Martin wrote:

Toolstation do an excellent and wide range of LED lamps too

Moo wrote:

Personally i think its a good idea. People left to their own devices will always take the easy way out.

countrywide wrote:

The fact people don't want to make the step is why it is being forced.

Why wouldn't people change though? Why would it be the easy way out?

The simple answer is that it's not. LEDs offer savings and people will gladly switch when they deem products are a suitable. Communications are all that's required. Given that there will inevitably be ways around the ban like the incandescent bulbs then, the ban would reduce market pressure on the LEDs, inflating prices and leading more people to seek the alternative loophole bulbs. Net result, fewer people switch to LEDs and everyone pays more...

Is that the aim?

I may be more fussy about my lighting than most, but it's my choice. I think it's justified for the place I have to live in day after day and when it's affecting a major sense of perception. I will be happily use LEDs where I deem them appropriate and will be waiting to switch others when I feel they are ready. If people don't want to switch, it's their choice, but they will all change when they are ready.

We should just have patience. As I see it, and as is so often the case, it is a ban that is taking the easy way out. It's nearly always a poor solution, but it's easy and simple.

 Current: Discovery 3 06MY (55 reg) HSE Auto Zambezi Silver Allisport Fast Road Intercooler, V8 Brakes, Silicone IC Hoses, EGRs Blanked, Remapped, De-Cat pipe, FBHIC
Freelander 2 2007 HSE Manual Tambora Flame
Previous: FL2 56 reg SE Manual Black (written off )
Disco 3 06 reg B7S Manual Rimini Red
Disco 2 TD5 Y reg ES Manual Blue - Chipped
Several Discovery 300 TDis
 

Lost for Words wrote:

No, that's just affirming the consequent.

The point is, people will change when they're ready and it won't take long. The presence of halogen bulbs on the market would clearly work to drive down the initial prices of LEDs and encourage companies to communicate their benefits. People should be entitled to delay changing things if they don't feel comfortable with it. You'll obviously disagree but I say it's none of our business and we should keep our noses out.

We could argue over this all day but we aren't going to get anywhere. It's a core thing - it's exactly why you support the EU and I oppose it. You see this kind of intervention as a good thing; I see it as unreasonable, unhelpful and undesirable - a knee-jerk reaction.

Quote:

Why are people entitled, it is this attitude of entitlement which forces legislation.

Quote:

Also if you knew the background it is a worldwide agreement, the EU is merely the method for it here. You see you clearly blame the EU as the source of everything, when you don't actually know the reason behind it. The UK agreed to end sales of incandescent bulbs by a agreement with retailers before the EU ban was agreed. It can hardly be knee jerk as it has been in discussion for several years and the date was recently extended, hardly knee jerk.

You are making assumptions as to the level of blame, and who I'm blaming. I don't care who it is, EU or not, and I haven't said who it is to blame - but it would be wrong to deny that the EU plays a role. If the EU is source, enforcer, whatever, it doesn't matter. You couldn't be more wrong if you think I blame the EU for everything.

The knee-jerk aspect all depends on what timescale you are looking at - since it can apply on any, it is more a descriptor of nature than speed.

Your argument is consistently in favour of supporting certain processes, and because I disagree, I must not understand it. EU trade mechanisms - it must be because I don't understand it. All I can say is that none of this is because I don't understand the systems; I just fundamentally disagree with them. I disagree that they are necessary, or that they work as thought to, or both.

The bottom line is this; you believe in active/complex mechanisms, methods, systems, laws, regulations to achieve something - I believe only passive/simple ones are valid. I'm following my interests, you are following yours; the two are undoubtedly closely linked by proximity so we are both after roughly the same thing.

Now back to the main bit - why people should be forced to follow these beliefs. Why should Joe Bloggs be forced to change his light bulb to LED? Then why, and why and why and so on? How far does it go before hitting Hume's guillotine?

 Current: Discovery 3 06MY (55 reg) HSE Auto Zambezi Silver Allisport Fast Road Intercooler, V8 Brakes, Silicone IC Hoses, EGRs Blanked, Remapped, De-Cat pipe, FBHIC
Freelander 2 2007 HSE Manual Tambora Flame
Previous: FL2 56 reg SE Manual Black (written off )
Disco 3 06 reg B7S Manual Rimini Red
Disco 2 TD5 Y reg ES Manual Blue - Chipped
Several Discovery 300 TDis
 

Lost for Words wrote:

The bottom line is this; you believe in active/complex mechanisms, methods, systems, laws, regulations to achieve something - I believe only passive/simple ones are valid. I'm following my interests, you are following yours; the two are undoubtedly closely linked by proximity so we are both after roughly the same thing.

