ban Lead containing ammunition because of lead. (It is clear that the intention of that ban is by far not environmental related)

Cater to certain lobbying organizations (like Clasp in Europe and many others), that might have non obvious involvement with the political groups promoting the bans - Again, often extending to other areas, not necessarily lighting related



Specifically for T12, the point i see is this : Most users notice extreme differences in brightness more than difference in CRI (as long as the spectrum of the lamp is not completely screwed up). The driving of the market to inefficient versions of T12, allows a few years later to provide "real" data that shows how T12 is inefficient and should be banned altogether

Any new lighting companies who want to manufacture banned lamp technologies would be forced by governments to discontinue production or go out of business altogether. I feel that governments want to destroy lighting companies who will not manufacture LED lighting.

I feel that governments even want to make neon discharge tubes illegal to manufacture and import as well as induction lamps in order to make LED lighting a monopoly. I feel that governments will write laws that outright require that ALL GENERAL LIGHTING MUST USE solid state technology. I feel that any private manufacturer who wants to make a light source that is NOT LED will be imprisoned by law.

I seem to find that the Minamata convention on mercury is a real threat to ALL NON-LED lighting.

I fear that countries around the world will have lighting police that will ask you to throw away all of your non-LED lamps that you have in your collections just to force us to use LED lamps only.

The lighting itself is not of interest to anyone (governmenets or companies). It's the market for lighting where all the interest is. There is an underlying assumption that any lamp you use is going to EOL someday, and then the interest is to sell you LED as your next lamp

In contrast, in cases where there is interest (or, in politically correct words, "concern") about the item itself, then there might be attempts to retrieve it from your posession fast. How much effort would be put into such attempts depends on how much "concern" there is around your item. Examples include anything from Cannabis to Software

   What make me mad that Texas should of fight back and
  And not ban any thing.    Firstly Texas power grid 90 psrcent
  Isolated from the rest of USA.  There are days in texas
  That state ran 66 percent of electricity from wind power
  Esp in the fall or in the spring months where demand for cooling or heating is very low and a good west texas wind
 Now there are lamp that make people go crazy esp in Caifornia MR16 12 volt reflector well lot off gridder that live
In remote places use these lamps.  It the stupid lamp manufacture put these lamp and transformer what cause
California to ban them.

 Also I have T12 lighting that runs on DC
This what lamp bans does.  It leave negative
 Impact for some one having a choice power
The lamp.  It my choice and it my god given
Right to light my home with 100 watt light bulbs
T12 fluorescent  and they cant say a word cause
When some one say my lamp is a energy hog.
First I sleep with a light on second LED prodce that
Blue peak.   I get mad at my step dad for turning my
Light off at night.  I will end up sleeping in and be late for
Things.  As I dont need a alarm clock to wake up either
So when some one turns my lights off i ended up being
Late for things. 

I personally don't really see any more bans happening.
But instead various types of lighting being discontinued due to them not selling well any longer...because LED is marketed/manipulated to be "better" (whether it actually is or not), and maybe subsidized to give people an incentive to 'upgrade' - basically a continuation of what's happening now.

I don't think the "average person" gives any thought to the lights they buy, other than "I like the way this one looks" and/or "I heard on TV(the paper/radio/internet/etc) that these are better than the old type".
I really doubt the government will care about the collectors who are few & far between when compared to the general population.

There are  4 states with state level out right T12 bans
 Vermont of this year,  2021 Colorado and Hawaii
 2023 is Washington having T12 bans comming up.