Tags: cfl, cfl shape, compact fluorescent, compact fluorescent light bulb, Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving compact light bulb, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, Enviromental Protection Agency, fluorescent, LED, led lighting, light, light bulb, light bulbs, lightbulb, spiral, spiral light bulb, Technology of a light bulb
add a comment
Gadzooks! It seems everyone has an opinion about Light Bulbs these days! Nothing stirs up more conversation than saying “spiral bulb” in mixed company..Anyways this guy from USA Today thinks the “new light bulbs” are “can do”..Me to! As long as they don’t suck..
ZOinmks! Did I say that?
When it comes to energy, the United States is too often the nation of “can’t.” Can’t drill for oil in new areas offshore. Can’t build a new generation of nuclear power plants. Can’t raise gasoline taxes to discourage the use of imported oil. Can’t move quickly to site new offshore wind plants. By PR Newswire More efficient choices: Halogen, compact fluorescent and light-emitting diode bulbs. EnlargeCloseBy PR Newswire More efficient choices: Halogen, compact fluorescent and light-emitting diode bulbs. OPPOSING VIEW: Turn on the BULB Act What the nation can do is limp along with a status quo energy policy that takes many energy decisions out of Americans’ hands and weakens national security and the environment. More than half the oil Americans use is imported — a vulnerability underscored by the ongoing tumult in Egypt. Electricity production relies heavily on coal, which exacts a heavy toll on the global climate. Congress and the president spend far more time talking about these problems than solving them, but occasionally they get it right. One of those times was in 2007, when then- President Bush signed an energy bill that, among other things, raised car mileage standards and took aim at an extravangantly inefficient household item: the light bulb. The best way for government to boost energy efficiency isn’t to micromanage by picking winners and losers, a job better suited to free-market innovation. It is to set a reasonable standard — miles per gallon or light per watt, for example — and let the market sort it out. That’s what Congress did in 2007. Americans are already reaping the benefits of higher-mileage vehicles, but a rebellion is brewing against the new standard for more efficient light bulbs, which takes effect next New Year’s Day. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., complained in a response to President Obama’s State of the Union address that the government “now tells us which light bulbs to buy.” A group of House Republicans has introduced a bill to repeal the standard.. That would be a mistake. The familiar incandescent bulb is a 125-year-old design that’s handy and cheap but a huge waster of electricity. Roughly 90% of the juice that goes to a typical bulb generates heat, not light. The new rules require bulbs to be at least 25% more efficient, starting with 100-watt bulbs. Incandescents can’t do that, so they’ll begin to disappear. There’s a huge payoff for this. The Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that fully implementing the new lighting standards would make it possible to avoid building 30 new power plants and cut CO2 emissions by 100 million tons a year. But what will Americans switch to? The most common alternative now is the compact fluorescent light (CFL), the spiral bulb that uses far less electricity than incandescents. It costs two to four times as much as an old-fashioned bulb but lasts five to 10 times as long —a big saving for consumers and country. CFLs aren’t perfect. Some people don’t like the light they give off, the delay before they reach full brightness or the extra care required because CFLs contain tiny amounts of mercury. Even so, millions of early adopters are perfectly happy with them because they reduce electricity bills. But light bulb makers know that some people hate CFLs, so manufacturers have produced an alternative: a halogen bulb that looks just like an incandescent and produces similar light but meets the new standard. You can buy them today. The evolution won’t stop there, which is the virtue of unleashing market forces. Manufacturers are working on next-generation LED bulbs that last roughly four times as long as long-lived CFLs. They’re wildly expensive now — as much as $30 to $40 or more for a single bulb — but the price inevitably will drop. Some of this innovation would have happened without the new law, but not as much, or as quickly. Faced with deadlines and a market for their new products, manufacturers intensified efforts to develop better bulbs. It would be a shame to undo that progress — and produce yet another energy “can’t.”
Tags: cfl, cfl shape, compact fluorescent, Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, green, i, incandescent, LED, led lighting, light, light bulb, light bulbs, lightbulb, lightbulbs, philips, Technology of a light bulb
1 comment so far
America’s most common light bulb gets LED replacement
Consumers will soon be able to replace the most common light bulb in U.S. households, the 60-watt incandescent, with an ultra-efficient LED, according to manufacturer Royal Philips Electronics.
