Wednesday, 30 September 2009

False marketing at Home Depot

No biggie but I just have to comment on this! When searching for those non-existing halogen energy savers at Home Depot, I instead found the most ignorantly written lamp description I've ever seen, for a CFL reflector lamp:

Feit Electric 23 Watt Clear Halogen Shaped Par38 CFL Reflector, 12 Pack

Well, first of all, there is no such thing as a "halogen shape". Halogen is of course a type of lighting technology, not a type of bulb. PAR38 is the bulb type. If there is a CFL stuck in the bulb, then it should say "CFL", not "Halogen" in the description.

But it gets worse:
"Color Temperature : 2700 °F"
Had to LOL when I read that. Colour temperature is measured in Kelvin.
"Save energy and the environment with this 12 pack of 23 Watt Par38 CFL bulbs. These compact fluorescent reflectors are the shape of halogen reflectors and have the same look as a floodlight but have the CFL energy saving feature! Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) are very energy efficient. CFLs use 75% less energy and last up to 13 times longer than standard incandescent bulbs."
Average rated life hours for Feit PAR38 CFLs according to their website is 8000h.
"These bulbs contain less hazardous materials than standard bulbs. The reduced levels of harmful materials in these bulbs means less hazardous waste and fewer toxins leak into the soil and poison the environment when disposed of in landfills."
This is a direct lie. All CFLs contain mercury and other harmful materials, whereas standard bulbs do not (not even lead solder after 2006). CFLs should all be returned to the store to be recycled, funny that the person who wrote this seems unaware that Home Depot is one of the few chains that accepts burned-out CFLs for recycling.

(Tried to mail this information to Home Depot but do not feel like providing all my personal details just to help them out and don't live in the U.S. so how can I choose a state.)

Energy Star wants more CFL subsidies

According to the article As C.F.L. Sales Fall, More Incentives Urged Energy Star products manager Richard Karney wants continued funding for CFL programs.

I find this rather stunning. Why should taxpayers and utility customers subsidise an arbitrarily chosen product with numerous quality problems and safety issues that customers don't like, to give it an unfair market advantage over other products that customers prefer due to their safety, reliability, versatility and higher quality?

If a product is so unpopular and poorly designed that you have to give it away, isn't that an indicator that it's time to get back to the drawing board and focus on the mercury-free alternatives, making incandescent Halogen Energy Savers even more efficient, and LEDs brighter, cheaper, more incandescent-like and colour stable?

The N.Y. Times article also mentions its previous article about Halogen Energy Savers, Incandescent Bulbs Return to the Cutting Edge which says that in the U.S. these are sold exclusively at Home Depot (can't find any in their online catalogue) and (obviously quite a bit pricier than here in Sweden where they've been freely available for a year). Isn't this late introduction, high price and very restricted availability rather strange, considering the fact that you can buy cheap CFLs at the nearest gas station or supermarket? Does the lighting industry not want us to buy these new and improved halogen lamps which give the same top quality light as standard incandescent lamps but saving 20-50% energy?

What is it with CFLs that make them get all the special treatment, even though many are not more effective than the best halogen energy savers, contain mercury and have a long list of quality- and other problems?

Wednesday, 23 September 2009

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.

* CFL and LED have zero romance factor when it comes to mood lighting of your dinner table, cosy corner or favorite restaurant, whereas halogen or incandescent spots on dimmers will complement candle light and create an attractive, romantic and relaxing atmosphere. More so the warmer, the dimmer, the lower down in the room, and the more directional & narrow-beamed the lighting is.

* Around children, I'd use only LEDs or incandescent lamps (preferably frosted in all open luminaires, if EU hadn't banned them, and clear in enclosed & shaded luminaires). CFLs contain mercury and can break, whereas clear halogen lamps can get too hot, bright and glaring.

* For night-lights, I would use LED. Even if you only save 6 watts per lamp, they're usually on all night, every night.

* Any coloured lights, e.g. Christmas lights, signal lights in cars and traffic signals, stage lighting etc. can be replaced by LEDs. LEDs come already coloured and are often ideal due to their smallness and lack of excess heat. Using top quality incandescent light only to filter out most of it with a colored filter is truly a waste! Except in cold climates where the heat helps melt the snow on traffic signals.

More photo comparisons between different lamp types can be found here:;f=12;t=10654

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

1. Plus, SVT, 17 sep 2009
2. Artificial Lighting and the Blue Light Hazard
3. SCENIHR: Light Sensitivity
4. HPA - Emissions from compact fluorescent laights
5. Picture from

Sunday, 13 September 2009

Mercury problem even worse than suspected

Chinese workers mercury poisoned!

