Slashdot Mirror


Lifecycle Energy Costs of LED, CFL Bulbs Calculated

necro81 writes "The NY Times is reporting on a new study from Osram, a German lighting manufacturer, which has calculated the total lifecycle energy costs of three lightbulb technologies and found that both LEDs and CFLs use approximately 20% of the energy of incandescents over their lifetimes. While it is well known that the newer lighting technologies use a fraction of the energy of incandescents to produce the same amount of light, it has not been proven whether higher manufacturing energy costs kept the new lighting from offering a net gain. The study found that the manufacturing and distribution energy costs of all lightbulb technologies are only about 2% of their total lifetime energy cost — a tiny fraction of the energy used to produce light." The study uses the assumption that LEDs last 2.5 times longer than CFLs, and 25 times longer than incandescents.

1 of 400 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Wat? by serbanp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Halogens get dismissed by prissy "green" zealots because, inconveniently, they're actually more efficient than the maligned incandescent (they run at a higher temperature, giving a better efficiency) while producing the best artificial light.

    Even modern CFLs or power LEDs generate crappy light when compared to an ordinary halogen; except the sunlight, there's no better light for reading than halogen.