Is something the gov should subsidize or at least organize competitors to act like a cartel[0]?

Such that the market forces don't push pricing that the plant would naturally die.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

The phoebus cartel whine is bullshit - incandescent light bulbs should be limited to 1000 hours because 1) the cost of electricity used by the bulb is easily as much as the replacement bulb (in the 1920s/1930s), and running the bulb hotter makes it more energy-efficient, and 2) because running incandescents cold makes the light look sickly and awful. Light bulbs were mostly being sold by electric companies at the time, so trading one for the other didn't matter to them.

Planned obsolescence does happen, but the phoebus cartel is the worst 'example' of it.

▲

phi0 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

This seems slightly inconsistent with them testing all cartel member's bulbs and fining those who surpassed 1000 hours. If shorter-lasting bulbs were better looking and more efficient their fining mechanism would be energy efficiency / appearance related.

Or require no fines at all. It's much simpler to sell a non-sickly looking bulb at the store and other companies would converge.

▲

HPsquared 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wonder what the economic calculation looks like. How much efficiency would be lost by doubling the lifespan? It depends on the relative price of lightbulbs and electricity, and the cost (in time/effort/inconvenience) when a bulb blows.

▲

Weryj 4 days ago | parent [-]

Saudi Arabia has regulation on the lightbulbs which require more LEDs run at lower power.

They last a lot longer.

	▲	HPsquared 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yes LEDs massively change the parameters, I'm more talking about the historic Phoebus cartel and the properties of incandescent filament lamps.

▲

xmprt 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> the cost of electricity used by the bulb is easily as much as the replacement bulb

This point is only relevant if 1000 hour old bulbs cost more electricity to run than new bulbs. Maybe I don't understand how old bulbs worked but why couldn't they invent ways to make bulbs run hot which also last longer than 1000 hours.

	▲	ahartmetz 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Light bulbs die because the filament slowly evaporates. If you increase the filament temperature just a little, efficiency increases quickly and life expectancy decreases quickly. They were already using the most heat-resistant metals, too. It's not sabotage, it's physics.

▲

irjustin 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It's fine to complain it's a bad example of "planned obsolescence", but I hope you didn't downvote me for that (i got a few downs).

I was just talking about organization of competitive companies for price manipulation, but specifically controlled for the benefit of the public - such that we don't lose the US plant due to natural market forces.

It's why ULA is still in business despite SpaceX being significantly cheaper.