As I mentioned out in my March post about mercury in CFLs, many CFLs made by leading manufacturers in China are produced in fully automated factories where no worker is exposed to mercury. But there are also many smaller manual factories, in which the phosphors and mercury are administered by hand. The Times Online article 'Green' lightbulbs poison workers confirms this information:
"In southern China, compact fluorescent lightbulbs destined for western consumers are being made in factories that range from high-tech multinational operations to sweat-shops, with widely varying standards of health and safety." [1]
As I pointed out, hand-dripping risks more mercury being injected into each CFL than the specified limit. VITO, the consultant firm hired by the European Commission to do the preparatory study before the ban, found this procedure to be the likely explanation for the widely varying mercury content in sampled CFLs:
"VITO performed a control on the mercury content of a limited sample CFLi’s, currently available on the market. The control was made by atomic fluorescence spectrometry, conform CMA 2/I/B.3." (Sampe 1: 1.8mg; sample 2: 1.1mg; sample 3: 6.4mg; sample 4: 3.5mg, sample 5: 0.28mg.) "It must be stated that sample #3 significantly exceeded the maximum allowed mercury content. This is probably caused by the cheap but inaccurate method of mercury filling (drip filling) that seems to be very common in most small far eastern production plants." [2]
I also warned that this manual dripping will poison workers, as mercury vapourises at room temperature (+20 degrees Celsius). Now this is exactly what has happened!
"Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent lightbulbs." [1]
Also, mercury mines in China are being reopened to meet the increased Western demand for CFLs!
"A surge in foreign demand, set off by a European Union directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment." [1]
1. 'Green' lightbulbs poison workers
2. Domestic Lighting, Part 1, Chapter 4

Mercury contamination of your home

As if this is not bad enough, it appears that a broken CFL at home is actually more cause for worry than previously thought.

After the now infamous (and cited ad nauseam) accident in Maine, the Maine DEP had its own science team test how much mercury is actually left in a room after breaking a CFL on floors with and without carpets, which resulted in revised cleanup recommendations:

Revised Cleanup Guidance
Maine Compact Fluorescent Lamp Breakage Study (the original report)
Mercury in CFLs - special investigation (long and scary reading, including summary of the Maine Report + interviews & addintional info collected by Invesitate Magazine TV, New Zeeland)
New Electric Politics: The mercury issue (shorter summary of the summary)

Some quotes from the Investigate Magazine summary [with my emphases]:
"First off, the often-cited claim that bulbs contain only 5mg of mercury was clarified: it's an average. (..) The average amount of mercury in a CFL is 5 mg with a range of 0.9 to 18 mg. Obviously, the smaller (in watts) the bulb, the less mercury. Higher power (brighter) bulbs generally have more, although there can be fluctuations between brands as well."

"'Mercury concentration in the study room air often exceeds the Maine Ambient Air Guideline (MAAG) of 300 nanograms per cubic meter (ng/m3) for some period of time, with short excursions over 25,000 ng/m3, sometimes over 50,000 ng/m3, and possibly over 100,000 ng/m3 from the breakage of a single compact fluorescent lamp,' the report confirms.

"That's up to 300 times higher than the recommended safe level of inhalable mercury vapour. From just one light bulb. According to the DEP scientific study, while the 300 ng/m3 limit is the maximum allowable daily dose of mercury for the sake of legislation, there is in fact
no known safe level for mercury exposure."

"To put the exposure in perspective, a study of workers who had been exposed on a regular basis to 33,000 nanograms/m3 of mercury (roughly a third of the 100,000 ng/m3 peak caused by a broken bulb), and compared in a neurological test to a control group of 70 unexposed people, found they scored worse on 'mental arithmetic, 2-digit search, switching attention, visual choice reaction time and finger tapping'."

"'Sensitive populations are of particular concern with mercury exposures for a number of reasons.' 'Elderly and unhealthy individuals may already be at comprised health and be more susceptible to mercury effects than a healthy individual. For example, mercury does kidney damage which could exacerbate an already existing kidney disease'."

"'Infants and toddlers have much more vulnerable brains.' 'Mercury exposures have serious impacts on fetal and infant brain development. Elemental mercury can cross the placenta from a mother to fetus.' 'It is well established that the developing organism may be much more sensitive than the adult to neurotoxic agents,' reports Maine's DEP study. 'For example,
methylmercury exposure can produce devastating effects in the fetus, including cerebral palsy, blindness, deafness, and even death, while producing no or minimal effects in the mother'."

"The report also noted that
following official clean-up guidelines was still not good enough to eliminate the pollution. 'Although following the pre-study cleanup guidance produces visibly clean flooring surfaces for both wood and carpets (shag and short nap), all types of flooring surfaces tested can retain mercury sources even when visibly clean. Flooring surfaces, once visibly clean, can emit mercury immediately at the source that can be greater than 50,000 ng/m3. Flooring surfaces that still contain mercury sources emit more mercury when agitated than when not agitated. This mercury source in the carpeting has particular significance for children rolling around on a floor, babies crawling, or non mobile infants placed on the floor'."

"[T]he scientists note that the mercury contamination was considerably worse – nearly double in fact – at summertime temperatures (32C) than winter (23C)."

"Additionally (and this is why carpets have to be destroyed), the scientific team repeatedly vacuumed carpets where bulbs had broken, to see if vacuuming did eliminate the residue. They found that even after several attempts, the mercury was still trapped in the carpet fibres. To make matters worse, some of the vacuum cleaners were so contaminated that cleaning them was impossible, meaning not only was the carpet over and out, so was the vacuum cleaner."