The company unveiled its new LED at the Lightfair International trade show in Las Vegas, just two days after Home Depot announced it’s begun selling a $20 LED replacement for the 40-watt incandescent.
As incandescents begin their Congress-mandated phaseout in 2012, companies are scurrying to develop and market more efficient replacements.
Philips says its 12-watt Endura light bulb is the industry’s first to replace its century-old predecessor. The company says the LED delivers the same soft white light and dimmability but uses 80% less energy and lasts 25 times longer. The LED will be available to consumers later this year, likely in December, but its price hasn’t been finalized.
More than 425 million 60-watt incandescents are sold each in the United States, representing half the domestic incandescent market, according to Philips. The company estimates its new LED has the potential to save 32.6 terawatt-hours of electricity each year — enough to power the lights of 14% of U.S. households.
GE makes LED replacement for 40-watt bulb April 12, 2010Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in LED Lights.
Tags: Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving compact light bulb, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, ge, General Electric Co., LED, led lighting, LED replacement, Led replacement 40 watt bulb, light, light bulbs, lightbulb, Technology of a light bulb
add a comment
Zoinks! LED’s are back in the news ! Check out the article below!
General Electric, the granddaddy of light bulbs, has developed an LED replacement for 40-watt bulbs that can last for 17 years. GE on Thursday unveiled the Energy Smart LED bulb that puts out 450 lumens–about the same output as a 40-watt incandescent–while consuming 9 watts. GE’s bulb is designed to disperse light more evenly than typical LED lights. (Credit: General Electric) The company plans to show off the LED bulb at upcoming lighting conferences and to start selling it by this fall or early next year. It ios expected to cost $40 to $50. LED lights tend to give off light in a specific direction, which is why they are often used for spot lighting. The GE light has a shape that looks like fingers wrapped around a traditional bulb and is designed to disperse light. Prototypes of the bulb will be fitted with an LED lamp from LED component manufacturer Cree. The bulb is rated for 25,000 hours which, if used four hours a day, means it will last for 17 years. The other advantages of LED bulbs are that they don’t need to warm up to give off full light, are cooler than incandescent or compact fluorescent bulbs, and do not contain mercury. “This is a bulb that can virtually light your kid’s bedroom desk lamp from birth through high school graduation,” John Strainic, global product general manager of GE Lighting, said in a statement. He added that the bulb is designed to satisfy consumers who are reluctant to move from incandescent bulbs because they like the light quality. Because of their relative energy efficiency and durability, LED lights are expected to start replacing other technologies more rapidly this year, particularly in commercial settings. As LEDs reach the output of 40-watt and 60-watt incandescent, lighting companies are also planning general-purpose LED replacements for traditional screw-in bulbs. Osram Sylvania, for example, plans to introduce an LED replacement for a 60-watt incandescent this spring. The high up-front cost, however, remains a barrier to broader adoption. Lighting manufacturers expect that sales will be driven by consumers’ interest in efficient, long-lasting bulbs and by more stringent national efficiency standards.
The History and Mystery of Christmas Lights! December 14, 2009Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in Uncategorized.
Tags: beer can christmas lights, christmas lights, christmas lights gone wild, christmas story, crazy christmas lights, gizmodo, history of christmas lights, holiday lights, LED, led christmas lights, led lighting, x-mas lights
add a comment
Merry Chrizzmazz! Did you ever wonder where the tradition of hangning christmas lights came from? Well the folks at Gizmodo have laid out the history in the brief article below! Enjoy!
Thomas Edison was known for his wacky publicity stunts, but during the Christmas of 1880 he went for the sentimental rather than shock value. That year, instead of electrocuting an elephant, he brought us the first electric Christmas light display.
The Wizard’s Light Show
By the time 1880 rolled around, Edison had his incandescent light bulbs pretty well figured out, and was on the lookout for a way to advertise them. To display his invention as a means of heightening Yuletide excitement, he strung up incandescent bulbs all around his Menlo Park laboratory compound, so that passing commuters on the nearby railway could see the Christmas miracle. But Edison being Edison, he decided to make the challenge a little trickier by powering the lights from a remote generator 13km away.
