Cree Introduces 200 Lumen/Watt Production Power LEDs

ndverdo writes "Cree just announced production power LEDs reaching 200 lumen/watt. Approximately doubling the previous peak LED light efficiency, the new LEDs will require less cooling. This should enable the MK-R series to finally provide direct no-hassle replacements to popular form-factors such as MR-16 spots and incandescent lighting in general. The LEDs are sampling and it is stated that 'production quantities are available with standard lead times.'"

Comments

These Cree guys are really bright.

[Anonymous Coward]

Kudos.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Nom du Keyboard]

Price?

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Jane Q. Public]

I hope the price turns out to be reasonable. I just looked at an incandescent bulb package and it works out to only 3212.6 lumens/W.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Jane Q. Public]

Slip of the finger. That should have said 12.6 lumens/W.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[N Monkey]

We just need to have our eyes bio-engineered to see infra-red. Efficiency problem solved :-)

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Mikkeles]

Now if we can only get them in white light!

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[mellon]

Cree fixtures produce a really good color spectrum. They are pretty much the company to beat on this.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[thrillseeker]

Note to actors: Do not look into spotlight with remaining eye.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Cordwainer Duck]

Newark is listing them for $10-11, Q250. Not in stock, of course.

Re:These Cree guys are really bright.

[Forty Two Tenfold]

Growing stuff wil get cheaper! Next up: cannabis prices at all-time low.

Cooling is the issue

[calidoscope]

The reduced cooling should help in lowering the costs of the LED versus the CFL and the reduced energy consumption will be a help as well.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

The reduced cooling should help in lowering the costs of the LED versus the CFL and the reduced energy consumption will be a help as well.

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[aliquis]

I don't know how it helps or interest someone else but I paid the equivalent of less than $10 for my 650 lumen ones but that was only because they was half price and when I bought it the half price was already in the register but the person selling them also pushed in 50% off so hence I only paid 25% of the original price. And I had actually looked at them at full price earlier because CFLs die so quickly at the toilet and bathroom.

I also bought 12v spotlights with LED. I wonder if I got the same price there but I kinda think I did. Possibly only half price. I have four of them in the ceiling in the living room and while expensive running that lamp normally used 4*25 watt + whatever losses the transformer have and that should be 4*6.7 or something such now. Also the halogen spotlights are rated at 1,000h life-time I think and die pretty quickly while these are 20,000h or 25,000h + spotlights are more expensive than regular lightbulbs to begin with. So even if they are expensive at 20 times longer life time they doesn't cost 20 times more. Just a higher up-front cost.

But then again prices will go down in the future. But I figured if no-one buy them now progress will take a longer time.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[pwizard2]

For me, CFLs have worked fine for years but I wish they would make giant LEDs you could screw in like regular light bulbs. Maybe LED technology doesn't work if you scale it up that much, I don't know for sure b/c it isn't my area of expertise. At least they have warmer color temperatures for white LEDs now.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[dougmc]

If you double the efficiency, you *more* than half the cooling needed for a given amount of light.

To give an example with some math ...

Suppose you need 2000 lumens from a 100 lumen/watt bulb. That means it takes 20 watts of power, and puts out 18 watts of heat.

Replace it with a 200 lumen/watt emitter that has the same light output, and it now needs only 10 watts of power, and only puts out 8 watts of heat.

All that said, I'm looking forward to this being available for bicycle lights. Doubling the efficiency means I can have double the light with the same sized battery pack, or the same amount of light with half the battery pack or some permutation thereof. Cooling isn't a big deal for bicycle lights until you get into the really high powered lights as the airflow is usually quite good.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[nabsltd]

And I had actually looked at them at full price earlier because CFLs die so quickly at the toilet and bathroom.

I have had 4 CFL globes in my bathroom for nearly 4 years, and have replaced only one bulb so far. In general, CFLs seem to have a worst case of about 5-6 times the life of an incandescent in the same fixture. I also like the fact that I can get more light when the fixture is wattage/heat limited.

Other than not being able to use dimmers, the biggest complaint I have with CFLs is that now it's tough to buy just one or two without paying a huge premium. The multi-bulb packs are sometimes so much cheaper per bulb that it's often worth it to just buy the pack. But, since they don't burn out very quickly, I end up with a fairly large collection of each type of bulb.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[symbolset]

These are surface mount LED modules, not bulbs. I checked one out. At 700 mA @12V (8.4W) gives 1040 lumens - approximately as much as a 70-watt incandescent - in a square 7mm on a side. This is only 123 lumens per watt. Max current is 1250 mA, so you could conceivably get a lot more light out of one, and presumably 1W is where the 200 Lumens/W kicks in, but that's only about a 25W incandescent equivalent - still pretty respectable considering the size. They cost about $10 in quantity 500. ROI is about 6 months vs. incandescent, or 18 months at the 200 lumens/W level.

I think I could see some interesting applications for this one. At 1040 lumens 18% of the electrical energy is converted to light, so around 6.9 W of heat. It's also too bright to look directly at.

Yes, it's a slashvertisement / press release. But LED lighting has /. common interests energy, technology, and so on. Progress is progress.

If they can just improve the efficiency a little more these might be interesting not only as a light source but as a means for spacecraft propulsion.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[aliquis]

It depend on the quality of the bulb.

Many are listed at 10,000 (or 8,000?) on-off cycles.

Osram Dulux intelligent longlife for instance is rated at 500,000 on-off cycles.

Sure it will cost more than the very cheapest CFLs but it's 5 or so times more, not 50 times more. And that's more than my LED lights are rated at (the ones I bought it's even highly rated.)

Regarding the rating and heat I think it make total sense to at least be able to put a similar power rated light-bulb in the same fixture considering the higher efficiency. I'm not 100% sure it work like that but I can't understand why it shouldn't. Using LEDs those cooling fins get hot but then again a regular lightbulb get very hot to.