"'If clothing or bedding materials come in direct contact with broken glass or mercury-containing powder from inside the bulb that may stick to the fabric, the clothing or bedding should be thrown away,' warns the US EPA."
"Maine state government is now officially recommends (...) that 'homeowners consider not utilizing fluorescent lamps in situations where they could easily be broken, in bedrooms used by infants, small children or pregnant women, or over carpets in rooms frequented by infants, small children or pregnant women.'

"Then there's the problem of what to do with the toxic waste. Surprisingly, plastic jars, like large peanut butter containers with screw top lids were little better than plastic bags, also failing to prevent mercury vapour from leaking into the house. The best method of containing bulb waste is inside a glass jar with a hermetically sealed lid."

"Brandy Bridges: 'They're not as eco-friendly as we'd like to think. Just the fact that they're being shipped in trucks and who knows how many cases get dropped? You're in your local hardware store, and they're broken on the floor, and you're walking by unknowing that there's mercury there, that people are just walking by and breathing in, and a lot of people don't have a clue'."

"Perhaps the most dangerous aspect to the CFL mercury issue, however, is not the instant 'spike' exposure caused by a breakage, but the effect of a string of breakages over the years on the toxicity of suburban homes. Picture a low income family (...) forced to use CFLs because of the light bulb ban and because they cannot afford even more expensive halogens. Picture a breakage, then try and estimate the odds of a stressed out (or drugged up) householder following proper clean-up and disposal procedures.

"Then picture a few more breakages over the years, none of them dealt with properly. Then try and figure out how much mercury might accumulate in the carpets, floorboards and walls of such a house over a 20 year span. Then try and figure out the impact such poisoning might have on every family that moves through that house, and how many taxpayer dollars might be wasted dealing with the health or crime problems that erupt downstream because of mercury exposure.

"When you buy a house or move into a rental, you won't know whether the home you're moving into is contaminated by mercury, unless you go to the extreme expense of getting it tested. Your safety, and your family's safety, will rely on the ability and willingness of other ordinary [citizens] to properly dispose of mercury laden light bulbs, and you'll never really know. The real cost is not one light bulb breakage, but how badly affected homes will be after 20 years of amateur attempts to clean up one of the deadliest neurotoxins on the planet. A generation of children crawling on mercury-infested carpets would give new meaning to the phrase, "dumbed-down".

"On the strength of these scenarios alone, there's a good case for actually banning the use of CFLs in homes, outright and immediately."

I couldn't agree more. And I don't see how any responsible politician or environmental organisation could either, after getting this new information.

Mercury & coal

For those who still believe that incandescent bulbs "cause more mercury emissions via coal plants", please understand that it is nothing but a cheap PR trick which seems to originate from the pro-CFL/anti-lightbulb lobby organisation IAEEL 1993, and based alternately on:

1. U.S. conditions in which, at that time, 59% of electricity production came from coal. [1] June 2008 it was 48,5% and decreasing. [2]

2. A Danish 'study' (= calculation excercise) from 1991 [3] in which a 60W (730 lm) 1000h incandescent (GLS) was compared with a 15W (900 lm) 8000h CFL, the latter assumed to contain 0.69 mg mercury, while electricity production from coal was assumed at 95%, as was the case in Denmark at that time - the highest in Europe! [4]. Based on these assumptions, CFLs were estimated to emit 1.69 mg mercury per million lumen-hour during production, operation and crapping phase, and incandescents 4.86 mg. However, these figures were seriously flawed then, and are even more so today:

a. "0.69 mg mercury" in CFLs is seems like a random fantasy figure, especially back in 1991! In 1993, IAEEL estimated CFLs to contain an average of 5 mg. [1] Eu consultants VITO consider 4 mg to be a realistic average now. [5] (Both are extremely pro-CFL and are not likely to exaggerate.)

b. According to EuroStat, the EU share of coal used in electricity production was 39% in 1991 and has since decreased to 29% in 2006 (though varying widely between different countries). [6]

Correcting for a and b (while still assuming the 15W CFL to give as much light as a 60W GLS and lasting 8 times longer) we get:

- GLS operation phase: 4.86 mg - 66% = 1.65 mg (as long as EU permits unfiltered coal emissions) = total 1.65 mg Hg on average. (In countries that don't use fossil fuels for electricity production, like Luxembourg, Iceland, Norway, Sweden & Switzerland, the sum total is 0.)

- CFL operation phase: 1 mg - 66% = 0.34 mg + scrapping phase (assuming no recycling): 4 mg = total 4.34 mg Hg.

In other words, when feeding correct numbers into the calculation, we get the opposite result!

See also my recently updated post Life Cycle Assessment for more LCA studies and details. And my previous posts about Mercury and Recycling.

1. Mercury: A Broader Perspective, IAEEL Newsletter 3/93
2. EIA: Electric Power Monthly, September 2009
3. Life Cycle Analysis of Integral Compact Fluorescent Lamps, 1991
4. More on mercury, IAEEL Newsletter 1/94
5. Domestic Lighting, Part 1, Chapter 4
6. Eurostat: Panorama of Energy 2007

Monday, 7 September 2009

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