Recent Comment
Share
It seems like the word "breakthrough" gets tossed around a lot. But we try to save it for the real deal. Well...here's the real deal.
LEDs are fantastic. But for a long time, they've been fantastic more because of what we think they can do than what they actually do. We've been pretty sure that LEDs can produce warm, white light at efficiencies far beyond even the much-touted compact fluorescent bulbs. But we've yet to actually see that.
Years ago, scientists were already producing LEDs that were far more efficient than fluorescents. The problem was, they only did it at very specific wavelengths. So the light was either pure red, or pure orange, or pure blue. And while it'd be nice to have an efficiently lit workspace...I'd prefer it if everything in my life wasn't purple.
So in the last ten years, scientists have switched their goals from producing efficient LEDs to producing "natural light" LEDs. Unfortunately, whenever they did this, they had to make significant efficiency sacrifices. Well, here's the breakthrough -- those days are no more.
Using a nano-crystaline coating, scientists at Bilkent University in Ankara, Turkey have created an LED that produces attractive white light while wasting next-to-no electricity . For every watt of light produced, about 300 lumens are visible to the human eye. Fluorescents produce about 80 lumens per watt, and other white LEDs are closer to 60. 300 lumens per watt is two times more visible light per watt of radiation than I've ever heard of for any light source, and they've done it with natural-looking light.
Honestly, the results are so spectacular that I must admit a bit of skepticism. If anyone can cast some light on how efficiencies like this could be possible, I'd love to hear from you in the comments. My only confirmation of this number is the New Scientist article shown below. My attempts to contact the scientists behind this awesome invention have so far been in vain.
The nano-crystalline coating bends the wavelengths exiting the light into a broad spectrum. The key is that the process is nearly 100% efficient, and the LEDs themselves, (which are blue) are extremely efficient as well.
Of course, any scientist will tell you that making something happen in a laboratory and putting it on a shelf at Wal-Mart are two very different things. The nano-crystalline coating is very expensive and difficult to produce, and, so far, there aren't a lot of ideas as to how to mass produce these things. But the question is no longer "if"....the question is now "when" and that's a breakthrough that I can celebrate.
Via New Scientist
Hits: 109521
Comments (66)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Beb, March 04, 2008
White LEDs are actually blue LEDs that have a phosphorescent coating that converts the blue light into the appropriate levels of red green and blue light to make the light from the LED appear white to the color resceptors in our eyes. This is the same thing that has been done for generations in the things like CRTs and florescent lights. Efficiency has to do with how well the map of the input frequency and the output frequency match and the left over energy is emitted in another part of the light spectrum, more than likely as heat. So you start out with blue high energy photons and then split them into a lower energy red or green photon and some infrared photons (heat).
There is a interesting property for nano particles where you can constrain the wave function of the electrons by making particularly sized crystals so that they floresce at a particular wavelength. This is the principle behind quantum dots. Theoretically, you can use exactly the same material and have it floresce in virtually any color based upon the size and the constraining of the wave function. It sounds like the researchers, are doing just this. They are putting quantum dots in front of the blue light and using it to split the photons. Because they can tune the frequency of the input and the output for the quantum dots, they can make a very close match and create pretty much exactly what they want. This makes it very efficient.
There is a interesting property for nano particles where you can constrain the wave function of the electrons by making particularly sized crystals so that they floresce at a particular wavelength. This is the principle behind quantum dots. Theoretically, you can use exactly the same material and have it floresce in virtually any color based upon the size and the constraining of the wave function. It sounds like the researchers, are doing just this. They are putting quantum dots in front of the blue light and using it to split the photons. Because they can tune the frequency of the input and the output for the quantum dots, they can make a very close match and create pretty much exactly what they want. This makes it very efficient.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daniel Rossi, March 04, 2008
How it happened not a long time ago for the Vinyl LP, Tape, VHS, (and so on) replaced by the digital devices, the time has came for the classic light bulbs too. It` s time to go digital even with light, so don`t wait 2012 to ban the classic light bulbs, simply start now avoiding to buy or using them. I did it.