You can get CFLs usable with dimmers to. I think what people should take home with them is that you should buy the CFL which fit your needs, not just any CFL. If it's going to be on for long sure buying any may be ok. If it's going to go on and off often buy one for that, if it need to be dimmable buy one for that and if it will be sitting outside like here and may have a -20 degree C around it buy one designed for that.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Psychopath]

I have Cree bulbs in my 4" recessed lights. They put out a warm color, don't make any noise, and work fine on a dimmer. I honestly can't tell the difference between them and the halogens they replaced, except they run a lot cooler. They sell them at Home Depot for about $40 each. I expect them to last at least ten years. The Cree guys know what they're doing.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[dougmc]

I've got lights like that myself. But XM-L emitters peak at about 100 lumens/watt, not the 200 lumens/watt promised by this new technology.

Also, none of these lights really do put out the amounts of light that the emitters are rated at. For example, this says 1600 lumens, but I'll bet it's more like 800 lumens. Still, not too bad, and yes, good lights make a huge difference, and it's hard to beat the price.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Airline_Sickness_Bag]

Bought 10 CFL bulbs for my kitchen. They all died in less than a year.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[fotoguzzi]

Incandescent bulbs will scorch one's fingers. What part of the led or circuitry is so sensitive to heat that cooling is such an issue for led bubs? Would placing the circuitry in a vacuum help at all?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the LED itself that is sensitive to heat. Placing it in a vacuum would be counterproductive since vacuum is an excellent insulator.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ArchieBunker]

Please explain how any of these issues can cause a CFL to fail.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[citizenr]

Bought 10 CFL bulbs for my kitchen. They all died in less than a year.

dont buy cheapest chinese shit, but quality CFLs with proper soft start.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in the Kansas City area. The local power company tells us with 10 cent per kWh the average payback on LED bulbs vs Incandescents is under 2 years.. I used to mark my CFL bases with a sharpie with date of service. Not one made it over 2 years and I returned every one to HomeDepot or Costco - the ones in the garages and bathrooms were the worst . So far with Lighting Science (Home Depot) or Feit ( Costco ) I have had to return 1 LED bulb and my house has around 35 bulbs. I even use LEDs outside and so far no degradation in light quality either.

I calculate the human energy to replace a bulb as something to minimize as well. so far LEDs have shown me an unlimited life span and the quality of the light vs that of a CFL is substantially better. I don't think I'd go out and replace what I have with newer bulbs but I sure know I won't ever buy a CFL again.

Its like the people who buy a Prius vs a VW vs a Dodge RAM truck. Sure the VW gets decent gas mileage, but the Prius gets GREAT gas mileage and the difference in upfront costs vs long term recurring expense is worth it and I kind of wish people viewed the overall picture if everyone had a VW or Prius and the impact on fuel .... same with LEDs vs CFLs

Re:Cooling is the issue

[darthdavid]

The point of bicycle lights isn't for when you're riding on the sidewalk, it's for when you're riding on the road and don't wanna get squashed by a car cause they can't see you.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

One issue with bicycle lights, especially those popular in North America, is that their reflectors are awful. They spray light everywhere. That's only really useful when mountain biking; when cycling on the road, light sprayed into the air is wasted light, and more powerful lights create a hazard for other cyclists and motorists. A good amount of engineering goes into a proper reflector, like those used on car headlights. There are some bike lights that do it right (Phillips has some), but the ones these LEDs are going to be thrown in first are going to be of the junk variety.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ryanov]

Shopping at Walmart or Sam's hurts America. Don't be a jerk.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ryanov]

I put CFL's in the toilet once, and yes, they did fail.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ryanov]

And congratulations to you for being a reactionary idiot. I've installed CFL's at my grandmother's house and they've been there for years and years. I've had a couple fail in my old place, but no more often (and I think significantly less often) than standard bulbs.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[theedgeofoblivious]

Well that's the problem. You're not supposed to put them in the toilet.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Incandescent bulbs will scorch one's fingers. What part of the led or circuitry is so sensitive to heat that cooling is such an issue for led bubs? Would placing the circuitry in a vacuum help at all?

Traditional incandescents are made from materials that operate fine at temperature without additional cooling. LEDs are silicon semiconductors and have far less tolerance of heat. A vacuum would probably cause an LED to overheat. Heat would radiate less efficiently within a vacuum.

Do you ordinarily assume that we're all really stupid and in desperate need of your guesswork?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[willy_me]

CFLs are most often killed by high temperatures, not poor power. Many older light fixtures (possibly even most) are fully enclosed because they were designed for incandescent bulbs. The fixtures got very hot but not so hot as to cause a fire. The problem with CFLs is that even though they use less power and result in less heat, the ambient temperature inside a fully enclosed fixture will result in premature failure. Very few new fixtures on the market are fully enclosed for this reason.

The next most common cause of CFL failure that I've seen is CFLs being placed on dimmer switches. People don't read the warning label on the package and try to use regular CFLs with dimmer switches all the time. Don't expect those bulbs to last long.

And finally, with regards to poor power... Just as dimmer switches will cause a CFL to eventually fail, power spikes and sudden drops will have the same impact. If you wiring is bad or you have a noisy device attached to power, the cheap CFLs can die early. Had a MacPro with a bad power supply cause a hum in the lines that could be heard the next house over if you listened to the CFLs. It would only happen with drawing a significant amount of power - in my case, rendering video. Serves as a good example of how if you have premature failure then there's something that needs to be fixed - or else you are asking for other, more expensive problems.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[inflex]

I've tried different brands of CFL ( generic, GE, Philips, Nelson ) , many sizes as well (including a monster 65W unit) and the failure rate is high compared to the proposed life on the boxes. Initially I think it was that I had them in enclosed diffuser bulbs and I dare say with the way our Summer weather is here it killed the first batch through overheating of the electronics in the CFL bases. However, after ensuring they all had good cooling (even bare bulbs) there were still plenty of failures, so I'm just thinking that overall it would seem that CFL drivers aren't yet up to scratch, or at least the manufactures are cutting corners on the components.

I've switched to the faux-traditional-halogen replacement bulbs and they seem to be doing a lot better. Looking forward to converting to LEDs soon.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Joce640k]

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Paying $6 for eight of them might explain why they 'burn out'...

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Joce640k]

CFL's rarely last more than 10 months. If they do they are at half the brightness of a ten year old bulb.

Let me guess: You also pay $6 for eight of them...

