Compact fluorescents are the poster children for the energy efficiency movement. But in a not-so-far-away future, LEDs may give them a run for their money. We recently wrote about this in a surprisingly controversial, post.
LED bulbs are longer-lived and consume less energy than compact fluorescents, and they do cheap price propecia not contain mercury. So why aren’t we using them already? There are two main complaints with LEDs: They are way too expensive, and they have an impractical spotlight type quality. But the University of Glasgow has a new process that they believe addresses both of discount levitra rx these complaints.
Researchers have developed a more efficient (and thereby more economical) nano-imprint lithography process to pit the best viagra online surface of the LED bulb with microscopic holes. These holes allow more light to escape from the bulb – for the same amount of energy. The light will also be more diffuse and less spotlight-like.
Before anyone sniffs at the triviality of light bulb research, it should be reported that the Department of Energy estimates that 22% of electricity generated in the United States is used for lighting.
written by sampath, January 26, 2008
written by Raymond, January 27, 2008
|< Prev||Next >|