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."
DoE had $20M to offer for this contest, but couldn't find $4M to save Fermilab ?
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of energy efficient lightning, but what the hell?
Vacuum cleaners suck. Kings rule.
Am I missing something or have they forgotten about white LEDs which are making pretty rapid inroads into general lighting? They're far more efficient that incandescent or strip lights.
Wouldn't it be assumed all modern light bulbs are 'solid-state' and will continue to be?
Perhaps someone wanted to sound smart by using more words than needed in that press release.
They work great for flashlights, and the headlight and taillight on my bike use LEDs.
But I researched LED lights a couple months ago, and found that a "60 watt replacement" LED light was expected to cost well over a hundred dollars, and at that time was still in development, and not yet available.
I finally settled for a couple twisty bulbs, but I'm not too happy about it because they contain mercury.
I'm also not too happy that the mercury warning on the package just advised me to dispose of them "according to local laws". As if it would be OK to let the mercury into the groundwater if there wasn't a law specifically against doing so!
Request your free CD of my piano music.
It takes about 1000 hours for the led to reach 50% light output. The time from 100% to about 85% is measured in single digit hours!
So, no, light fixtures that last for decades are right out. With current technology, that is.
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.
Anyone got any bright ideas?
the L prize gives nothing out UNTIL something is found. So the truth is, that the L-prize really costs nothing except for real results.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The main reason was that there was no need to develop any new technology. It was only necessary for previously developed tech to be implemented cheaply. Any great NEW technology like efficient light bulbs or a cancer cure or whatever will usually have such a huge payoff to its developer that a few extra million isn't likely to add much extra incentive. If funders think it can be done then they'll fund it even without the prize. If those who would fund it see it as a long shot then the prize won't change the equation much.
The other reason the X-Prize was successful was that it wasn't clear that a manned suborbital rocket could be profitable. Boeing or Lockheed could have easily built such a rocket. If they thought it would be profitable then why wouldn't they? Maybe they thought that anything less than a very careful and therefore prohibitively expensive development project would have left their deep pockets open to excessive liability. Again, concerns like this are not a problem for a lighting technology or a cancer cure or an efficient car technology.
Oh well, best of luck anyway. Even if these prizes are a waste at least they aren't wasting all that much in the grand scheme of things.
1. buy LED lights from thinkgeek.
2. Mail into DoE.
3. Profit?
stuff |
Many of these decisions are made by Congress, not DOE. As part of the President's Budget submission, DOE submits a budget proposal to Congress. Congress then goes through that budget. As part of their Constitutional duties, Congress frequently says "you're spending too much money here, not enough there." Congress passes the budget, and the President generally signs it. DOE is then stuck with the budget it is given. While DOE has some discretion in moving money around because of unforeseen circumstances, it does not have a free hand. Furthermore, frequently through the committee reports, Congress provides "guidance." In essence saying, "We, the Congress, put this money here for a reason, you better not move it, or there will be hell to pay." Federal agencies pay a lot of attention to "Congressional language." Furthermore, there is a problem in DC known as the "color of money." Congress puts money into different accounts. Frequently, the law says this color of money (e.g., money for salaries) cannot be used for other things (e.g., building new buildings). Added all together, there is a limit on what federal agencies can do.
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
Now, we have a NEW genetic disease up and rising: Psoriasis. Evey drug company is screaming that it is genetic. And they have all sorts of new drugs that treat the symptoms. But everybody seems to ignore several little things about:
This is the next ulcer. And while HIV does have a lot more basic research going on, it is obvious that the majority of the research is devoted to solving the symptom issues and not the issue of the bug itself.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.