Now back to the main bit - why people should be forced to follow these beliefs. Why should Joe Bloggs be forced to change his light bulb to LED? Then why, and why and why and so on? How far does it go before hitting Hume's guillotine?

DSL wrote:

I feel like living on the ragged edge, got 30 g10 50w halogens for sale.

Go on switch them all on at once, sod the polar bears I want some warming

Quote:

Banning is not a complex method, it just works.

Different point - it's not the ban I was refering to as a complex method. Though, it is still more complex than nothing.

Quote:

Also incandescent bulbs are not banned in all respects. It is the energy requirement of the current version which is. There is research to make them more energy efficient going on currently, so they may return. In fact for the last 10 plus years grants have been given to improve the efficiency of lighting. Remember it is a ban on selling them, not on buying them, so it is aimed at manufacturers producing product which affects other areas such as power consumption. It is no different to other manufacturing processes which have been stopped, pesticides, asbestos, leaded paint etc etc. Fine for the person who uses it and finds it easier than other products to use, but what about later on and the legacy it leaves behind. Your passive view would have made that much worse and drawn out that process for years.

We are entitled to buy anything we like, but without total knowledge of the effect of buying it or using it you need somebody to provide some legislation so that you can take for granted that within reason you are buying something which is no going to harm yourself or others.

Quote:

I don't see how you view of entitlement means that you should still have the choice to buy something which is potentially harmful until you decide it is time to change. Apart from anything the average person is unlikely to know what the issues are. When I say you don't understand systems, I was not making a reference to your ability, rather that you won't know all the facts and therefore have to at some point rely on others to take decisions. I am unlikely to be any the wiser than you which is why you have to listen to specialists in their field.

I am willing to accept that some things are in my best interest and those around me, but you seem less so but not sure what that is based on.

Obviously, I accept things that are in my best interests, but if I cannot be persuaded of such, it is unlikely to be in my best interests. I believe it is in my best interests to save energy - I think very, very few people disagree. However, do I think it is in my best interests to change to a bulb I consider to still be inferior for certain purposes now, rather than simply wait until it is not inferior, I think probably not. What's more, it's impossible to place a fixed value on such things. Now that may be me being picky, but aside from that, I'm not one to concern myself with unfamiliarity of new technology in general, but there are people who do take longer to feel comfortable with things, however irrational it may be. I think it is in my interests not to twist their arms unless absolutely necessary, and I think the circumstances are far from necessary. Thus the appropriate course of action is simply to communicate the benefits to them and they will easily be persuaded.

I don't consider it to be in my interest, to be totalitarian about my/one's own interests. I think it is in my interest, to allow others to determine their own interests, even if it doesn't always seem, at face value, to be in my interest. In my mind, there is a greater depth of reason to an anti-interventionalist stance on such things.

 Current: Discovery 3 06MY (55 reg) HSE Auto Zambezi Silver Allisport Fast Road Intercooler, V8 Brakes, Silicone IC Hoses, EGRs Blanked, Remapped, De-Cat pipe, FBHIC
Freelander 2 2007 HSE Manual Tambora Flame
Previous: FL2 56 reg SE Manual Black (written off )
Disco 3 06 reg B7S Manual Rimini Red
Disco 2 TD5 Y reg ES Manual Blue - Chipped
Several Discovery 300 TDis
 

al cope wrote:

isnt that dealing - have you got an RRS with blacked out windows

The heat is on

Al

I'm undercover in a beat up 10 year old D3.

Pelyma wrote:

Go on switch them all on at once, sod the polar bears I want some warming

The reason I have them available to flog to the rebels out there is I've replaced 30 halogen ones in the parts of the house we use a lot with LED bulbs. Kitchen, hall, cinema room, etc. The other wings (well rooms) have the old pole melting halogens in there as the payback in energy use was about 25 years. I'll be green where it works for me, cuddly polar bears or not.