Slashdot Mirror
GE Announces Advancement in Incandescent Technology
finfife writes to tell us that GE has announced an advancement in incandescent technology that promises to increase the efficiency of lightbulbs to put them on par with compact fluorescent lamps (CFL). "The new high efficiency incandescent (HEI(TM)) lamp, which incorporates innovative new materials being developed in partnership by GE's Lighting division, headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, and GE's Global Research Center, headquartered in Niskayuna, NY, would replace traditional 40- to 100-Watt household incandescent light bulbs, the most popular lamp type used by consumers today. The new technology could be expanded to all other incandescent types as well. The target for these bulbs at initial production is to be nearly twice as efficient, at 30 lumens-per-Watt, as current incandescent bulbs. Ultimately the high efficiency lamp (HEI) technology is expected to be about four times as efficient as current incandescent bulbs and comparable to CFL bulbs. Adoption of new technology could lead to greenhouse gas emission reductions of up to 40 million tons of CO2 in the U.S. and up to 50 million tons in the EU if the entire installed base of traditional incandescent bulbs was replaced with HEI lamps."The California legislature may want to revisit the wording of their proposed ban on incandescents (AB 722). How about mandating a level of efficiency rather than assuming that innovation can't happen?"
There are times when you *need* incandescent lighting, photography for one. Fluorescent is not suitable in all cases. And initial costs of fluorescents are more because you need the ballast etc.
The fact that these lawmakers don't understand enough of the technology to make it workable really gets on my chimes.
If you're not getting "warm" colors from CFL bulbs, you're probably using older bulbs. The flickering also points to this. My wife can't stand CRT monitors at 75Hz, but she hasn't complained about our CFL bulbs flickering. She's also got insanely good hearing and doesn't hear them buzz.
This is like the complaint people have with diesel engines. Yeah, the first diesels in the US were smokey and loud and slow, but new ones are virtually indistinguishable from gas engines and use 50% less fuel or more. Yet, people still avoid them because they don't want a "noisy, smokey, slow diesel car."
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
Have you tried any of the newer CFL's with non-magnetic ballasts? The oscilation frequency is now much higher, beyond what the human
eye can typically perceive.
Also, CFL's come in a range of color temperatures, some of which match "warm yellow" from traditional incandescents. They're not all "hard white".
A quick reference: http://medfordcan.home.comcast.net/Myths.html
That's because you got a Daylight model. You can buy CFLs in incandescent orange if you want. I have one in the lamp across the room right now, and it's virtually indistinguishable from the incandescents I have (certainly a 'warmer' colour than halogen lights, that I have in the downlighter fixtures).
You can get CFLs in pretty much any colour you like.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
30 lumens/Watt. Thanks for coming out. Here's your little yellow "I Participated" ribbon.
There are prototype white LED's at 150 lumens/W, supposedly to hit 200 lumens/W by years end.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
I'm not sure what the human eye can perceive, but my wife's migraines went away when we ditched our CFL's. And yes, they were the newer "not flickering" type. Interesting link. Looks like advocacy rather than information to me. Not as bad as a wikipedia ref, but almost.
Cheers
JE
I agree with everything you said, but as has been noted, CFL have mercury in them. There is a disposal problem that's going to start looking nasty in a couple of years. Most people have no idea about this. As long as folks handle the disposal of CFLs properly (they won't), this isn't an issue (it is).
ComedySportz! http://www.comedysportz.com/
Thats odd. Every CFL I have explicity states non-dimmer but every LED i've purchased is dimmer capable. CFL's are usually only rated for max power and if you aren't providing that power they wont "fire".
I purchased LED floods for less than 50 bucks a piece (38.00 - found on froogle - did purchase 20 of them though) but when you figure in the lifespan of 20-30,000 hours they're not only cheaper in cost but cheaper in long term power use as well.
That's because you bought daylight bulbs. They are supposed to look like that since their color temperature is typically 6500K which approximates the color temperature of the sun. If your eyes have not adjusted to it and there are regular warm bulbs nearby then it will look bluish. Next time buy one with a lower color temperature, like 2800-3500K. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature for more information.
-Aaron
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
I purchased my LED lamps from http://www.besthomeledlighting.com/ they gave me a quantity discount. There are many others out there as well. I just think of it as a 0% interest buy down on my electricity for the next 2 years and after that its pure ROI :)
True, Diesel's
Diesel's what? His engine?
have come a long way in the noise department...but still, when you have pistons the sizes of a small child's head, it's difficult to make a Diesel quiet:-)
I'd beg to differ. A Lexus RX330 we have stabled here has obnoxiously noisy gasoline injectors which are far louder at idle than a friend's Jetta TDI (Volkswagen Turbo Diesel). Not all Diesel engines are built by Caterpillar.
Primary stumbling blocks to Diesel adoption her in the states have been our strict particulate and NOx emissions rules, particularly in California and other states that have adopted California Air Resource Board rules. Urea injection will help to solve the NOx problem, and ultra-low sulfur and advanced fuel injection technologies will do the rest.
