Slashdot Mirror


DoE Announces 'L Prize' For Solid-State Lighting

erikaaboe notes that the US Department of Energy has announced a competition to develop efficient solid-state lighting technology. The "L Prize" program will allocate as much as $20 million in cash prizes for innovations to replace the common light bulb. Further details are available at the L Prize website. From the press release: "Lighting products meeting the competition requirements would consume just 17% of the energy used by most incandescent lamps in use today. The plan also includes a rigorous evaluation process, including testing of proposed products by independent laboratories (conducted through DOE's CALiPER test program), as well as field evaluations by DOE and utility partners to assess products in real world conditions. Four major California utilities ... have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with DOE, agreeing to work cooperatively to promote high-efficiency solid-state lighting technologies."

3 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. Why not fluorescents? by DFJA · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I don't understand this - fluorescents easily beat all *mass produced* white LEDs with good colour rendering in efficiency, and as long as you don't believe the manufacturers' 'incandescent equivant ratings', are a perfect replacement for incandescents. I know there are laboratory LEDs which have higher efficiency, but these are a long way off being mass produced at reasonable prices. I'm all in favour of pushing technology, but prescribing that it must be 'solid state' is completely wrong.

    It reminds me of the old UK cycle-lighting regulations, which basically stated you had to have a light bulb conforming to one of about 3 standards, all incandescent. Once efficient red LEDs came along, it was ages before the regulations changed to make them technically legal - long after everyone in their right mind stopped using the legal versions.

    --
    43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
  2. Re:Significantly bright LEDs are very expensive by brunes69 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is 60 times more mercury in the battery in the watch on your wrist than there is in 1 CFL.

    How many people do you think send their watch batteries to the toxic waste disposal centre?

    The hazards of mercury in CFLs is vastly overblown by the media looking for a story.

  3. Lasers by Kythe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Right now, diode lasers are among the most efficient (if not the most efficient) light emitters available. I'm guessing the winner, if there is one, will involve a laser or three plus diffusers/despeckling to get general lighting.

    Of course, getting cost down is another thing entirely.

    --

    Kythe