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Max_W]

It is very important for product photography. The quality of images depends on light.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

power spikes and sudden drops will have the same impact. If you wiring is bad or you have a noisy device attached to power

...Or if you have shitty infrastructure, that is, live in large swaths of the US.

I dislike CFLs. Not for the usual nonsense about light temperature and gradual ascent to full brightness (that's a definite bonus, especially first thing in the morning!), but because of the potential for truly catastrophic failure.

Incandescents? At worst, I've had a bulb shatter. Once.

CFLs? Twice, I've had them shoot a jet of flame while melting the casing during failure. These were not bottom shelf, absurdly cheap CFLs, either. (Nor were they the same brand.) Statistically, I'm sure, this is just Fortune pissing on me. After all, I've had dozens of CFLs run without issues for years. Be that as it may, I like my lightbulbs to not potentially burn down my house.

No, I'll stick to my conventional lighting, as long as I can, while I wait for LED bulbs to get better. (Already using a number of 'em in places where I can get away with the relatively low light output.)

Re:Cooling is the issue

[hawguy]

Get your blinding fucking light off the sidewalk.

signed,

A pedestrian coming the other way

kthxbai

I think you'll find that the cyclists that ride on sidewalks don't have lights. Or reflectors.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[aliquis]

I refuse to call my toilet room the bath room.

Rather nasty and cold to take a bath in there.

"Shitting closet"?

I tried googling it to see if anyone else used the expression and this is what I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxB1OtgphbQ ... WTF?

The Internet shouldn't be open for anyone.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[hawguy]

One issue with bicycle lights, especially those popular in North America, is that their reflectors are awful. They spray light everywhere. That's only really useful when mountain biking; when cycling on the road, light sprayed into the air is wasted light, and more powerful lights create a hazard for other cyclists and motorists. A good amount of engineering goes into a proper reflector, like those used on car headlights. There are some bike lights that do it right (Phillips has some), but the ones these LEDs are going to be thrown in first are going to be of the junk variety.

I have a very nice German made B&M bike light that has a very sharp cutoff to keep light on the road. The only problem is that there's very little light available above the road so it doesn't illuminate street signs or any reflectors above waist high (which is a problem since the bike path I frequent has a number of dark wood posts with reflectors mounted about 4 feet off the ground - I can barely see the reflectors when using only the B&M lamp. But since I supplement with a helmet mounted light, it's not much of a problem, but it is a weakness of having a reflector with a sharp cutoff.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[lightknight]

These things come with warranties? @ $20+ dollars per bulb, I'd be pretty pissed if the thing burned out after several months.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't buy CFL lamps, buy CCFL (or switch to LEDs)

http://blog.pegasuslighting.com/2011/06/ccfl-vs-cfl-whats-the-difference/

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

Good bycicle lights, or any traffic lights at all, only light down to the road.

But the first payable LED lights from china are mostly just LED flashlights with a part to fix them on a bike. They blend everybode including other bycicle and car drivers. Therefor they are only good for the forrest.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[wvmarle]

You can get CFLs usable with dimmers to.

You need special dimmers, which cost a multiple of dimmers for incandescents. And then the cost saving of using CFL over incandescents is less than the extra cost of the dimmer.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[SecurityTheatre]

I use these:

http://1000bulbs.com/product/58963/LED-409946.html?utm_source=SmartFeedGoogleBase&utm_medium=Shopping&utm_term=LED-409946&utm_content=LED+Light+Bulbs+-+60+Watt+Equal&utm_campaign=SmartFeedGoogleBaseShopping&gclid=CND43cb5wbQCFelDMgodCyIABA

About 1/5 the power of an incandescent and about 1/2 the power of a CFL for the same light. Also, supposed to last 15 years.

Neat.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[jonbryce]

I've got one of these http://www.philips.co.uk/c/-/led-9.5-w-48-w-bayonet-cap-warm-white-8718291193005/prd/ as a cupboard light and it works fine in there.

For room lighting, I am using 30W CFL bulbs, and there aren't yet any LED bulbs that will replace them, but things are improving all the time. I like my rooms to be much brighter than most people, but for a lot of people, something like http://www.philips.co.uk/c/-/led-11-w-60-w-normal-cap-warm-white-8718291193029/prd/ will do the job just fine.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[flyneye]

I've had some go in a few months and have some still burning after I bought them at least 4 years ago, normal household use. I remember getting 8 for $16 at Sams. I do get the multi packs at Walfart too. I've had some turn to crap out of the box and some just keep going, socket doesn't seem to be a big diff.
Whatever the outcome, my electric bill dropped nicely when I started using them exclusively.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Coward]

LED's are sensitive to heat just because they are semiconductor diodes. They need heat sinks to transfer generated heat to the surrounding environment.

Filament bulbs emit IR (heat) and that's how most of their waste heat is dumped.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[flyneye]

So....you do bathe regularly....somewhere...right?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[AmiMoJo]

CFLs are most often killed by high temperatures, not poor power. Many older light fixtures (possibly even most) are fully enclosed because they were designed for incandescent bulbs. The fixtures got very hot but not so hot as to cause a fire. The problem with CFLs is that even though they use less power and result in less heat, the ambient temperature inside a fully enclosed fixture will result in premature failure. Very few new fixtures on the market are fully enclosed for this reason.

You must be living in bizzaro world where everything is opposite. Many homes and shops used to have those recessed spots and the filament bulbs would fail every few months due to heat, but as soon as they were replaced with CCFLs they could last for years. Aside from anything else the shape of the CCFLs was narrower and thus allowed airflow, where the filament spots filled up the hole almost perfectly.

Similarly those almost enclosed wall lights and desk lamps kill incandescent and halogen bulbs much faster than CCFLs or LEDs, due to heat. Now LEDs are available we are seeing much smaller, fully moulded plastic enclosed lights that simply were not possible before.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[dfghjk]

There is virtually no selection of dimmable CFL, the few that exist are incredibly expensive, and they work like hell. That's all added to the crappy light they put out. They are junk and a waste of money. You're whole comment reads like you have no experience with any of this.

Some light switches, very often dimmers, trickle a small amount power through them when switched off. CFL is incompatible with those, dimmable or not. Then there's the fact that the places you use dimmers you are likely to care about the light quality and CFL is worthless there. CFL is essentially incompatible with dimming, regardless of whether there's an example of a dimmable balast or not.