Audi's Diesel-powered direct injection race cars are loud - but they also won LeMans this year. Diesels look to be on the verge of a very big comeback, and a lot of money is being dumped into these efficient petrochemical engines.
Like the Diesel engine, the incandescent bulb is a product which can be made far more efficient and competitive while retaining it's inherent advantages - but only if the makers of these products are sufficiently goaded into investing in the R&D to make these advances happen. Australia and California, by proposing CFL-only laws to save energy are providing that incentive.
Can you say 18:1 compression?
That's not what makes the noise. The noise is because diesel combustion is extremely rapid and violent - the characteristic diesel clatter comes directly from the explosion - this is why the parts for diesel engines are made so robust. Modern car diesel engines control the combustion much more precisely and produce very little clatter, which can mostly be heard at idle when there is no road noise.
when you have pistons the sizes of a small child's head, it's difficult to make a Diesel quiet:-)
I know of no diesel car engines with pistons the size of a small child's head. We're comparing diesel car engines with gasoline car engines, not heavy truck engines right? Even the Cummins 5.9 in the Dodge pickups doesn't have pistons that big. My friend's VW diesel has pistons that are quite small, but once again the sound comes from the combustion event - not the engine parts.
What we're waiting for now is diesel car engines that meet the new emissions requirements, and after reading technical papers about the after-treatment systems required, I'm not sure I'd want one. Once system (to be used by Mercedes and other makers) requires a separate tank of some nasty liquid like urea which is injected into the exhaust - if the car runs out of this stuff, the computer won't let you drive the car any more.
White LEDs are actually not very good for color in many cases. Most white LEDs actually only produce blue, and through the use of a scintillator, mostly yellow light. The yellow is the wavelength which affects the eye by stimulating both red and green since the wavelength is in-between. The result of this is that when using it to look at various objects, the reflected colors are often pretty bad. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LED#Disadvantages_of_ using_LEDs.
-Aaron
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Well they are an IC blub, so that tells you that the light is being emmitted by passing current through a piece of wire which then glows. Normal IC blubs have tungsten fillaments, and when current is passed through these they emmit light mostly in the IR range (which you feel as heat). However tungsten also emmits about 5% of the energy in the visible spectrum (which you see as light). GE claims to have found a substance to use for wire which emmits 20% (4x efficiency FTA) of the energy as visible light. The rest of the energy will be in the UV and IR ranges. What that substance is or how it works they arent saying. I am guessing that it is still tungsten (because they claim it has the same yellowish color) but they have cut down the IR emmissions by adding some crap in with the tungsten.
can typically perceive.
That's the problem I think, most people here assume because they can't see something nobody can. I'm pretty sensitive to high refresh rates, and things that don't bother other people bug the hell out of me.
Also just because you can't consciously perceive something doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect.
Typical tungsten bulbs are about 15 lumens/Watt. The HEI described get only 30 ln/W. Your old stand-by T12 fluorescent tube in the drop ceiling troffer of a old style cube farm get 50 lm/W. Currently available T5 tubes get 100+ ln/W with improved performance on the way. There are dimmable CFLs out there. Controlling fluorescent brightness is very simple in modern high frequency electronic ballast with PWM. The reason you do not see more dimmable CFLs is due to the small increased cost. In the long run, CFLs are a less optimized solution compared to separating the ballast from the bulb as you might see in many commercial (and some residential) recessed can fixtures. Why replace the ballast every time the bulb goes (hint: CFLs fit into existing sockets)? Also, the old color, flicker and lifespan issure are a tthing of the past with modern electronic fluorescent ballasts. While great tings are promised in LEDs (>150 lm/W), the best LED bulbs that I've seen are only 25 ln/W, but I'm sure there are better out there.
LEDs are over ten times more efficient and the directionality of the light can be solved in a number of ways.
What are you smoking?
Incandescent from my closet: 100 watts, 1690 Lumens or 16.9 lumens/watt.
CFL: 27 watts, 1750 lumens or 64.8 lumens/watt.
Let's find a few LED lights...
LED spotlight: 8 watts, 120 lumens, 15 lumens/watt.
Bulb toward end of page: 10 watts, 200 lumens, 20 lumens/watt.
How about this $70 bulb? Surely that one must be bright! Nope: 10 watts, 340 lumens, 34 lumens/watt. Better, though -- half as efficient as the CFL, but still too dim for good room lighting.
LEDs are pretty cool for certain uses, but they SUCK for general purpose lighting.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
I'm not sure your math works.
If I didn't have that vehicle, we'd need four small wind-up passenger cars to haul the passengers and payloads.
So, you're hauling a payload in your SUV. Assuming you're driving something huge like an Excursion, you could fill the back with cargo and then squeeze 6 people in the remaining two rows of seats. So, four cars implies each car has 1.5 and 1/4 of the cargo that will fit behind the 2nd row of seats in an Excursion? I don't think so. If you'd seen the amount of crap I jammed into my Subaru wagon, you'd be amazed.
There are no small, more-efficient vehicles that can go where I can go, and get the people there, too.