Two years later, an Edison crony named Edward Johnson displayed the first electrically illuminated Christmas tree at his home in Manhattan. The then-impressive 80-light display girded a very unimpressive Charlie Brown Christmas tree (I mean really, look at that thing). And as you might expect, Johnson’s feat was also intended as an advertising tool.
The tradition of stringing electric lights may have started as a Christmas thing in the Western world, but now it’s a global phenomenon used for all kinds festivities. It’s a practice we take for granted – come December, they’re everywhere. The evolution of the Christmas light parallels that of the light bulb, with some remarkably ornate – OK, tacky – variations. But regardless of how they look, one thing’s for certain: They’re a much better option than sticking a candle in a tree.
In the Beginning There was Fire
Today we look at Christmas lights and think, “Oh, those are pretty.” But the tradition of lighting lights didn’t start off with aesthetics in mind. December is the darkest month of the year with the shortest days (if you live in the northern hemisphere). People living without central heating in the 12th century were understandably unhappy when the sun went down and plunged them into the cold depths of night. Way back during the winter of 1184 was the first recorded lighting of the Yule Log [PDF] in Germany. The burning log was seen as a symbol of the sun’s promise to return. It probably didn’t hurt that a big burning hunk of wood makes for a pretty good heat source.
The Christmas tree has a whole story behind it that we won’t get into here. (Fun fact: They were originally hung upside down from the ceiling — hilarious!) Long story short, Christians had lights, they had trees, and in the 17th century, they decided to put the two together.
Unfortunately, the only way to add Christmas lights to a tree back then was with candles. Obviously, this was a pretty bad idea. So bad that, unlike today, the tree would only be put up a few days before Christmas [PDF] and was promptly taken down afterwards. The candles would remain lit only for a few minutes per night, and even then families would sit around the tree and watch it vigilantly, buckets of sand and water nearby. It’s kind of like the old-timey equivalent of deep-frying a turkey: People knew it could burn their house down, but proceeded to do it anyway.
By 1908, insurance companies wouldn’t even pay for damages [PDF] caused by Christmas tree fires. Their exhaustive research demonstrated that burning wax candles that were loosely secured to a dried-out tree inside your house wasn’t safe. At all. Electric Christmas lights were becoming a viable option for some. They weren’t perfect – incandescent bulbs can get plenty hot, and sparks from malfunctioning strings can still light up a dry tree – but it was a much safer option than lighting multiple fires so close to their favourite fuel.
Keep in mind that by “some”, I mean the extremely rich. In 1900, a single string of electric lights cost $US12 [PDF] – around $US300 in today’s money. It would take the magic of mass manufacturing to create the Clark Griswold-esque neighbourhood light displays that would become a Western tradition.
The Dawn of Tacky Lights
In 1900, eight years after General Electric purchased the patent rights to Edison’s bulbs, the first known advertisement for Christmas tree lights appeared in Scientific American magazine. Like I said, these suckers weren’t cheap. They were so expensive that the ad suggests renting lights for a holiday display.
Twenty-five years later, demand was up. There were 15 companies in the biz of selling Christmas lights, and in 1925 they formed a consortium called the NOMA Electric Corporation, the largest Christmas light manufacturer in the world.
Even though NOMA was formed three years prior to the Great Depression, their appeal was great enough to pull through, becoming a juggernaut that was synonymous with Christmas lights from the Depression clear through to the US Civil Rights Movement. NOMA didn’t just further Edison’s vision, though. They worked hard to bedazzle, giving birth to the bubble light – arguably the first great mass-produced tacky Christmas decoration.
Though NOMA is no more, these psychedelic bubble lights are thankfully still in existence. These colourful round plastic cases hold an unseen bulb, while a candle-shaped vial of clear liquid protrudes upward. As the bulb heats up, the liquid – usually methylene chloride, a chemical with a low boiling point – also heats up, so that the vial would bubble, flickering like the candle it was supposed to replace.