CFL sucks. We're better off with incandescent in the meantime.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BitZtream]

You can get CFLs usable with dimmers to.

You need special dimmers, which cost a multiple of dimmers for incandescents. And then the cost saving of using CFL over incandescents is less than the extra cost of the dimmer.

Not anymore, now you just need dimmer aware CFLs that can deal with the clipped sine wave.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BitZtream]

In what way? Because you care about some store that wasn't able to compete? Because you think workers are mistreated even though most of them don't actually care? Let me guess, you've got no real reason other than some silly ultra-left wing fantasy reasons that the world should be a happy place where everyone gets along and farts butterflies?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[gl4ss]

because taxing = bad, but taxing by local mob = good!

Re:Cooling is the issue

[gander666]

Yep, I have been buying them for some time now, and they are awesome. Good light throw too.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[DamonHD]

Yes, I dislike this usually-literally-incorrect US euphemism.

I have a bath in my bathroom, and I take a dump etc in the WC in the *separate* room next to it. More hygienic for a start.

I can't quite see why the word 'toilet' (although another euphemism I'll grant you) was so offensive that the often-wrong 'bathroom' seemed better. How many public 'bathrooms' in the US sense actually contain a bath?

Rgds

Damon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[demonlapin]

although another euphemism I'll grant you

What on earth do you mean? A toilet is literally a device meant to dispose of human waste. It is considered the "polite" word in parts of the English-speaking word, as opposed to phrases like "the shitter", but it's not a euphemism.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[demonlapin]

No, he wants people to pay a lot more for their stuff so they don't buy as much. And for lots of people to be out of jobs.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[DamonHD]

Completing one's toilet was originally getting dressed and washed and a toilet (or lavatory) was the place to do that, etc, but then the word got hijacked, in a long and glorious tradition of being unable to call a spade a shovelling device...

http://aj.hd.org/TFTC/E.html#euphemisms

Rgds

Damon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[wvmarle]

Ah, didn't know that yet. Well when those final incandescents finally burn out (there for many years - not using them much) I'll check on it. Or maybe by then LEDs are a competitive option, currently they're just too expensive for me, at several times the price of CFLs.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[jc42]

How many public 'bathrooms' in the US sense actually contain a bath?

Almost none, because they are usually called "rest rooms". ;-)

But there are jokes about that euphemism, too, because they never contain the beds or couches or cots you'd expect in a "rest" room.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[GoChickenFat]

Please elaborate...

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Mikkeles]

So what I gather from all these comments is that CFLs are less robust in all important respects: power stability, switches, and enclosures, all of which are common. In addition, they are more expensive and they produce a harsh light.

I wanted to use them for all the right reasons, but went through 3 packs of 8 in under two years (actually, there is still one working).

I'll wait until they're ready to real life, thanks.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[rjr162]

The Philips led outdoes the cfls I've used except the 75w (or was it 100.. I forget now as I got it for free from the power company) GE cfl.

The Philips goofy looking led puts out an great color of light and it's bright too for what it is. I had picked mine up from home depot for around $35

Re:Cooling is the issue

[marcosdumay]

I have a crappy power supply. The CFLs I put at home last for about a year (except for the kitchen, where they last for half a year - too much turning on and off there).

Now that LEDs are really competitive, I think I'll never buy a CFL again.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[green1]

What you neglect to mention is that dimmable CFLs (And dimmable LEDs too) are a myth. They don't actually exist. Sure some of them claim on the packaging to dim, but when you get them home, and connected, you find that they dim form 100% all the way down to about 70%, and then shut off. (The LEDs seem to go down to about 20%, Incandecents dim the full range down to 0%) additionally the selection is only a handful of bulbs, and they are all at least twice the physical size of an incandecent bulb, so they don't fit in any fixtures.

And before you blame my dimmers, or the specific bulbs, this is experience from 3 different brands of CFL "dimmables", 2 different brands of LED "dimmables" all on 3 different dimmer switches (1 of which was specifically bought to be CFL compatible, the other specifically to be LED compatible, both of which worked exactly the same as the old dimmer switch from the 1970s)

Meanwhile legislators are in the process of banning incandecent bulbs when there is as of yet NO replacement for many very common applications.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[jimicus]

Tungsten bulbs reached the point of being a commodity item years ago - there really is very little to choose between one 60W tungsten bulb and another.

Problem is, this means people expect the same thing from CFLs. Why not? They're sold in the same part of the store with similar packaging to do a similar job, many stores only carry one brand and they're outwardly all very similar, it's hard not to make that assumption.

But the actual products vary hugely in terms of quality. The nasty ones behave exactly as you describe; the decent ones don't.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

I had actually looked at them at full price earlier because CFLs die so quickly at the toilet and bathroom.

It's been almost 8 years since I placed the CFLs I use in my bathroom and they're still good to go.

I also bought 12v spotlights with LED.

I don't use spot lighting, so I'll wait to get LED lights until they're good for area lighting. Well, I may use a LED in a flashlight, replace the incandescent bulb in my Mag light with one.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[rgmoore]

Regarding the rating and heat I think it make total sense to at least be able to put a similar power rated light-bulb in the same fixture considering the higher efficiency. I'm not 100% sure it work like that but I can't understand why it shouldn't. Using LEDs those cooling fins get hot but then again a regular lightbulb get very hot to.

The big difference is that LEDs (and CFLs) will fail at much lower temperatures than incandescents. The sensitive part of the incandescent bulb is the filament, and it's the part that gets really hot, so the fixture will usually fail before the bulb does. LEDs and CFLs contain electronics that can fail at relatively low temperatures, so you have to be a lot more careful about where you mount them. If LEDs weren't temperature sensitive, they wouldn't need the big cooling fins.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

Other than not being able to use dimmers, the biggest complaint I have with CFLs is that now it's tough to buy just one or two without paying a huge premium. The multi-bulb packs are sometimes so much cheaper per bulb that it's often worth it to just buy the pack. But, since they don't burn out very quickly, I end up with a fairly large collection of each type of bulb.

