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 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 these complaints.
Researchers have developed a more efficient (and thereby more economical) nano-imprint lithography process to pit the 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 >|