Alas, in 1968 the NOMA Electric Company stopped manufacturing lights, and the bubble lights became more of a novelty, soon to be joined by a host of ridiculously shaped Christmas lights, including chili peppers, flamingos, beer cans and a miniaturised version of that leg from A Christmas Story.
With NOMA, the tacky Pandora’s box had opened, and even people who didn’t spring for bubble lights or their Tex-Mex successors have done wonders with the decidedly more standardised sets we all know today. Once they were weatherproofed for outdoor use, it was only a matter of time before they were stapled to every square inch of house, hearth, tree, even truck.
The Lights You Know and Love
Incandescent lights are the ones that started it all. Even though they’re well over a hundred years old now, the technology largely remains the same. The shapes and sizes of the bulbs, on the other hand, have been in constant flux. Now we’re left with three major types of incandescent Christmas light bulbs:
The Mini/Fairy Light: This is the big kahuna. If you haven’t seen one of these by now, then you’ve probably never seen Christmas lights. Traditionally, the set is wired in series, hence the age old problem where if one bulb goes out, the rest won’t light. But it’s not hard to find sets that are wired in parallel nowadays.
These guys also have a lo-fi twinkle method built in. That little red-tipped bulb that comes with each set is made in a way that as the filament heats up, it rises and breaks the circuit. That, of course, shuts off the rest of the lights. When it cools down, it falls again to complete the circuit, and the lights (wait for it…) come back on. Physics 101.
C7: Again, an incandescent light that comes in a different-sized glass housing. These are about the size of your thumb, and work in almost exactly the same way as a mini light.
C9: You get the picture by now. Same shape as the C7, but slightly bigger.
LED lights have been growing in popularity for the past few years. Regardless of what you think of their light output, there’s no denying that they’re much more energy efficient than incandescent bulbs, and they give off less heat. And who knows, maybe someday they’ll match the colour temperature of good-ol’ tungsten lighting. Until then, here’s what you’ll be looking at:
5mm: These are the LED equivalent of incandescent mini-lights. They’re small LED bulbs in a plastic enclosure. Usually the “white” level is waaaay off from the “white” of incandescent lights.
G12 and G25: Just like with incandescent lights, you’re going to find a whole lot of the same with LEDs, just in different shapes and sizes. These are globe-shaped plastic enclosures, G12 is pictured.
C7: You’ve seen these before, except this time there’s an LED inside.
You’ll find a bunch of crazy light designs out there, but 99.9 per cent of them are just plastic enclosures that are illuminated by these types of bulbs.
A Long Way From Candles
The basic foundation of the Christmas light, the incandescent bulb, hardly changed for nearly a century, and is only now undergoing its first major revolution as we start replacing our old tungsten lights with energy-efficient LEDs. Yet in that same time, we’ve gone from sticking burning candles in a tree to creating massive, computer-controlled – and completely excessive – light displays like this:
One thing’s for sure: No matter what the technology at hand, no matter what the reason to celebrate, the human desire to light up trees and houses in December will forever be a source for amazing – and often hilarious – innovation.
Wearable Technology LED Kimono Reacts to Music, Motion to Create Interactive Light Show December 3, 2009Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in Uncategorized.
Tags: composer miya mosaoka, LED, led art, led dress, LED kimono, led lighting, light, light and music, light art, light music, miya mosaoka, Technology of a light bulb
add a comment
Zoinks! It looks like LEDs aren’t only the future of general lighting.. They also the future of stage performance! Check out this great article and video below from ecouture.com!
RAZZLE DAZZLE Depending on the pitch of the accompanying music, or the angle and rate of motion of the sleeve, the LEDs turn on and off to create a fluid light show. And here’s where it gets technical: The LEDs, which are connected with conductive thread to eight 9-volt batteries underneath the fabric, are driven by tiny Arduino processors that are sewn into pockets on each side. The processors, in turn, can be hooked up to a computer via Bluetooth wireless or USB. More than a dress, the LED kimono is an interactive light-and-sound instrument. Eventually, Masoaka plans on running LEDs throughout the entire kimono, an endeavor that will require more than 5,000 hand-sewn LEDs. If each point of light is considered a single pixel, the dress can function as a low-resolution video monitor that evolves with its environment.