Walmart, at least the one I went to, have CFLs that can be used with dimmer switches. I have the same problem with the multi-bulb packs though. I didn't want to get an 8 bulb pack, but even more I didn't want to pay a higher price.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

These things come with warranties? @ $20+ dollars per bulb, I'd be pretty pissed if the thing burned out after several months.

As I said in my original post, I bought an 8 pack of CFLs for less than $6. The first CFL I bought cost $20, but that was more than 25 years ago and it lasted about 15 years before burning out. Between the cost of the bulb, how much energy it saved, and how long it lasted I believe I saved money paying more to buy it than the total cost of buying incandescent bulbs instead.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Umm, typically the toilet is a separate room from the bath room.

If you're intent on speaking in truly general terms, "what bathroom?" would be the most common reaction of an average Earthling.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Smauler]

What about "loo"?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

Bought 10 CFL bulbs for my kitchen. They all died in less than a year.

The CFLs in my kitchen I put there more than 2 years ago. Of course they replaced other CFLs, and those were there more than 5 years, after surviving moving.

Falcon

Re: Cooling is the issue

[mspohr]

I installed 6 Philips LED bulbs in my dining room chandelier with a Lutron dimmer (same price as their regular dimmers).
Works great down to very low brightness. Quality of light is perfect.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

I've tried different brands of CFL ( generic, GE, Philips, Nelson ) , many sizes as well (including a monster 65W unit) and the failure rate is high compared to the proposed life on the boxes.

I've been using CFLs for more than 25 years and I have never had a CFL last less than 5 years. the first CFL I bought I bought in a specialty store, it lasted about 15 years, and the last 2 tymes I bought them I bought them at Walmart.

Looking forward to converting to LEDs soon.

When LEDs are good for area lighting, the only spotlighting I use is my flashlight, then I switch to them.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Twinbee]

Can you get standard light fitting LED bulbs which put out the equivalent of more like 5000 lumen? I'd love something to replace my 60W CFL bulb (that's actual watt not equivalent). At 200 lumens per watt, that would work out to a 25w LED bulb.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[samkass]

The lifetime of a CFL also seems to depend heavily on the quality of your electricity source. The power lines in our area has a lot of fluctuations, and CFLs don't last much longer than incandescents in that environment.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Anonymous Psychopath]

Can you get standard light fitting LED bulbs which put out the equivalent of more like 5000 lumen? I'd love something to replace my 60W CFL bulb (that's actual watt not equivalent).

At 200 lumens per watt, that would work out to a 25w LED bulb.

I haven't found (or looked for) anything that puts out that much light in a single bulb. Is this an outdoor security flood?

The light I referenced is http://www.homedepot.com/EcoSmart/h_d1/N-5yc1vZ4b8/R-202240932/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053&langId=-1&storeId=10051#.UOB5rOj2GG8.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Bob the Super Hamste]

The only issue I have had with the CFLs on the dimmer is that it is a 5 fixture light and with 5 dimmable CFLs in it they would start to flicker from time to time. After putting in one of the old incandescents that problem seems to have been resolved. Does anyone know why, I would assume that it was some interference from having 5 CFLs in the same fixture but I am not an expert in electronics.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Twinbee]

No it's for indoors. I like something which is a little less cave-like than most people. Quite a few household CFLs give are 65W or higher (I saw one at a gigantic 200W which must be about 10000 lumen). Yes, they're quite big. I was hoping the LED tech would be competing by now.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Technician]

Many don't list the Lumen Maintenance specs for their products. After many Christmas string issues with LED's. I tested some lower cost LED's in an application where they were on all the time. My results were repeatable. I'm not sure how well Cree holds up in this regard, but many brands still work after 20K hours, but the light output is no longer usefull.

Here is a link to a site with my personal test. I expect the life issue has improved, but not yet perfect.
Note, the bulbs in test did not have proper heat sinking. All bulbs were from the same batch, in the same package. The dimming was only from use.
http://www.spudfiles.com/forums/science-and-engineering-sould-i-buy-an-led-tv-t23374.html

Re:Cooling is the issue

[hawkinspeter]

I went for the three LED model: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0097A6R2E/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i00/ . It works really well on the lowest light setting - I reckon the highest setting would probably set fire to anything in front of me.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[pwizard2]

The only lamps I know of that can put out that much light are metal halide and HPS (neither of which are really designed for indoor use unless you have a big warehouse or box store to light up).

Re:Cooling is the issue

[rot26]

*** varies by location and custom.

Probably not true in most areas of most first-world countries.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[saleenS281]

*lots of people in china, and/or lots of store level workers that receive such a low wage that we are subsidizing Walmart's workforce through welfare. In turn, those people would be forced to find a new job working at another retailer who would pick up the slack but actually pays a decent living wage. Like Costco or Target. OH, THE HORROR!

Re:Cooling is the issue

[rot26]

And not ideal for brief use, since they take 5 minutes to warm up.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BlackPignouf]

Pro-tip : Light is also heat. :D

Re:Cooling is the issue

[demonlapin]

Why are America's welfare rolls Wal-Mart's problem? ANY company that hires a lot of low-level workers is going to have a lot of EITC people. That's why we have an EITC: we want them to earn money. They just can't earn enough to support their existence, so we top them up.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[pwizard2]

that, plus any type of gas-discharge lamp gets way too hot to safely use indoors (outside of specially designed enclosures). Even the big high-bay lights with an open bulb have metal heat shields.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Immerman]

Bulbs are far more resistant to electrical disturbances than (cheap) CFLs. Wiring that's perfectly sufficient for most things may still be introducing voltage sags or spikes that destroy the electronics in a CFL - do you have any high-amperage devices on the same circuit that could be introducing line noise? Especially in older houses it's very possible that your appliances are on the same circuit as your lighting. The noise may also be introduced from outside your house - neighbors with very high draw devices, or just poor infrastructure - most power tools for example wreak havoc on their voltage source, and if the local power lines aren't thick enough that noise can affect the entire neighborhood. In that case the only solution is to install power filters between your house (or at least the lighting circuits) and the incoming line.