I was irritated that my Subaru wagon only got 25 mpg. I could put 5 people and a lot of cargo in there, plus a lot more on the roof, and go almost anywhere in that car. Sometimes, I even did this as a college student.
and not even touching on the wasteful habits of people that use a marginally more efficient tool that you like better.
How is a hybrid only "marginally more efficient" than your massive-capacity SUV?
I grew up in 4x4 trucks, and SUVs when they were still Wagoneers, Scouts, and Broncos. I've driven a VW Bug around 4x4s stuck in the mud many times.
SUVs are not just glorified station wagons. Most are sub-standard station wagons.
Overall CFLs generate less mercury over their life cycle than the equivalent incandescent (entirely due to coal being the major source of electricity for the bulbs in the US).
Also don't forget that burning coal to produce electricity releases a large amount of mercury into the environment, so less efficient incandescent bulbs will, over their lifetime, cause more airborne murcury to be released than CFL's.
STFU about slashdot bias.
The energy required to light a normal bulb 10000 hours will release 18 mg of Hg. Lighting a fluorescent bulb 10000 hours will produce 3 mg and with the bulb itself containing 5.5 mg the total amount of mercury is 8.5 mg.
Of cause you are not supposed to throw fluorescent bulbs out with the garbage.
Never express yourself more clearly than you are able to think. --Niels Bohr
The reason Slashdotters are suspicious is that a large number of, (if not all) corporations are out to deceive the public. This is not conjecture. It's cold fact. GE is a great example, btw. You should look into some of their criminal activities.
This will probably by solved by using lumens for rating the light output.
When you say “need incandescent lighting”, I presume you're speaking of the quality and responsiveness of the light source, not of the need for an excited wire filament inside a vacuum-sealed glass orb. (clearly more efficient as a heat source than a light source... evidenced by the common Lava Lamp®)
I mean really, what's the need about? Is it about a strong-and-steady flow of photons? Is it about a light source that can be analog-controlled to dim and brighten in smooth steps?
I may not be speaking for everyone, but for those of us that are prone to the affliction, enduring the 60-66Hz “hummm” and the barely-perceptible flicker of fluorescent is a condition I will trade-in for just about anything.
I've seen a lot of lighting fads come and go. Fluorescent seems to stay just because it's so ergonomically attractive against vis-a-vis Heat Lamps. CF is about the same, just in a smaller package. Cold-cathode lamps are nifty, but they're about as useful as Xmas Lights, and cost ten times more. (with current Consumer Offerings) My bet is on up-and-coming technologies like bright LED and HID (High Intensity Discharge; the son of the Arc Lamp) lighting.
Just this past year, I've noticed an abundance of LED lighting technologies— not in the news, but in my hand. To me, that means a lot more than “coming soon”.
Butane lighters with a small LED flashlight are now common give-away items, as are just simple promotional pocket-lights. Battery-operated LED Xmas Lighting is now just about everywhere, and in many colors. (most popular, of course, is pure-white) When a technology becomes commonplace, that is when you know its about to come into its own.
Look at cellphones and GPS; both were considered Luxury or High End at first, then the price dropped enough that everyone found a reason to buy one. When everyone on the block has the same technology, the industry is pressured to make it better. As soon as cellphones became common, it was a race to make The Best Cellphone. Though there are clear leaders, that race is still on.
You watch; this will come to the Lighting Industry as well. As the knock-off CF and LED lighting floods the market, the leaders have to come-up with innovations to make their offering (seem) better than the others. (Note the implied reservation) Though I don't doubt their ability to innovate, I do doubt their veracity in purporting innovation.
There's already a remarkable offering of Consumer LED Lighting. Compact Fluorescents already have their well-earned niche, although I personally have distaste for them. As for high-end needs, such as photography and “spectacle” uses, (WARNING: token Wiki articles) HID is slowly emerging into its own. Your street may soon be lit with HID, rather than sodium vapor. (for example)
If General Electric can make a better light bulb, I say let them. If Australia never makes it legal to use one in your home when it would be just as viable as CF, it's their loss. I think a greater question is, how long is the “better light bulb” supposed to last? (LED “bulbs” are edging towards offering Lifetime Guarantees—and by that, meaning the lifetime of the consumer! W
This post © Copyrite Duggeek, all rights reversed.
I don't know what you see of light bulbs, but there are a lot of incandescent manufacturers (a quick search turned up http://www.globalsources.com/gsol/I/Provides/Inca
Only a very large company would have the financial standing and ability to devote major resources to such future R&D. Because of relative stability of the market (as you mention a lack of advancement), they can stockpile technical advances, file patents long before they're needed, and always be one step ahead of the competition.
According to http://www.ge.com/en/product/home/lighting.htm, GE also manufactures florescent lighting. GE Is obviously trying to keep status quo: retain current paying customers in both fields, florescent and incandescent, regardless of new laws and sanctions.
Errr, you do realize that all road hybrids today don't do that? Do you know ANYTHING or do you just pull it all out of your butt? Railroad hybrids do that -- but railroad diesel engines have always done that. It's just that they're adding batteries to switchers now.
Don't piss off The Angry Economist