Light therapy can relieve symptoms of seasonal depression December 1, 2009Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in Uncategorized.
Tags: fluorescent, fluorescent light box, fluorescent light bulb, fluorescent lighting, fluorescent tube, led lighting, light, light bulb, light therapy, lightbulb, sad and light therapy, sadd and light therapy, seasonal affective disorder, seasonal affective disorder and light therapy, seasonal depression and light therapy
add a comment
Zoinks! Here is a great article on using light help treat seasonal depression. It comes from the Cleveland.com website. Useful info!
Light therapy can relieve symptoms of seasonal depression
Kim Sherwin’s recent two-and-a-half week trip to Europe, made partly to watch the Cleveland Orchestra performances in Vienna, Austria, was perfect except for one thing.
She forgot her portable light therapy device.
The contraption is what helps Sherwin endure the overcast, dark and dreary days from September through March.
Sherwin, 70, of Cleveland, suffers from seasonal affective disorder, or SAD.
SAD is a form of depression marked by its consistency of almost always occurring in late fall or early winter.
The decrease in sunlight, compounded by shifting the clock back one hour, can affect an individual’s internal clock that regulates the sleep-wake rhythm.
And that, in turn, can do a number on energy levels. Symptoms include sleeping more than usual, eating more, particularly carbohydrates, and having an overall tendency to hibernate deeply.
For Sherwin, that meant staying in bed most days until afternoon.
“It just gets grimmer and grimmer, and I don’t want to get out of bed,” she said.
That’s where light therapy comes in. Five years ago, Sherwin, who takes antidepressants for other forms of depression, started using light therapy every morning.
Light therapy is the best form of treatment for seasonal affective disorder, says Dr. George Tesar, chairman of the department of psychiatry and psychology at the Cleveland Clinic.
Light therapy is not about sitting in a room illuminated with regular or fluorescent bulbs.
Nor is it jetting off to a warm, sunny climate for a few days, although that might provide fleeting relief.
Rather, it’s exposure to a special light with a particularly high intensity.
“Your eyes have to be open, and the back of your eyes need to see this light,” Tesar said. “The light that hits your retina triggers the changes in the brain that result in a positive response that relieves the depression.”
The light helps regulate one’s internal alarm clock, or circadian rhythm. It also helps regulate melatonin, the sleep hormone, and serotonin, the chemical in the brain that helps relay signals from one area of the brain to another. Changes in serotonin levels can affect a host of things, such as mood, appetite, sleep and memory.
The best time for light therapy is first thing in the morning, for about 30 minutes a day. Most people start to notice subtle changes in the first couple of weeks. But “the moment you stop using it, the effects start to wear off,” Tesar said.
Antidepressants (such as Wellbutrin, the only drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the specific treatment of SAD) are also available for more severe cases if light therapy isn’t effective.
“It’s best to avoid medication if you can,” Tesar said. “But if other treatments don’t work, it’s shortsighted not to try medication. Sometimes that’s the only thing to help re-regulate the chemical environment of the brain.”
Experts also recommend reducing carbohydrate intake, exercising more, staying social and getting fresh air whenever you can.
Light therapy, which has not been approved by the FDA to treat seasonal affective disorder, isn’t designed for everyone (extra caution is needed for people with pre-existing eye disease and certain mood disorders).
It’s easy to order devices online or buy them in stores, but using them should be done under a doctor’s supervision.
A couple of years ago, Sherwin stopped using a big light box and switched to a newer product the size of a compact disc holder.
Today, Sherwin eats breakfast and reads the newspaper while her Litebook sits off to the side, providing her light therapy for 30 minutes every morning.
“It just starts to grow on you,” Sherwin said. “So many people complain about the problems they have, but I just don’t think people know about these machines.”
The Litebook Co. is collaborating with Harvard University, Yale University and universities in Canada and the Netherlands on a clinical trial that started last December to explore how the product can be most effective in treating SAD.
“People have always acted like broad spectrum light is important, but it’s the pattern of light that’s important,” said Dr. Paul Desan, an assistant professor of psychiatry at Yale University who is coordinating the study.