As for being expensive - even if the CFLs only last as long as a normal bulb their amortized cost is significantly cheaper - a single 60W, 5000h bulb will consume ~$30 of electricity in its lifetime (5000h * 60w = 300kWh), whereas a CFL will typically consume between 1/3 and 1/2 as much to deliver the same amount of light - and if you're spending $15-$20 for a single CFL then it will probably outlast the bulb by a dramatic margin unless your power supply is *really* bad.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Twinbee]

This 85watt CFL for example gives off 5400 lumens:
http://www.megamanuk.com/products/cfl-lamps/clusterlite/integrated-ballast/871691/

And the 100watt version apparently gives off 6700 lumen.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[MrL0G1C]

Can't speak for other brands but I have bought a couple of dozen Philips 8000hr and 10000hr CFL bulbs and they're all lasting as long as they should (several year now).

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BitZtream]

Congratulations, you don't know your place in the world. You're going to get a rude awakening when you get out of school and find out you're thousands of dollars in debt and still not making a fortune just because you think you're entitled to it.

I've had this discussion with Walmart workers. There are two types. Kids who think their entitled to make a fortune doing the job of a well trained chip, and adults who realize that sometimes you have to work for a living. Been there myself. Its a job that can be done with an IQ of 12, you aren't worth paying more than the bear minimum for waht you do.

Find a different job. Its not Walmart's place to fix the problem for you, its yours. If you're too stupid to work somewhere else where you can make more and have have the skills to do so then you get what you deserve. The reality however is, you don't have the skills. You don't have any experience. You're just a punk with an entitlement complex. Read your own message, it applies to you far more than me.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BitZtream]

And so because the vendor thinks its entitled to more profit than it is, you're blaming walmart.

Pull your head out of your ass. If someone else will do it cheaper then the problem is yours, not theirs. If people don't like cheaper, they can go shop elsewhere.

Interestingly enough however, I buy the same shit from walmart that is sold by Amazon, BestBuy, Target and places in 'the mall'. Perhaps you should get a little bit of a clue.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BitZtream]

You have no clue how supply and demand works.

If Walmart suddenly ceased to exist, there would be a large abundance of unskilled workers, the end result is that the over-supply of workers would result in Costco and Target lowering their wages since they no longer have to compete.

No one in America makes 'shitty' pay. Go live in an ACTUAL shitty country and then come talk to me.

Yes, the horror in people having to actually work for a living. The standard of living in America is ridiculously high compared to what it was ANYWHERE in the world 100 years ago. Or plenty of places elsewhere in the world.

You aren't entitled to jack shit and you'll get much further in life when you realize that.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[saleenS281]

You're assuming Target and Costco have higher wages as a result of competition which is patently false. The only one failing to understand how it works is you. Wall street has been begging both companies to cut wages for years because they very easily could. They've told wall street to fuck off because they realize it's harmful to their long-term success. All lower wages will do is shrink their pool of customers.

But thanks for the armchair expert analysis without bothering to look at the foundations of either company.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[saleenS281]

No, ANY company that hires a lot of low-level workers will not. Case in point - Costco. Case in point - Target. Walmart is simply bilking the US political system for their own gain. It's an unsustainable house of cards.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ChrisMaple]

Cheapie made-in-China incandescents have lumen/Watt ratings markedly inferior to GE, Philips, Sylvania.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ChrisMaple]

W.C. = water closet.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[ChrisMaple]

You may have cause and effect reversed. It's possible that the existence of EITC and food stamps et cetera multa make it possible for businesses to pay lower wages because the government effectively picks up part of the tab.

Regardless of which way causality runs, there's a government employee in the middle, soaking up money while producing nothing. Everyone loses.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[pwizard2]

You're talking about those floodlight-shaped CFLs, right? Those damn things take forever to warm up (the light starts near the base and takes a few seconds to reach the tip) but I've found putting regular instant-on CFLS in those fixtures works just as well. Regular CFLS usually start >50% brightness and warm up much faster.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[OneAhead]

I have a bath in my bathroom, and I take a dump etc in the WC in the *separate* room next to it. More hygienic for a start.

If you suffer from frequent bouts of explosive diarrhoea, then you might want to cut down on the exotic food.

Otherwise, more hygienic how?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[OneAhead]

... which are mostly made in china as well.

There's actually variation within the brands as well, and some manufacturers are quite upfront about it. Last time I went to the lighting department of my closest wal-mart, they had a huge lineup of GE CFLs. They were not only diversified by color temperature and form factor, but also by expected lifetime, ie. the expected lifetime is written somewhere on the box and the ones for which it's low are markedly cheaper.

I've been replacing Incandescent bulbs with a wide variety of CFLs since 2003 or so and I always had a tendency to stay away from the cheap stuff. Overall, my failure rates are so low that I can't even make reliable statistics; once I put in a CFL, I usually don't have to replace it anymore. That is, except for one pretty large batch of very cheap GE bulbs, which I bought in 2007 and all of which failed in less that 2 years.

Conclusion: regardless of the brand, stay away from the cheap ones.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[flyneye]

Dunno, there've been times it's been handy to have the crapper by the shower. Emergencies like diarrhea,when ill or vomiting , when one tries to clear up the bedspins with a cooling shower after taste testing booze, then uURRRGH SPLAT! The shower drain holes being too small to wash the chunks down.
But I do get your point. There should be another name for the works, some call it a masturbatorium, but, that doesn't cover everyone. Perhaps the waste-room would be a good name. Everything goes down the drain there, dirt,sweat, feces,whiskers,vomit, semen even snot. There should be another name because old fashioned " shithouse" just doesn't cover it.

Re: Cooling is the issue

[green1]

please post the model number of the dimmer, because my 5 Philips LED bulbs in my family room on a Lutron dimmer don't go below about 20% before flicking out, and worse yet, if you have them right at 20% or so and the freezer kicks in, they turn off and don't come back on until you adjust the dimmer again.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[vegge]

I've been using CFLs for more than 25 years and I have never had a CFL last less than 5 years. the first CFL I bought I bought in a specialty store, it lasted about 15 years, and the last 2 tymes I bought them I bought them at Walmart.

Same here -- the half-dozen CFLs in my apartment are all at least 10 years old, and the oldest more than 15. But they are all in in open fixtures, and not in frequently switched locations (i.e., none in the bathroom).

