Hot on the heels of several stories proposing the all-out banning of Edison's ubiquitous invention comes the news that they may soon be just as efficient as compact flourescent bulbs, and maybe without all that pesky mercury!
According to a recent GE press release, incandescent bulbs with an efficiency comparable to compact fluorescent bulbs could be available within a few years.
It's just a general announcement about the company's direction. "Over the next several years, these advancements will lead to the introduction of high-efficiency incandescent lamps that provide the same high light quality, brightness and color as current incandescent lamps..."
There is no product being introduced, or even proposed for a future release date. However, the prospect of this is intruiging. There is no indication in the press release of what materials or technologies are being used to derive these increases in efficiency. But, if they are able to make these improvements and, at the same time, eliminate the need for using mercury (which is used in compact fluorescents) and the need for electronic ballasts (which add to the cost and waste complexity of CF bulbs) then this could turn into a real bright idea.
In the meantime, keep swapping your old incandescents for compact fluorescents. And, for the future, my money's still on LEDs.
via: Inside Greentech
Hits: 10750
Comments (8)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by john savage, February 24, 2007
Sirs, other folks, want to save money? Change every light bulb in your home you can. Spiral light bulbs can be found at Home Depot for about $1.59. They last for years, and a lower light equivalent spiral light bulb provides greater light. A forty watt equivalent spiral light bulb can replace a sixty watt or 75 watt incandesant light bulb. Can you imagine the energy savings in every home? Or if used in retail stores? js.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Rob, February 25, 2007
It would be good if they could improve the efficiency of incandescent bulbs, to match fluorescents. As incandescent bulbs have a better light quality.
Although LEDs are excellent for bicycle lights and the like, I have doubts about them ever being useful for lighting a room. As although they are very bright, they don't seem to "throw" the light. If you try using a LED torch to find something, you will find it isn't as good as a standard torch, even though it appears to produce an excellent beam. :(
Although LEDs are excellent for bicycle lights and the like, I have doubts about them ever being useful for lighting a room. As although they are very bright, they don't seem to "throw" the light. If you try using a LED torch to find something, you will find it isn't as good as a standard torch, even though it appears to produce an excellent beam. :(
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jinks, February 26, 2007
Visit this blog for more info:
http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2003/D/20032218.html
That link explains in very good detail about what this new technology is all about. It's known as a photonic lattice, which, in the case of incandescent lamps, would be a fine tungsten structure (on the micron scale) which would replace the standard filament. This concept has more applications than simply lighting fixtures. Some are pursuing it as a means of energy production. The link explains this.
Very exciting and interesting, but sadly this technology seems very solidly grounded in the research and development stage still, so it may be quite a while before we see any products.
Jinks
http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2003/D/20032218.html
That link explains in very good detail about what this new technology is all about. It's known as a photonic lattice, which, in the case of incandescent lamps, would be a fine tungsten structure (on the micron scale) which would replace the standard filament. This concept has more applications than simply lighting fixtures. Some are pursuing it as a means of energy production. The link explains this.
Very exciting and interesting, but sadly this technology seems very solidly grounded in the research and development stage still, so it may be quite a while before we see any products.
Jinks
-
- +0
-
-
written by Atul, February 27, 2007
Fluorescent lighting is depressing and has too much glare. I'd rather keep my lights off most of the time but I can't give up incandescent or halogen. I save energy in other ways. I do have an LED nightlight as well as a few of those glowing ones that use next to no energy.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Hank, February 27, 2007
I don't know about anyone else here, but I hold a CFL and a Edison right next to eachother, and I can't tell the difference between the light they're putting off. I use all CFL lamps now, and they seem very warm and soothing to me.
Maybe people are thinking of the fluorescents that haunt offices across the world...those are definitely depressing.
Maybe people are thinking of the fluorescents that haunt offices across the world...those are definitely depressing.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Jinks, February 28, 2007
Did anyone of you notice that this article isn't about CFL's or linear flourescent lighting?? That seems to be allyou are talking about...
The incandescent technology that this article is featuring is far more impressive than flourescent technology. And quite possibly more green (no mercury needed and similar effifiency).
Additionally, this technology holds the promise of being able to turn waste heat into electricity!!! That could totally change the direction that Combined Heat and Power systems are going and make them even more efficient.
The incandescent technology that this article is featuring is far more impressive than flourescent technology. And quite possibly more green (no mercury needed and similar effifiency).
Additionally, this technology holds the promise of being able to turn waste heat into electricity!!! That could totally change the direction that Combined Heat and Power systems are going and make them even more efficient.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Daniel Lunsford, February 28, 2007
If you do a few internet searches, you'll find that a century ago we had incandesent bulbs THAT ARE STILL BURNING!! So what changed? Just like with the electric car, the industry realized that a product that doesn't go broke in a year will result in people only buying your product once a century! We have to ask ourselves "Why did lightbulbs 100 years ago last 50X longer than the ones today?" So it doesn't surprise me in the least to hear that these lights are magically getting "better". They're easier to produce, so the corporations would rather produce filament bulbs that last as long as CFL's than sell the CFL's. It's an easy no-brainer... We just have to demand what we want and the corporations have to either provide or get out of the way.
--Daniel
--Daniel
-
- +0
-
-
written by David, March 20, 2007
Global warming is here now, CFLs are here now, so use them. Just do a little homework first (learn about lumens, color temp etc) and stick to the brands with the Energy Star label and you'll be fine. If GE really wanted to make a better incadescent bulb, they would have done it years ago before the threat of government regulation. Don't wait X number of years because of a vague press release.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
FEB 23
"Global warming is here now, CFLs are here now, so use them. Just do a ..."
View all Comments