-
- +0
-
-
written by RhapsodyInGlue, March 04, 2008
This would seem to be getting close to a claim of perfection. Checking out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy one can learn that maximum visible light efficiency would be 683lm/W but that is pure green light that the eye is most sensitive to. For an "ideal white" they list the maximum as 242.5lm/W. There are different ways of defining white and what most people would find pleasing for home lighting probably is not this "ideal white". So maybe it is possible to get 300lm/W for some version of white... but call me a skeptic until I see more. Keep in mind this is probably also the efficiency from whatever particular low voltage DC source this device likes best. Add the necessary components to run it off of 120AC and you lose a lot due to heat loss in the conversion electronics.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Rob, March 04, 2008
Having done a bit of work with low dimesional semi-conductors during my degree, those ideas about quantum dots certainly make sense to me (I don't have the maths to prove it though). I do know that those types of semi-conductors are still a long, long way from being mass produced, however!
And who says vinyl is dead?
And who says vinyl is dead?
-
- +0
-
-
written by jsbarrie, March 04, 2008
The max efficiency of white LEDs is 242.5 lumens per watt. To reach over 300 Lm per watt the light would have to be shifted toward the yellowish-green, and it would have to be 100% efficient.
Blue LEDs, as far as I know are nowhere near this efficient, and they will necessarily loose some of their efficiency when converted to white light.
Sounds too good to be true.
Blue LEDs, as far as I know are nowhere near this efficient, and they will necessarily loose some of their efficiency when converted to white light.
Sounds too good to be true.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daniel Rossi, March 04, 2008
I use the warm white -5 mm -50 degree LED- which are pretty good similar to the halogen one with no eat. It fit perfectly for interior light fixtures.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Wibble, March 05, 2008
Daniel Rossi.. you are an idiot.
The lightbulb ban to come into effect in the EU soon maybe efficient.. but it certainly doesn't even begin to address the problems people have at the moment with the effects of fluorecent lighting... you may be unaffected, but you are certainly not the be and end all of people.
Fluorecent lighting is a major concern to those affected by it, causes headaches and sight problems and generally makes life and working conditions quite unpleasant. People like you who say 'ban bulbs' are nothing short of dangerously ignorant, with short term goal planning.
As for LED's it hasn't yet been established that these light sources won't cause the same problems.
The lightbulb ban to come into effect in the EU soon maybe efficient.. but it certainly doesn't even begin to address the problems people have at the moment with the effects of fluorecent lighting... you may be unaffected, but you are certainly not the be and end all of people.
Fluorecent lighting is a major concern to those affected by it, causes headaches and sight problems and generally makes life and working conditions quite unpleasant. People like you who say 'ban bulbs' are nothing short of dangerously ignorant, with short term goal planning.
As for LED's it hasn't yet been established that these light sources won't cause the same problems.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Saleel Velankar, March 05, 2008
I just took a nanobiotech course at my university and one of the demonstrations was a coating of quantum dots that got excited and emitted any color possible that you wanted, depending on what wavelenght you hit them with. oh are the energy requirement for this was really tiny. Properties of elements on the nanoscale are radically different. Gold nanoparticles for instance appear blood red.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Gerald, March 05, 2008
As for me, the theatrical applications are going to be brilliant when they become dimmable.
-
- +0
-
-
written by tinder, March 05, 2008
unfortunately these q-dot nanocrystals are made from cadmium selenide. cadmium is an extremely toxic heavy metal and is banned in the EU. oops. no breakthrough here since they can't be used in an environmentally friendly manner.
-
- +1
-
-
written by dave, March 05, 2008
@Gerald: white LEDs (the standard blue-excited phosphor ones) and arrays of R,G,B LEDs are already dimmable, and readily available in many theatrical form factors including PAR-64's. it gets tough to focus them well enough for ellipsoidals, but why wait for your PAR and fresnel uses?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Shopping Cart Software, March 05, 2008
This is a very interesting read, I heard they got the idea of how to make shopping cart software from leds lol. Having done a bit of work with low dimesional semi-conductors during my degree, those ideas about quantum dots certainly make sense to me (I don't have the maths to prove it though).
-
- +0
-
-
written by mike, March 05, 2008
I don't care if just one of these costs $20 for a single bulb... I want one for playing/testing!!!