So far equally good experience with two LED bulbs ($$$). Especially like the new warm white LEDs from Philips.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

You're talking about those floodlight-shaped CFLs, right? Those damn things take forever to warm up (the light starts near the base and takes a few seconds to reach the tip) but I've found putting regular instant-on CFLS in those fixtures works just as well. Regular CFLS usually start >50% brightness and warm up much faster.

No I'm not. Sure Walmart has dimmable floodlight CFLs but they also have regular dimmable CFLs. GE CFL 26wt Dimmable Spiral - 3 bulbs $15.44. They have a bunch more too.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Paying $6 for eight of them might explain why they 'burn out'...

I guess you didn't understand what I said. The 8 bulbs I paid $6 for were to replace bulbs I bought years ago that eventually burned out. Just for the heck of it, I thing tomorrow I'll label new bulbs with the date as I replace older ones. Then I can keep track of exactly how long they last me. But I know I haven't had a CFL last less than 5 years.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

So far equally good experience with two LED bulbs ($$$). Especially like the new warm white LEDs from Philips.

Once LEDs are good for area lighting and drop in price I'll start replacing my burnt out CFLs with them. But for now I don't see a reason to replace what I have now, I don't use spotlights.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Whuffo]

You might not be aware that fluorescent bulbs (including CFLs) are gas discharge lamps, also. They're low pressure mercury vapor lamps with a phosphor on the inside of the glass to convert the hard ultraviolet from the mercury arc to "fluorescent light".

Re:Cooling is the issue

[demonlapin]

Costco? They have, according to their 10-K for the fiscal year ending August, 2011, 92000 full-time and 72000 part-time employees. Target employs about 400k people during the Christmas rush, about 355k all year. Wal-Mart has 1.4 million employees in the US alone. (You can look up the 10-K's yourself for the other two.) Not only does it operate in a different market segment, with very different demographics, its workforce is over thrice that of Target and about ten times that of Costco. My home - a mid-sized city in the heartland, metro population about 400k, has two Targets - but seven Wal-Marts. The nearest Costco is about a three-hour drive away. Wal-Mart operates in poor, rural areas because they have figured out how to make money while serving those populations, and it's a good thing. If you ever shopped in the South before Wal-Mart, you know what I mean. I was headed out on a trip a few years back when the adapter I was using to play the iPod through my car stereo broke. It was 8 AM on a Sunday. Guess who was open, had several to choose from, and was literally right on my travel route? It wasn't Target.

People who are on welfare in the US are supposed to work. The EITC is one of those rare government programs that is actually very, very close to what economists would suggest in an ideal situation - instead of paying people to sit at home and do nothing, you supplement the meager income they are actually capable of earning but only if they actually go out and earn something. Now you're upset that someone is willing to take a chance on them? Let's be honest - if they had better opportunities, they would take them. But they don't, so they don't. Sorry, I just can't get upset that Wal-Mart is going out and giving them jobs. Does it make lots of money? Of course it does. So what? Have you ever sat and talked with someone who shopped at Wal-Mart because everywhere else was too expensive? It's the best part of a lot of people's lives. Where else are you going to get a bottle of Sriracha in Baxley, GA (picked at random, but it's in stock there as well as every other nearby store)? Take a look at the appliances and furniture they sell - yes, it's mostly cheap particle-board stuff, but it's remarkably better-made and better-looking than you would expect for the price. Target has talked about bringing design to the masses, but Wal-Mart does it too, and well.

Wal-Mart isn't generally despised by its workers. It has a long tradition of hiring from within. My wife has some cousins in rural Iowa - solid salt-of-the-earth types, farmers and ranchers and blue-collar families who in times past would have been building washing machines and bulldozers. One is the manager of his town's Wal-Mart; he started as a stock boy in high school and worked his way up the ranks. It's a solid middle-class job.

I lived one year in a ghetto apartment complex in a small cow-college town. (Why I did so is a long and boring story. Post-baccalaureate studies. I had a good reason.) Everyone else in my building of eight apartments was a college student except for the one working-class couple with a teenage son that lived next door to us. To them, shopping at Wal-Mart meant that their dollar went a lot further than otherwise. It was cheaper than any other grocery store or general goods provider. It offered a remarkably good selection. IOW: actual poor people like shopping at Wal-Mart (as People of Wal-Mart proves over and over again). They generally seem to like working there. You can't compare them to Target, because Target is an upscale Wal-Mart with correspondingly smaller market presence. You really can't compare them to Costco, because actual poor people don't buy $90 memberships to clubs that offer a small but rotating variety of stock purchased based on what's cheap at the moment and pushed out in warehouse style to people who are willing and able to buy a lot of it at once. Hell, Costco's net profits are less than their me

Re:Cooling is the issue

[tyrione]

The reduced cooling should help in lowering the costs of the LED versus the CFL and the reduced energy consumption will be a help as well.

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Falcon

And 3 years ago CFL's were going for as high as $10+ per bulb.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[DamonHD]

This is finally the moment for Linux on the ... uh ... UI. We get to officially name the room "/dev/null"?

Rgds

Damon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[flyneye]

BRILLIANT IDEA!
Mod this man up to +5 insightful.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[cynyr]

sounds like the bulbs need better power filtering... Some of us have no way to fix any of the things the GP listed, as they don't belong to us, and the apartment management does not care if our CFLs burn out fast. That doesn't cost them money and I can just buy halogen.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[bill_mcgonigle]

And 3 years ago CFL's were going for as high as $10+ per bulb.

They still are if you want the fancy dimmable 3-way type. But like today, I was buying 6-packs of decent CFL's for $15. I'll be happy to replace them all with LED's at $10 (2012) per equivalent light output.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[BonThomme]

and Microsoft was going to be the next Microsoft

Re:Cooling is the issue

[jackbird]

recessed cans, yes. Those square fixtures with a metal frame around a frosted glass/plexi lens is what the OP is referring to. You generally don't see those in commercial settings; just residential construction between 1965 or so and 1990.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

And 3 years ago CFL's were going for as high as $10+ per bulb.

They still are if you want the fancy dimmable 3-way type. But like today, I was buying 6-packs of decent CFL's for $15. I'll be happy to replace them all with LED's at $10 (2012) per equivalent light output.