Desan and his team are testing to see how the Litebook affects a person’s circadian rhythm. “Right now, [no device] that has been developed has been approved by the FDA to treat seasonal affective disorder,” Desan said. “We’d like to change that. We think this is the direction that the field is going in.”
Finding the right light
At least a dozen companies sell a wide variety of light therapy products — visors, alarm clocks, floor lamps, big light boxes — even though the Food and Drug Administration has not approved their use to treat seasonal affective disorder. Here’s some things you should know before buying.
What to look for
A good starting point for picking a product is to look for the unit of light intensity, or LUX. Special light therapy products often have 10,000 LUX, versus 500 LUX of a standard light bulb.
It’s important that the product emit little or no ultraviolet light. Some newer products use blue light instead of the standard white light found in most light therapy boxes. Some research suggests that blue light is more effective at reducing SAD symptoms; however, the retina is much more sensitive to blue light than it is to white light and could be damaged if directly exposed.
Check your insurance
Light therapy usually isn’t an item that insurance companies uniformly cover, but it’s worth checking with your provider; sometimes providing documentation of a SAD diagnosis from a physician is all you need.
Tags: christmas lights, Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving christmas lights, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, Holiday lighting, holiday lights, LED, led christmas lights, led lighting, light, light bulb, lightbulb, santa, Technology of a light bulb
add a comment
Its the Holiday Season and running those Christmas Lights can really jack up your energy costs.. A great solution for this is changing for traditional (incandescent) Christmas lights to LED Christmas lights.
Cherie Jacobs, a Progress Energy spokeswoman, says:
Running 10 strands of 100 LED light bulbs during evenings for the month of December will cost about 70 cents.
• Running 10 strands of 100 conventional light bulbs during evenings for the month of December will cost about $7 — 10 times as much.
The Electric Power Research Institute says if seasonal lights nationwide were replaced with LED lighting, carbon emissions could be reduced by as much as 400,000 tons per year and electricity cost savings would exceed $250 million.
Thanks to By Ivan Penn, Times Staff Writer for the info
Tags: Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving compact light bulb, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, eric taub, green, incandescent light bulb, incandescent lightbulb, incandescent lightbulb ban, LED, led lighting, light bulb, light bulbs, new york times, new york times led article, Technology of a light bulb
add a comment
Zoinks! Its me Dr. Z! LED’s are all the rage in lighting and now the New York Times is running another article on their energy saving benefits..Dig this article!
By ERIC. A. TAUB
Published: November 29, 2009
Does the latest generation of energy-saving light bulbs save energy? A comprehensive study conducted by Osram, the German lighting company, provides evidence that they do.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Rick Friedman for The New York Times
A standard incandescent bulb over its life will use almost five times the energy of an LED bulb, a German study concluded.
That is because no one knew if the production of LED lamps required more energy than needed for standard incandescent bulbs. While it is indisputable that LEDs use a fraction of the electricity of a regular bulb to create the same amount of light, if more energy were used in the manufacturing and distribution process, then the lighting industry could be traveling down a technological dead end.
The study results show that over the entire life of the bulb — from manufacturing to disposal — the energy used for incandescent bulbs is almost five times that used for compact fluorescents and LED lamps.
The energy used during the manufacturing phase of all lamps is insignificant — less than 2 percent of the total. Given that both compact fluorescents and LEDs use about 20 percent of the electricity needed to create the same amount of light as a standard incandescent, both lighting technologies put incandescents to shame.
“We welcome these kinds of studies,” said Kaj den Daas, chief executive of Philips Lighting North America. The Osram study “provides facts where we often have only emotional evidence.” Philips recently became the first entrant in the Energy Department’s L Prize, a race to develop the first practical 60-watt LED equivalent to a standard light bulb.
To calculate what is know as a Life Cycle Assessment of LED lamps, Osram compared nearly every aspect of the manufacturing process, including the energy used in manufacturing the lamps in Asia and Europe, packaging them, and transporting them to Germany where they would be sold. It also looked at the emissions created in each stage, and calculated the effect of six different global warming indexes.