-
- +0
-
-
written by M, March 05, 2008
I've used LED panels to light documentary interviews and the unit used 7 watts. The LEP panel gave similar footcandle readings as a 250 watt tungstun mole richardson inky, both were 3200 kelvin, the standard color tempature of tungston light
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bob, March 05, 2008
Electronic-ballasted fluorescent lights do not have any property humans are able to perceive to distinguish them from incandescent other than color. The "flashing" some nuts talk about is 20kHz or better, which no human eye is capable of seeing. No one has been able to produce a double-blind study that confirms the authenticity of claims by some that fluorescent lights cause anything other than hysteria among people ignorant of the physics of light.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Isaac, March 05, 2008
The cost for LED lighting is much more significant than you would think. If you want an example where LED lighting would be a bad decision imagine a closet light. You only use it, say, 10 hours a year (1.6 minutes a day, overestimate). An incandescent for 50 cents will last over fifty years, and for 1000 hours you'd only be spending about $6 for electricity. (60W * 1000h * 1Kh/1000h * $0.10/KWh = $6) That's $7 for a lit closet for the next 100 years. An LED bulb of the same brightness is going to cost you at least $10.
If you want a wider example of how the cost of LEDs and even fluorescents have held them back look at where the lights were used first. They have all been in places where lighting is constant for much of the day, and where there is a significant cost to replacing the bulb (paying people to go out and change it). Factories, schools, department stores, and for LEDs a good example in street lights.
A couple places in the U.S. have switch their street lights to use LEDs. The lights are on for about 12 hours a day each, and it's expensive to send guys out to go replace one, not to mention pay for the electricity. So replacing a fluorescent bulb with an LED that lasts six times as long and uses a fraction of the power is a very economic choice.
As a homeowner the switch to using fluorescents will pay off in a couple years or so, maybe less. But the switch to LEDs won't pay off, at least not for a very long time. The opportunity cost most people give up when using LEDs, and what can make it economic, is opting for less light output. Settle for a dimmer, less natural light, at a lower power use.
That's why something like this is so interesting. If the technology ever becomes affordable LED lighting could become significantly more practical for everyday people.
If you want a wider example of how the cost of LEDs and even fluorescents have held them back look at where the lights were used first. They have all been in places where lighting is constant for much of the day, and where there is a significant cost to replacing the bulb (paying people to go out and change it). Factories, schools, department stores, and for LEDs a good example in street lights.
A couple places in the U.S. have switch their street lights to use LEDs. The lights are on for about 12 hours a day each, and it's expensive to send guys out to go replace one, not to mention pay for the electricity. So replacing a fluorescent bulb with an LED that lasts six times as long and uses a fraction of the power is a very economic choice.
As a homeowner the switch to using fluorescents will pay off in a couple years or so, maybe less. But the switch to LEDs won't pay off, at least not for a very long time. The opportunity cost most people give up when using LEDs, and what can make it economic, is opting for less light output. Settle for a dimmer, less natural light, at a lower power use.
That's why something like this is so interesting. If the technology ever becomes affordable LED lighting could become significantly more practical for everyday people.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Alex Prestia, March 05, 2008
But florescent lights don't have the same color specrum as incandescents, as you said, so surely this could be the cause of the problems people experience?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Xzin, March 05, 2008
Luxeon already sells 160 - 200 lumen LEDs.
http://luxeon.com/
They still get quite hot and need conductive cooling. But they are available for purchase today. I don't know what their lumen output per watt is but they are QUITE bright - they power many high end flashlights.
http://luxeon.com/
They still get quite hot and need conductive cooling. But they are available for purchase today. I don't know what their lumen output per watt is but they are QUITE bright - they power many high end flashlights.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Xzin, March 05, 2008
Oh, and you can dim LEDs quite easily. It's called PWM, pulse width modulation. You basically turn it off and on many times a second. Do it too slowly though and you can see it streak - think the rainbow effect for early "micro mirror" style DLP projectors and even some car brake lights. Done right, this saves even more power as the human eye isn't sensitive past some 300 - 400 hz or so.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jason Kichline, March 05, 2008
I recently installed a number of florescent bulbs in my home. It took some time to acclimate to the extreme white light, but now it's quite nice. I imagine LEDs will have the same problem. I was looking into getting LEDs, but the cost is prohibitive. The big issue I have with florescent bulbs is they are often larger to hold the ballast, and don't turn on immediately. LED has an advantage there! I wish they would create an LED bulb that can replace halogen. They consume a lot of power and throw off a lot of heat.
