Slashdot Mirror
LEDs - Do the Benefits Outweigh the Cost?
7x7 asks: "We keep hearing about the latest and greatest thing to come out of LED technology, and every article seems to give an over-view of the topic. How LEDs consume little electricity and last a long time, etc. However the manufacturing process involves super hot ovens and expensive componants. Do the requirements necessary in the manufacture LEDs and LED componants out-weight the requirements for standard bulbs over 10 years? One LED light can last ten years, but contains dozens of LEDs. Has anyone seen or performed an evalutation to see if the trade-off is really anything to speak of?"
I wish the bulb that burned out in my truck's dashboard had been an LED to begin with.
It cost $95 to change it.
It seems to me that if the power usage of those LEDs is much lower than that of a bulb, then yes, there is a very good chance of the LEDs being less damaging to the environment.
Don't underestimate the power savings you can achieve over a ten year period.
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
From the voltage drop you quote (1.7 V) that must be a single colour (probably red?) LED. The 20W flourescent is (I assume) closer to white. If you look at white leds they're far less efficient than the basic red and green varieties. The loss of efficiency puts them below flourescent lighting. I don't have any sources to hand to back this up I'm afraid.
Of course, LEDs can be used to make very cool light enclosures that can't be achieved with other technologies.
If we're talking car lighting (brake or tail lights) then LEDs win out easily, 'cos they've got to be red anyway.