Because it won't sort itself out.

An incandescent ban is the only thing that is going to keep people like my parents from using them.

My father does not understand efficiency at this point in his life.

"Why would I pay two dollars for a new LED light bulb, when I can get four of the regular ones for a dollar?"

He does not understand that the inexpensive incandescent bulb is going cost him more a lot more than two dollars by the time it burns out. I've tried explaining it to him, and he seems to understand it very well each and every time, but he's old and he forgets.

At least he has someone like me who will try (over and over again) to give him straight advice that will save him some money.

But most people aren't like me, and they are not like you. They don't hang out here on HN. They may have no understanding of how these things work, or how efficiently works. They may even be misinformed and making decisions with bad information.

So, no: The invisible hand of the free market will not and can not sort it out by itself, because the free market does not have good technical literacy.

Meanwhile, the downsides to the ban are what? Rudeness? Sorry, but I'm not Canadian enough for that to matter to me.

I find that LED bulbs have a much higher failure rate than advertised, even though I am buying a selection of what I think are quality brands. (Strangely, the only kind I have not had die are some weird Chinese brand I can only find on Amazon.) I haven’t done the math but given I’m replacing at least one bulb a month I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price, especially since I prefer 100w equivalent bulbs.

Maybe my power sucks but I don’t have this problem with incandescent and that’s what consumers care about. I have power filtering for my desktop though and the reporting doesn’t show any issues. CFLs were much worse, I’m glad those are done with. It feels like I’m paying more for inferior quality.

> I’m skeptical the efficiency makes up for the price

This might feel intuitively plausible but it really isn't. In the lifetime of a 60W incandescent bulb here (1000 hours) it would use £15 of electricity whereas an LED which produces significantly more light would cost about £2.25 over the same 1000 hours. So even if incandescent bulbs were literally free and the LED lamp costs £10, the LED lamp is a significant saving even if it didn't last longer.

If your LED lamps die much sooner than you expected, consider overheating. Unlike the incandescent which is designed to run hot because it's literally incandescent lighting, it is so incredibly hot that it glows white, LEDs don't like heat. If you have a fixture where the hot air is trapped next to the lamp it will reduce lifespan, consider different fixtures when they're next replaced, or placing lamps where heat would naturally be drawn away. Flaky power can be a problem but (presumably) there isn't much you can do about that, whereas overheating is very much an interior design choice that you can influence.

The LEDs don't just not last as long as advertised, they don't even last as long for me as the approximate incandescent average. There does seem to be sort of bathub curve factor, though: if they make it past a certain point they seem to last longer. Lower power ones also seem to last longer. Sometimes they just go out, sometimes they begin rapidly flickering.

Maybe then it is heat related as you suggested; I'd lend more credence to that too because the bulb-population I have not had a single one go bad in despite years of use now is SANSI, which have weird-looking ceramic heatsinks. It does also seem to be worse in some fixtures than others (worst: bathroom vanities.) But even that is pretty damning: LEDs should have been designed for the fixtures people actually have. (I find the habit of creating LED fixtures also pernicious - there's a lot more waste when they go bad.)

> The invisible hand of the free market will not and can not sort it out by itself

You are but one small part of the invisible hand! Other people have other preferences. Efficiency per dollar isn't the end-all, be-all of the market function. Is it so critical to stop people like your parents from using incandescent bulbs, on the basis that they are less efficient?

> They may even be misinformed and making decisions with bad information

We are all operating under imperfect information, as myself and other commenters have pointed out, because LED bulbs don't last as long as advertised. And worse, by banning incandescent bulbs outright, the government is preventing any further information from even being gathered.

> the free market does not have good technical literacy

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." Add technical literacy to "benevolence".

> the downsides to the ban are what? Rudeness?

Well, rudeness is a euphemism for the ever-encroaching regulatory suffocation of the federal government, where people can't even freely choose what kind of lightbulb to buy. It's not like we're talking about trading fissile material.

> Is it so critical to stop people like your parents from using incandescent bulbs, on the basis that they are less efficient?

When these people complain that energy is expensive and want solutions (but can't math out their value themselves), then yes.

>We are all operating under imperfect information, as myself and other commenters have pointed out, because LED bulbs don't last as long as advertised.

Anecdotes are anecdotes. Here's my own anecdote: My LED bulbs last a long time. I still have the heavy, silicone-coated, heatsinked, glass-enveloped OG Cree LED bulbs that I got from Home Depot in ~2012, and they still work (the CRI sucks and always has, but they work). I've been using LEDs exclusively at home for close to a decade, and the only failure I recall on my own watch was of a fairly early wifi-connected TP-Link RGB bulb.

I use them in all kinds of applications, in enclosed fixtures and open fixtures with good airflow, indoors and out.

Furthermore, with incandescents I always felt it was important to keep spares in stock at home, and buying another package of light bulbs was a semi-regular occurrence. But with LEDs being as reliable as they are for me, I no longer feel compelled to have a stash of spare light bulbs at home.

> And worse, by banning incandescent bulbs outright, the government is preventing any further information from even being gathered.

They aren't outright banned. Many types of incandescent light bulbs remain available, and you're free to burn as many dollars on them as you wish. Is there the possibility that your own misinformation may be clouding your ability to form thoughts and make decisions that are based in reality?

> In either case, why a federal ban on incandescent bulbs? If LED bulbs are superior, the market will sort itself out.

Because part of the cost of the use of the incandescent bulb is externalized and therefore not subject to market pressure. Specifically, it uses (way) more energy, and the harnessing of that energy involves emission of greenhouse gases and depletion of non-renewable fuels.

I was at my parent's house and turned on a bathroom light which popped and startled me. I was very worried about some electrical fault that might be dangerous. It turns out it was a quite old incandescent light (probably the last one in their house) that had simply died. I forgot that they did that because I haven't replaced a bulb in literal years.

My understanding is that they need more air flow for good operation, and lots of ways you can socket them won't provide that, especially recessed lights. The 10 year lifespan is in more ideal circumstances, I guess.