-
- +0
-
-
written by macwac, March 05, 2008
Contrary to popular belief that LED bulbs are expensive.. they are damn cheap - That is if you have a bit of DIY skills.
I posted an article on digg: http://digg.com/mods/ How_to_make_your_own_LED_light_bulbs_for_less_than_2_US
D
Direct link to article is here:
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/1/28/215243/977
I didn't write the article, but after reading it i went out and bought a couple of LEDs (~200 bulbs) and tried it out and it works really well and won't cost more than $2 (probably no more than $1) to make if you buy bulk LEDs and have the necessary equipment. Tested it out and brightness is great! Message me on digg if you want some further information. The only reason why they cost an arm and a legg is because they are marked up over 1000% per bulb... do let me know if you know any cheap versions that are pre-manufactured so that there is no DIY needed.
I posted an article on digg: http://digg.com/mods/ How_to_make_your_own_LED_light_bulbs_for_less_than_2_US
D
Direct link to article is here:
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2007/1/28/215243/977
I didn't write the article, but after reading it i went out and bought a couple of LEDs (~200 bulbs) and tried it out and it works really well and won't cost more than $2 (probably no more than $1) to make if you buy bulk LEDs and have the necessary equipment. Tested it out and brightness is great! Message me on digg if you want some further information. The only reason why they cost an arm and a legg is because they are marked up over 1000% per bulb... do let me know if you know any cheap versions that are pre-manufactured so that there is no DIY needed.
-
- +1
-
-
written by LoMan, March 05, 2008
It's most likely a financial wash anyway. Saving a few watts will only lead to higher per watt cost as companies protect margins. They have already done this with other utility services in my area.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Gorken Macharrina, March 05, 2008
Has anybody considered the dangers these LEDs present to the environment. Skin cancers, photon disease to name a couple.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jake, March 05, 2008
Come on Gorken, is it really that dangerous or are you exaggerating?
-Jake
my site:
dual action cleanse
-Jake
my site:
dual action cleanse
-
- +0
-
-
written by baterija, March 05, 2008
Macwac - you may be able to find some LED bulb deals here:
http://www.dealextreme.com/pro....34501616
I've used this site for other items and looked at the LED bulbs briefly. Since this site sells "cheap" chinese made goods you can get some great deals, but risk being at the mercy of poor quality control. A quick look right now doesn't show anything but it may be worth looking more carefully. Recommend you make a test purchase of any item that looks promising before you commit to a big order though.
http://www.dealextreme.com/pro....34501616
I've used this site for other items and looked at the LED bulbs briefly. Since this site sells "cheap" chinese made goods you can get some great deals, but risk being at the mercy of poor quality control. A quick look right now doesn't show anything but it may be worth looking more carefully. Recommend you make a test purchase of any item that looks promising before you commit to a big order though.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Wibble, March 05, 2008
Bob.. you're another idiot..
The effects fluorencents have on some people is well documented and thouroughly accepted by the medical profession..
..unless you call 20 years of research and medical opinion lies.. just because YOU PERSONALLY have no evidence of it doesn't mean no one else has...
The effects fluorencents have on some people is well documented and thouroughly accepted by the medical profession..
..unless you call 20 years of research and medical opinion lies.. just because YOU PERSONALLY have no evidence of it doesn't mean no one else has...
-
- -1
-
-
written by Joe, March 05, 2008
CFLs, an all fluorescents, also have one problem that most people over look, they contain mercury. If you break one it is recommended that you evacuate the house, or area in a large building, for 15 minutes to allow the mercury vapor to settle. I think that may be an issue for many people. Also this means that they should not be disposed of in regular trash but need to be handled as a toxic.
