Inside Fire Station No. 6 in Livermore, California, a single light bulb has been burning since 1901. It survived earthquakes, power outages, and moves between stations. More than a century later, it still glows.
Contrast that with the bulb in your hallway, which likely burned out within a year, and a question arises: how could a hand-blown early-1900s bulb last for over a million hours while many modern bulbs fail after only a few thousand? The answer isn’t a simple decline in craftsmanship or materials. The shortened lifespans of many consumer products can be traced back to deliberate industry decisions made nearly a century ago.
How Long-Lasting Bulbs Became a Problem
Image via iStockphoto/Mann Clon
By the 1920s, incandescent bulbs were routinely lasting 2,000 to 2,500 hours, and some exceeded that. For households gaining access to electric lighting, a bulb that lit for years on end was a real benefit. But the manufacturers who profited by selling those bulbs saw a problem: fewer replacements meant declining sales. Major companies such as Germany’s Osram and America’s General Electric grew concerned that their expanding market would shrink if consumers didn’t need to buy replacements regularly.
In December 1924, executives from leading manufacturers met in Geneva and formed the Phoebus Cartel. Members included Osram, Philips, Tungsram, Associated Electrical Industries, and subsidiaries of General Electric. The group agreed on measures to standardize and limit bulb lifespans, effectively fixing a target average life of about 1,000 hours. The intent was to prevent any single company from producing overly long-lasting bulbs that would undermine everyone else’s sales.
Planned Obsolescence Gets Its First Big Test
Image via iStockphoto/Welcomia
The cartel enforced its limits. Factories were required to send representative bulbs to shared testing stations, where banks of sockets kept the lamps lit until they failed. Bulbs that exceeded the agreed lifespan by too much could incur fines payable in Swiss francs. Engineers who had previously focused on maximizing bulb longevity were redirected to ensure bulbs reached—but did not greatly exceed—the agreed lifespan.
By 1934, records indicate average bulb life had fallen to about 1,205 hours, aligning with the cartel’s goal and driving sales upward. While the cartel framed its actions as standardization and improved efficiency—introducing things like the universal screw thread and standardized wattages that persist today—later internal documents and antitrust proceedings in the United States revealed the underlying motive: profit protection and market control. A 1949 Sherman Act ruling highlighted General Electric’s role in manipulating patents and agreements to dominate the market and limit competition.
The Cartel Collapses, But Its Shadow Remains
The Phoebus Cartel originally planned to operate through 1955, but international turmoil, rising noncompliance, and ultimately World War II undermined its coordination. Still, many of the technical standards and the expectation of a roughly 1,000-hour bulb life became entrenched. The familiar A19 bulb shape, the common 40–60–75–100 watt categories, and the normalized expectation that bulbs would need regular replacement persisted for decades. Consumers grew accustomed to those lifespans without knowing they had been influenced by deliberate industry decisions.
The full story only resurfaced later when researchers uncovered archival documents. In the 1990s, a German scholar found original Phoebus records in Osram’s archives that confirmed the cartel’s activities. Cultural references also kept the idea alive: Thomas Pynchon’s 1973 novel Gravity’s Rainbow features an immortal bulb pursued by a cartel intent on protecting its business interests.
It Didn’t Stop With Lightbulbs
Image via Wikimedia Commons/National Photo Company Collection
The strategies developed by the Phoebus Cartel set a precedent for deliberately shortening product lifespans to sustain demand. Similar approaches surfaced across industries: automobile manufacturers began annual restyling to make older models appear obsolete, nylon stockings were intentionally made fragile in the mid-20th century to increase repeat purchases, and in the digital era companies have faced accusations of degrading older devices through software updates to encourage upgrades.
As markets and technologies evolved, manufacturers learned that producing an exceptionally durable product could threaten ongoing sales. The result is a cycle where durability is balanced—or sometimes sacrificed—in favor of predictable replacement. Some countries, particularly in Europe, have responded by debating or enacting legislation to curb planned obsolescence, but proving deliberate shortening of product life remains legally and technically difficult.
Today, awareness of these historical decisions helps explain why certain products don’t last as long as older examples. While better materials and modern manufacturing could allow longer lifespans, market incentives and business models often favor regular replacement. The century-old bulb at Fire Station No. 6 stands as a reminder that longevity is possible—and that how long things last is sometimes determined by choices made in boardrooms rather than by engineering limits alone.