While everyone was worried about gas stoves and other household appliances, they weren’t watching what the other hand was doing: speeding up the ban on incandescent lightbulbs.

The incandescent lightbulb has been on its deathbed since 2007 and officially breathed its last breath on August 1. The rule was initially issued under the George W. Bush administration, sparking plenty of controversies to merit several postponements. Donald Trump rolled it back. But thanks to an administration focused on climate change, President Biden made it official. It is now illegal to manufacture and/or sell standard incandescent bulbs, which have been used since 1879.

The Department of Energy contends the standards would save consumers $3 billion each year in utility costs and cut planet-warming carbon emissions by 222 million metric tons over the next 30 years, equivalent to emissions generated by 28 million homes in one year. The LED (light-emitting diode) bulb will now reign supreme.

Sure, there are ample benefits to LED lights. They are more energy efficient, last much longer, emit less heat, and don’t attract bugs or insects. They already constitute 54 percent of the market share in lighting. But they aren’t without drawbacks.

The upfront cost of an LED lightbulb is substantially more than the incandescent counterpart. One bulb can cost $5 to $10, or more, whereas the incandescent will cost $1 or $2. If you have to buy 10 LED lightbulbs at once, that’s a hefty price tag.

The incandescent emits light in multiple directions, filling a space with ultimate uniformity while creating a cozy and welcoming environment. For some, a full spectrum of visible light enhancesoverall well-being, creating a soothing and regenerative effect similar to natural sunlight. In fact, it has a near-perfect color-rendering index score, which measures how well a light source replicates colors in your environment. This benefit is unmatched by any other light, including the LED, which is directional and allows only a limited degree of divergence.

The LED emits more blue light than what is deemed safe for the human eye and increases the incidence of glare and compromising vision. Studies have also indicated that exposure to this blue light can increase the risk of age-related macular degeneration and damage to photoreceptor cells. These blue light rays will also affect the natural circadian rhythms, which can hamper regular sleeping cycles. A study has even linked it to cancer.

LED lighting is all over our roadways, and motorists likely have mixed feelings regarding implementing them in vehicles. The driver with LED lights may find that the increased distance illuminated by the blue light is helpful, whereas the oncoming traveler might disagree. LED and high-intensity headlights can and often provoke significantly strong discomfort reactions. The glare from oncoming traffic or cars whose lights appear in the rearview mirror (or side mirrors, for that matter) can be blinding and is a potential hazard.

Both types of lights have their pros and cons. And both should have a place in society.

Climate modeling is hard to predict and may or may not even be accurate. Completely eliminating a lightbulb from the marketplace is a drastic move and, for some, a major inconvenience, all for something that makes only the slightest difference. Maybe.

Consumers should be able to decide what is best for themselves, their households and businesses. They don’t need the government running another aspect of their lives. The climate agenda has gotten extreme, putting policy over people.

Consumers like choices. Some will opt to use incandescent lights for part or all their lighting needs, just like some will pick LED bulbs. People can choose based on what they deem to give them a higher quality of life. The market should dictate production according to the supply and demand of consumers, not elected officials.

No one disagrees that we should look for ways to increase efficiency, improve product quality, provide variety or reduce emissions. But it shouldn’t come at the expense of consumer choice. A simple lightbulb should not be used as a political weapon to further an agenda.

Unfortunately, that the incandescent lightbulb, perhaps one of the most revolutionary inventions of our time, is another casualty of federal regulation.

Kristen Walker is a policy analyst for the American Consumer Institute. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.

Newsletter