-
- +1
-
-
written by Pierre, March 05, 2008
Hey Mike Mc, LEDs are digital if you pulse their current supply.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Thomas R. Betty, March 05, 2008
Most of you need to do a little research regarding LED technology. LED's WILL be the lamp of choice in our very near future. We are currently producing a replacement for MR-16 Halogens that outperform their replacements by 8:1! Our government is working overtime to make solid state technology a REAL and VIABLE part of our everyday life. We are but one company among thousands advancing the uses of LED's in general illumination applications.
There are those that will stretch the truth to coerce you into purchasing their product, but they are becoming fewer due to consumer knowledge on the subject! Some of our lighting solutions are already beyond what is currently being utilized, and they will be dropping in cost soon enough for the average consumer. Don't be afraid to purchase LED's and see for yourself just how beautiful this new technology really is!
There are those that will stretch the truth to coerce you into purchasing their product, but they are becoming fewer due to consumer knowledge on the subject! Some of our lighting solutions are already beyond what is currently being utilized, and they will be dropping in cost soon enough for the average consumer. Don't be afraid to purchase LED's and see for yourself just how beautiful this new technology really is!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dan Moran, March 05, 2008
CFLs do have mercury, but your statement that it is recommended that you evacuate the house, or area in a large building, for 15 minutes to allow the mercury vapor to settle -- is pure nonsense. The amount of mercury in a normal CFL is 1/6000th of an ounce. A thermometer has at least 100 times as much mercury -- have you ever evacuated your house over a broken thermometer?
Me neither.
Me neither.
-
- +0
-
-
written by BML, March 05, 2008
http://www.abitgeek.com/money-...aving.html Here is a real life monetary analysis of the use of LED's over incandescent or even CFL's. I can only imagine how much money you could save by replacing ALL of your household incandescent lighting with LED's.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Seajay, March 05, 2008
Actually evacuating for 15 minutes is the current advice, see DEFRA's site here:
How should I deal with a broken CFL?
...Vacate the room and ventilate it for at least 15 minutes. Do not use a vacuum cleaner, but clean up using rubber gloves and aim to avoid creating and inhaling airborne dust....
http://www.defra.gov.uk/enviro...ts/cfl.htm
How should I deal with a broken CFL?
...Vacate the room and ventilate it for at least 15 minutes. Do not use a vacuum cleaner, but clean up using rubber gloves and aim to avoid creating and inhaling airborne dust....
http://www.defra.gov.uk/enviro...ts/cfl.htm
-
- +0
-
-
written by hubbers, March 05, 2008
Are there any of the issues that there are with other efficient lights like they cause some people to have migraines?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jeff, March 05, 2008
@Macwac- http://www.x-tremegeek.com/tem...&pi=Y&st=3
$70 for a warm white LED "bulb"
Havn't used this before, but It's been out for over a year. Has anyone else used this>?
http://www.enluxled.com/
these are a little more expensive but i find them to be beautifully designed.
@Xzin
yes, luxeon with philips has done some great work on LED's. My thesis design project was heavily involved with LED's and we experimented with many LED's from luxeon. There K2 LED's are incredibly bright, you just need a driver ($15 for one), the led($4-$7 for one), and a powersource, and also a heatsink of some sort, they can get quite hot.
$70 for a warm white LED "bulb"
Havn't used this before, but It's been out for over a year. Has anyone else used this>?
http://www.enluxled.com/
these are a little more expensive but i find them to be beautifully designed.
@Xzin
yes, luxeon with philips has done some great work on LED's. My thesis design project was heavily involved with LED's and we experimented with many LED's from luxeon. There K2 LED's are incredibly bright, you just need a driver ($15 for one), the led($4-$7 for one), and a powersource, and also a heatsink of some sort, they can get quite hot.
-
- +0
-
-
written by ST, March 05, 2008
says Wibble is a GE plant that cruises these sites and plants the fake science. Sounds like GM when California was gearing up for their mandated zero emission vehicle. GM started planting the stories about batteries exploding.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Kevin D, March 05, 2008
Following up from Seajay, @ Dan Moran.
For those of us in the U.S. http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/#whatnever
Seems that there is some risk, however minuscule, as there is with nearly everything these days.
