[mrfumier]

"The Phoebus cartel was an international cartel that controlled the manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs in much of Europe and North America between 1925–1939. The cartel took over market territories and lowered the useful life of such bulbs, which falsely claimed to raise their efficiency and output."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

[iamflimflam1]

But also in the same wiki page:

"As regards life standards, before the Phoebus Agreement and to this day the general service filament lamp was and is designed to have, on average, a minimum life of 1,000 hours. It has often been alleged—though not in evidence to us—that the Phoebus organisation artificially made the life of a lamp short with the object of increasing the number of lamps sold. As we have explained in Chapter 9, there can be no absolutely right life for the many varying circumstances to be found among the consumers in any given country, so that any standard life must always represent a compromise between conflicting factors. B.S.I, has always adopted a single life standard for general service filament lamps, and the representatives of both B.S.I, and B.E.A., as well as most lamp manufacturers, have told us in evidence that they regard 1,000 hours as the best compromise possible at the present time, nor has any evidence been offered to us to the contrary. Accordingly we must dismiss as misconceived the allegation referred to above."

[kipchak]

The statement by UK Monopoly and Restrictive Practices Commission seems to be inaccurate as the objective was an average lifespan of 1,000 hours, not "on average a minimum life of 1,000 hours" as bulbs that exceeded 1,000 hours were fined, as well as those lasting less.[1] That bulbs lasting longer than 1,000 hours were fined, regardless of their wattage used to lumens produced seems explainable only by a desire to restrict lifespans, and contrary to efficiency or minimum lifespans being the goal.

From [1], quoting Anton Phillips discussing members building higher voltage and longer lived bulbs,

“This, you will agree with me, is a very dangerous practice and is having a most detrimental influence on the total turnover of the Phoebus Parties…. After the very strenuous efforts we made to emerge from a period of long life lamps, it is of the greatest importance that we do not sink back into the same mire by paying no attention to voltages and supplying lamps that will have a very prolonged life.”

[1]https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-great-lightbulb-conspiracy

[masklinn]

This is also what Alex explains in the Technology Connection video, and a lot more, with actual examples using actual lightbulbs and some surface explanations of the physics.

[BillinghamJ]

I believe his name is Alec btw :)

[jokabrink]

The text you cited was changed just today from

> [...] lowered the useful life of such bulbs, which raised their efficiency [...]

to

> [...] lowered the useful life of such bulbs, which falsely claimed to raise their efficiency [...]

emphasis mine. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phoebus_cartel&di...

[vesinisa]

This seems to have been reverted only moments ago. Perhaps a disgruntled person from HN trying to force learned false history on Wikipedia?

Please watch the video from Technology Connections linked above to understand why a) Phoebus was indeed a cartel but b) which did not have as nefarious purposes as has been later claimed by e.g. populist TV documentaries such as "The Light Bulb Conspiracy".

[jokabrink]

I believe you that the efficiency argument played a role when they decided to reduce the life expectancy of the light bulbs. The cartel doing 'cartel-things' aside, the 1000h-limit probably was a good decision even though I think that they ultimately did not do it for the consumer.

[ThrowawayTestr]

Of course, there's no citation for the change.

[rcxdude]

The citation for that sentence does back up the assertion: there's a quote from someone in the source saying that the cartel didn't meaningfully increase efficiency but did shorten lifespans. Whether you trust a media studies professor who has 'studied the cartel's documents' is another question though.

[rocqua]

The video cited above explicitly claims that the thinner wires (that last less long) are indeed more efficient. He backs it up with real experiments, and addresses the common claims that the Phoebus only did this to sell more products.

Specifically, the life-time of a bulb has to do with filament thickness (the filament sublimates until it is too thin, melts from resistance and breaks). At the same time, thinner fillaments will get hotter, and therefore be brighter at the same power level. (specifically, more of the heat energy is radiated away in the visible spectrum). This means bulb life-time and efficiency an inherent trade-off.

[afiori]

The claim of the video is that lifetime, efficiency, and luminosity cannot be optimized independently.

Meaning that the best 2000 hours incandescent lightbulb is either less luminous or less efficient (or both) than a well built 1000 lightbulb.

Wether the cartel was nefarious is slightly beyond the point and primarily of historical interest.

As a "proof" the centennial lightbulb is about as luminous as a candle, that is useless in almost every case.

It is impossible to build a new centennial lightbulb that anyone would want to buy outside of niche industrial or artistic applications.

[ekidd]

Has there been a similar shortening of the lifetime of commonly-advertised LED bulbs?

We bought a bunch of Philips Hue bulbs around 2015 or 2016. They were expensive bulbs, but every single one is still running fine. The downside for Philips is that once I replaced all my bulbs, I stopped needing to buy lightbulbs.

The Hue bulbs are still available, but a lot of the newer LED bulbs I see claim much shorter lifetimes.

[RetroTechie]

A LED bulb = LED(s) + electronics.

It's usually the electronics that dies (specifically: electrolytic capacitors, if included).

Life of the LEDs themselves depends a lot on operating temperature. Running hot (like in the cramped innards of a bulb), their output gradually decreases or they burn out @ some point. This is the fate of many cheap bulbs with poor thermal design.

Separate electronics (read: and their waste heat) from the LEDs, cool them well (and/or run at reduced power), and the LEDs can last practically infinite. Just like standby LEDs on appliances don't burn out. And -potentially- failed LEDs or driver electronics can be replaced independently.

But this does require a purpose designed fixture. Chip-on-Board (CoB) LED is the keyword here.

[mleo]

I am there with you, but with regular Philips LED bulbs from 2012. When I moved in 2013, I took those bulbs with me and they have been going strong 10 years now. All other LED bulbs in the house have been replaced a couple of times.

[sgerenser]

I imagine this is at least partly due to being more realistic. LED bulbs from the past few years were rated for around 25,000 hours but anecdotal reports seem to say they rarely reached that lifetime.

[rcxdude]

Is this assertion that the claim of efficiency is false actually backed up by anything, though? The cited article has a quote from a media studies professor who has apparently read the cartel's records.

[oblio]

I'm not sure what your comment does, is it just to provide the Wikipedia link?