Those included the amount of greenhouse gas emissions created by each process, the acid rain potential, eutrophication (excessive algae), photochemical ozone creation, the release of harmful chemical compounds, and the resultant scarcity of gas, coal, and oil.
Compact fluorescents also contain harmful mercury, which can pollute the soil when discarded.
In addition to the amount of electricity needed for each process, the energy used and the emissions created as a result, were also calculated. In China and Malaysia, where part of the LED production took place, that meant coal and natural gas respectively. In Germany, where the lamps would be sold, electricity is created from a mix of coal, nuclear and renewable sources.
The methodology followed the procedures set down in ISO 14040/44, an industry standard. The results were certified by three university professors in Denmark and Germany as adhering to the standard.
“The difference in energy use between incandescents, compact fluorescents and LEDs is definitely significant,” said Dr. Matthias Finkbeiner of Berlin’s Technical University and chairman of the study’s review committee. “The results are very stable.”
While 60-watt lamps are more popular light sources, they were not used in the study as Osram does not yet have a commercial version. The amount of energy used to illuminate 60-watt-type lamps would increase, but the increase would effect all types of lamps and therefore not change the relative results, according to Dr. Berit Wessler, head of innovations management at Osram Opto Semiconductors in Regensburg, Germany.
Dr. Wessler expects the results to shift even more in favor of LEDs, as newer generations of that technology become even more efficient, requiring less energy to produce the same amount of light.
“Everything I’ve seen strengthens the assumption that LED efficiency will increase,” she said. “There has not been much improvement in incandescent efficiency in the last 10 years.”
How Many Lightbulbs? November 2, 2009Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in cfl, compact fluorescent, light bulb, Light bulbs in pop culture.
Tags: Cambridge University physicist, cfl, coal, compact fluorescent, compact fluorescent light bulb, compact fluorescent shape, Energy Crisis, Energy Crisis Sustainable Fossil Fuels Climate Control Power Wave Wind, Energy saving, energy saving bulb, energy saving compact light bulb, energy saving light bulb, energy saving lighting, fluorescent, fluorescent light bulb, fluorescent lighting, fluorescent tube, gas, heat, incandescent light bulb, incandescent lightbulb, LED, led lighting, light, light bulb, lightbulb, lightbulbs physics science, oil myths, Physicist David Mackay, Science Tips Stephen Fry, wind turbines
add a comment
Zoinks! Check Out Physicist David Mackay’s video of how the light bulb provides a graphic way of communicating to non-physicists the scale of the energy gap now facing our society! Light bulbs will always lead the way for me!
Cambridge University physicist, David Mackay, in a passionate, personal analysis of the energy crisis in the UK, in which he comes to some surprising conclusions about the way forward. The film is based on his new book Sustainable Energy without the hot air, in which Prof Mackay has calculated the numbers involved for the alternatives to fossil fuels like coal, gas and oil.
He debunks some myths about energy saving – unplugging our phone chargers, does not make any appreciable difference. After showing us what won’t work – he goes on to show what will make a difference at home, like turning your thermostat down.
But, his big point is that this will not be enough – individual efforts are not enough. Instead we need to make sweeping national changes to our energy production, and we can’t reject everything available to us. If we are going to follow the advice of climate scientists, and get off fossil fuels by 2050, which currently provide 90% of our energy, Britain’s main options are wind power and nuclear power. But to make this huge change in our power supply, Mackay says that we have to get building now!
For more information go to David Mackays website
LED Eyes October 23, 2009Posted by Dr. Z Bulbs in LED Lights.
Tags: dangerous minds blog, japan led, LED, LED Eyelash, led eyes, led lighting, light, Technology of a light bulb, weird news, weird news light bulb
add a comment
Zoinks! Have you heard about the latest fashion coming out of Japan? LED Eyes! Check out this from the Dangerous Minds Blog!
I know the LED Eyelash craze is sorta old news. However, I’ve never seen the video of the eyelashes in action.
LED Eyelash is a clever product that speaks to many Asian women’s desire for bigger eyes. It features an inclination sensor with mercury to turn on and/or off. The sensor can perceive the movements of the pupil in the eyes and eyelids. If someone wears it and moves her head, LED Eyelash will flicker following the movement.