For those of us in the U.S. http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/#whatnever
Seems that there is some risk, however minuscule, as there is with nearly everything these days.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Turn Buckle, March 05, 2008
This seems very similar to research in Nashville TN.
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/stories/quantumdotled.html
http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/stories/quantumdotled.html
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dluv, March 05, 2008
I happen to like my incandescent light bulbs. They don't take take time to 'warm up'. Just turn it on and shapoopi! light. I fell into this CFL mess by replacing all my lights with them. Their light output plain stinks.
Everyone else can switch over but I have a feeling I will be that guy that buys bulk 100 watt incandescents from China years after everyone switches....unless they are illegal. In that case i will buy a bulk quantity the day before the law goes into affect.
Seems like no one wants to address the problem of having enough light. They are only interested in saving a few pennies. Build some nuke plants and produce more electricity. Problem solved.
Everyone else can switch over but I have a feeling I will be that guy that buys bulk 100 watt incandescents from China years after everyone switches....unless they are illegal. In that case i will buy a bulk quantity the day before the law goes into affect.
Seems like no one wants to address the problem of having enough light. They are only interested in saving a few pennies. Build some nuke plants and produce more electricity. Problem solved.
-
- +0
-
-
written by science business, March 05, 2008
I want to buy stocks in companies who are going to commercialize this.
-
- +0
-
-
written by soundjunky, March 05, 2008
As stated previously, it is cost prohibitive to preplace all of the lights in an existing home. But, for new installations, it makes good sense. The lighting is no longer an afterthought, but part of the design of the home. Also, Flourescents emit EMR, Electromagnetic Radiation. Most people do not find this harmful, but it can interfere with audio components, as well as some electronics. I work with Pro Audio Installations and Flourecents can be a pain.
Currently there is no perfect answer, but as the author states, this is a breakthrough in the right direction. even if the materials are toxic, with the knowlege gaied, we can look for other materials with the same properties, etc.
Currently there is no perfect answer, but as the author states, this is a breakthrough in the right direction. even if the materials are toxic, with the knowlege gaied, we can look for other materials with the same properties, etc.
-
- +0
-
-
written by VW, March 05, 2008
I hope it makes it out of the lab and out on the market. It would be realy cool to see flashlights using them and car makers like vw to start using them as headlights.
-
- +0
-
-
written by sir lightalot, March 05, 2008
luxeon emitters are not as efficient as their Cree and SSC counterparts. the luxeon rebel is almost 100lm/w where an Cree R2 is a little over that with more efficient bins to come.
-
- +0
-
-
written by llama, March 05, 2008
One thing people sometimes fail to realize is hat CFL's are much more difficult to break than standard incandescents. The ballast gives you something to hold on to if you really need to wrench the light out of the socket, and the glass itself isn't as fragile as incandescents. I've been using these for years indoors and out without any breaking. They're just more solid. One thing to remember, though, is that they should be recycled. (Of course, a lot of stuff *should* be recycled, it's just hard getting people to jump on board...)
My main problems with CFL's is how the light ruins the colors inside the house. I've tried all different warm/cool bulbs, but they all make for ugly colors.
My main problems with CFL's is how the light ruins the colors inside the house. I've tried all different warm/cool bulbs, but they all make for ugly colors.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Peter Lorraine, March 05, 2008
The New Scientist article had a link to the research group's website and papers. LED in question has a blue source LED pumping a nanocrystalline phosphor mix. The output efficiency claimed is 300 lm per watt of blue light - not 300 lm per electrical watt - you would need to multiply the 300 lm number by the efficiency of the blue LED to get the plug efficiency. The result is still pretty good. The nanocrystalline phosphors have narrow emission lines and the total lamp spectrum tends to look a little notchy but the CRI is still pretty high. Nano-phosphors may have other advantages such as decreased temperature dependent performance and higher quantum efficiency.
Peter
Peter
-
- +0
-
-
written by mike sartor, March 05, 2008
I use halogens in my office, which has no heat! They are great in the winter, and the produced light is wonderful. The rest of the time I USE ALTERnate lighting. LEDs would be perfect.
Cyborg
Cyborg
-
- +0
-
-
written by Julian, March 05, 2008
I actually have a friend who has been on the LED lighting kick for a while. At first he had to have AC-DC adapters for every installation, which was expensive and likely inefficient. But during a reno he started wiring some DC around the house. He's an eccentric with some extra money and time, so I don't see other people doing this for general home lighting for a while. But I think it very well could be the future -- especially if the power source is DC in the first place like solar.
-
- +0
-
-
written by ChaosFreak, March 06, 2008
If these health effects are so well documented, how about some links to credible peer-reviewed medical journal studies?
-
- +0
-
-
written by CNCMike, March 06, 2008
For those of you who think the extremely small amount of mercury in CFL's is dangerous, do you have any silver colored fillings in your teeth that have been there for 10 years of more? If you do then you have been inhaling a lot more mercury than you ever will by breaking a CFL. I have all white fillings now.
-
- +0
-
-
written by dank, March 07, 2008
Awesome efficiency! Unfortunately, it looks like it will take years before it actually gets incorporated into LED lights on the market. Even so, the existing LED lights out there are very good at saving energy, and perfect for low light applications.
One site I found with a lot of info on existing LEDs (as well as some bulbs for sale) was:
http://weloveleds.com/
One site I found with a lot of info on existing LEDs (as well as some bulbs for sale) was:
http://weloveleds.com/
-
- +0
-
-
written by Robin, March 07, 2008
I have recently had the opportunity to live in both the US and the UK. In the US I was able to buy boxes of CFL bulbs at Lowes and other stores for $1 each when purchased in bulk. In the UK they are now available for 50p which is also $1. Even if you have 50 bulbs in a house it will only cost you $50 to replace the lot!
You will then only pay about 1/7th what you previously did on your light bill and you will have bulbs lasting up to 7 times longer. No way can you get bulbs for 7c - therefore CFLS are now cheaper than incandescents in every way.
The person who does not switch now is a fool (unless they have non-economic reasons for not switching).
You will then only pay about 1/7th what you previously did on your light bill and you will have bulbs lasting up to 7 times longer. No way can you get bulbs for 7c - therefore CFLS are now cheaper than incandescents in every way.
The person who does not switch now is a fool (unless they have non-economic reasons for not switching).
-
- +0
-
-
written by David Gonzales, March 07, 2008
This is very good news for the tech industry. Now is the time to strive for more innovation... I hope Apple picks this breakthrough up and applies it to one of their next releases.
-
- +0
-
-
written by ryan powers, March 07, 2008
I HATE THE ENVIROMENT
I LOVE BURNING TREES AND CUTTING THEM DOWN
YOU GUYS ARE GEEKS
:- 
I LOVE BURNING TREES AND CUTTING THEM DOWN
YOU GUYS ARE GEEKS
:-
-
- +0
-
-
written by Larry, March 07, 2008
Vanderbilt University discovered this about 1-1/2 years ago. Sounds like a copycat to me...
-
- +0
-
-
written by Sean Kidd, March 10, 2008
There are dreamers and skeptics, then there are professionals, I am a Certified Energy Manager (AEECENTER.ORG)and a Licensed Electrical Contractor. In my career I have replaced over a million incandecent and magnetic technology fluorescent lamps and luminairs. LEDs are coming and staying. For the time being switch to CFL, but please recycle them properly. I use both CFL and LED, my 2400 sq ft home electric bill was $45 last month. I even pay extra to buy wind power. (NewWindEnergy.com)nuff said.
-
- +0
-
-
written by David Doggett, March 12, 2008
-The final LEDs were also better than commercially available LEDs at creating visible light, giving off more than 300 lumens of visible light for every watt of all light emitted. This figure, known as the "luminous efficacy", is high compared to typical white LEDs.-
This isn't saying that the entire LED-coating system creates light at an efficiency of 300 lumens per Watt.. The key is “for every watt of all light emitted.” Most blue LEDs are less than 40% efficient so the Watt of “light emitted would require 2.2 Watts of electrical power input. Then the efficiency would be 136 lm/W which is still very good.
Also, consider that the CRI is only 80. While that may be good enough for general lighting it would probably cause eye strain for readers.
This isn't saying that the entire LED-coating system creates light at an efficiency of 300 lumens per Watt.. The key is “for every watt of all light emitted.” Most blue LEDs are less than 40% efficient so the Watt of “light emitted would require 2.2 Watts of electrical power input. Then the efficiency would be 136 lm/W which is still very good.
Also, consider that the CRI is only 80. While that may be good enough for general lighting it would probably cause eye strain for readers.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Unclle B, April 10, 2008
LEDs seem ideal for solar and wind installations, low volt, low amp, no inverter losses, long life, what more could we ask for. Thank you science!
-
- +0
-
-
written by stig, November 07, 2008
Indeed, perfect white light with 300 lumen/watt is not possible. But less-than-perfect white light with 300 lumen/watt can be achieved.
The nano crystals applied as a coating to these LED's shift the blue light to green and red wavelengths - possibly lossless (4-wave mixing could be one of the processes).
The light is therefor peaking at the green light wavelengths, with less intensity at the blue and possibly red frequencies. This is important, because the eyes are most sensitive to light in the green wavelength area (probably because nature is mostly green). This is the reason, that the claim might just be true - instead og a bluish light, these LED's will have a more greenish light, and more red light than typical white LED's.
This light-profile will seem like a warm light color, without the blueish tint so typical of more traditional phosphorous white-light LED's. But the color rendering index will not be as good as that from eg. typical light bulbs.
These new LED's may be good at rendering green-yellow-red light, however blue will not be rendered as well - therefore blue objects in a room will seem a bit dull, using such LED's. On the other hand - it is almost perfect lighting for watching movies, since movies tend to have a lot of blue light.
The nano crystals applied as a coating to these LED's shift the blue light to green and red wavelengths - possibly lossless (4-wave mixing could be one of the processes).
The light is therefor peaking at the green light wavelengths, with less intensity at the blue and possibly red frequencies. This is important, because the eyes are most sensitive to light in the green wavelength area (probably because nature is mostly green). This is the reason, that the claim might just be true - instead og a bluish light, these LED's will have a more greenish light, and more red light than typical white LED's.
This light-profile will seem like a warm light color, without the blueish tint so typical of more traditional phosphorous white-light LED's. But the color rendering index will not be as good as that from eg. typical light bulbs.
These new LED's may be good at rendering green-yellow-red light, however blue will not be rendered as well - therefore blue objects in a room will seem a bit dull, using such LED's. On the other hand - it is almost perfect lighting for watching movies, since movies tend to have a lot of blue light.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Michael Pelletier, January 06, 2009
It` s time to go digital even with light, so don`t wait 2012 to ban the classic light bulbs, simply start now avoiding to buy or using them. I did it.
===
Did they make vinyl LPs, tape, VHS illegal, like they're going to do with classic light bulbs?
Don't you just love the government? Whatever would we do without them?
===
Did they make vinyl LPs, tape, VHS illegal, like they're going to do with classic light bulbs?
Don't you just love the government? Whatever would we do without them?
-
- +0
-
-
written by Chris, June 16, 2009
handling Mercury (heck even ingesting it) is a hell of a lot safer than breathing the fumes of vaporised Mercury. handling and ingesting, less than 1% will enter you blood stream. Breath the vapor (read be around a broken hot mercury vapor lamp) and you will absorb 80% of what you breathe in. Evacuate the room if you break a mercury containing globe, less than 1% of something toxic is still something toxic.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Walter Jeffries, March 11, 2011
Unfortunately the life-span of is totally missleading. I have bought a LOT of LEDs for domestic lighting and they have a very high failure rate. It isn't the "LED" that usually fails but rather the inverters, switches and other elements the prove to be the weak link. But the result is the same, the product fails. This means that the claimed 100,000 hour lives of LEDs are false because the product as a whole is not delivering that life-span. This would be like claiming that a light bulb will last 100 years because the metal base will last that long. Problem is, when the filament burns out it's dead.
-
- +1
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
And hey, if they end up being a lot more expensive than CFLs, that's not really that big a deal, considering that they will be some of the last lights you'll ever need to buy. ^_^