I'll replace my CFL with LED light bulbs when they are as good as CFLs for area lighting and do not cost much more than them.

Falcon

Re: Cooling is the issue

[mspohr]

Here's the exact model that I'm using. It was a Leviton dimmer, not Lutron.
It works great. No flickering and dims down to a very low level.
Leviton 6613-PLI SureSlide
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000U3FW5K/ref=oh_details_o04_s00_i00

Re:Cooling is the issue

[bill_mcgonigle]

I'll replace my CFL with LED light bulbs when they are as good as CFLs for area lighting and do not cost much more than them.

Just curious how you'd calculate the proffered life expectancy of LED's over CFL's. In theory they should last 5-10x as long, but that doesn't translate into a 5-10x price premium, counting the time value of money.

I'm also skeptical that any electronics manufactured today will last 50 years - maybe 20 years if I'm lucky and that won't command a 4x price multiple on CFL's (assuming they last 5 years which the old decent ones do).

Re:Cooling is the issue

[dougmc]

Pro-tip : Light is also heat. :D

Appropriate retort: not exactly, but close enough. (Heat is a form of energy transfer, and radiation is indeed one form of that. But we were talking about cooling needed (which in general for lights means adding heat sinks and improving air flow), not "heat" in general.)

More detailed retort: if the LED emits light, that means that the energy emitted does not go into heating up the LED, therefore it doesn't directly contribute to the cooling needed itself. (Though it's a little more complicated than that -- if the LED emits some IR or UV, which of course it does, then that doesn't contribute to the cooling needed either, but it doesn't increase the efficiency either, unless you consider these things to be useful for whatever your purpose is.)

As an extreme example, a 100% efficient LED needs no cooling (unless it needs to be cooler than the ambient temperature), because it doesn't warm up, as all it's energy leaves as light. (It also doesn't exist, unfortunately.)

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Richy_T]

My grandparents house had this arrangement. The sink was also in the bathroom. This meant one had to handle two doors between the requisite wiping and the washing of hands afterwards. Hardly more hygienic.

Also, while apparently offering an efficiency advantage of the use of the bath not interfering with the use of the toilet and vice versa, coming out of the toilet to find that someone was occupying the bathroom (and therefore the sink) was not a pleasant experience.

I suspect whoever designed things this way did not think things through. Or it was some kind of holdover from outside toilets (This was a post-war government-built house)

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Richy_T]

I'd buy LEDs at a significant premium over CFLs since I have had poor experience with CFLs (for whatever reason) whereas once LEDS are able to produce correct and sufficient light, I expect them to perform much better with a decent lifespan. I really wanted to like CFLs and was an early adopter but there's a reason the government had to make a law to force people to use them.

In many ways, it would have been better to attempt to advance regular fluorescent lighting that the whole CFL thing. At least when a tube or ballast goes out there, you don't have to wastefully throw the whole kaboodle away. Green, my arse.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Richy_T]

Heat radiates fine in a vacuum. It's conduction and convection that become problematic.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

I'll replace my CFL with LED light bulbs when they are as good as CFLs for area lighting and do not cost much more than them.

Just curious how you'd calculate the proffered life expectancy of LED's over CFL's. In theory they should last 5-10x as long, but that doesn't translate into a 5-10x price premium, counting the time value of money.

As things are now I wouldn't count on life expectancy as I have to watch, keep track of, my budget. I'm on disability and haven't worked for more than 10 years. I hope I can start working again soon, though I don't what I'd do. I hope I can work as a photographer, but my eyesight isn't really good enough for that I think. That's the least of my problems though.

I'm also skeptical that any electronics manufactured today will last 50 years - maybe 20 years if I'm lucky and that won't command a 4x price multiple on CFL's (assuming they last 5 years which the old decent ones do).

True. The US is a disposable society. What's worse is the rest of the world is following in the US's footsteps.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[falconwolf]

I'd buy LEDs at a significant premium over CFLs since I have had poor experience with CFLs

Other have said the same thing, but I haven't had trouble with CFLs. And I bought my first one about 25 years ago.

Falcon

Re:Cooling is the issue

[green1]

Banning bulbs with poor efficiency is synonymous with banning incandescents. The fact that we "could have had super-efficient incandescents" is irrelevant because we don't actually have them. So the difference is the same. When I go to the store to buy a bulb, I don't care what wording was used in the bill, I only care what bulbs are on the shelf for me to buy. Right now, if you remove the "poor efficiency bulbs" you have no dimmable bulbs left. I don't care what bulbs COULD have existed, only what bulbs I can buy. Unfortunately manufacturers have decided that what they have now is "good enough" for dimmable, and market them as such, even though they don't do it adequately.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[Richy_T]

My first one, bought around 1997, lasted one week. They weren't cheap back then either.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[lsatenstein]

The reduced cooling should help in lowering the costs of the LED versus the CFL and the reduced energy consumption will be a help as well.

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Falcon

===
Until the number of competitors come along, and the market gets filled, you will pay for leds in the same style you pay for Apple Products.

Re:Cooling is the issue

[lsatenstein]

It depend on the quality of the bulb.

Many are listed at 10,000 (or 8,000?) on-off cycles.

Osram Dulux intelligent longlife for instance is rated at 500,000 on-off cycles.

Sure it will cost more than the very cheapest CFLs but it's 5 or so times more, not 50 times more. And that's more than my LED lights are rated at (the ones I bought it's even highly rated.)

Regarding the rating and heat I think it make total sense to at least be able to put a similar power rated light-bulb in the same fixture considering the higher efficiency. I'm not 100% sure it work like that but I can't understand why it shouldn't. Using LEDs those cooling fins get hot but then again a regular lightbulb get very hot to.

You can get CFLs usable with dimmers to. I think what people should take home with them is that you should buy the CFL which fit your needs, not just any CFL. If it's going to be on for long sure buying any may be ok. If it's going to go on and off often buy one for that, if it need to be dimmable buy one for that and if it will be sitting outside like here and may have a -20 degree C around it buy one designed for that.

===
The cfls that our Loews, Home Depot, Ronat, and Costco sell are the 6 for $10.00. These are ok if you turn them on and leave them on.

We get 20F or colder in Montreal. At that temperature most cfls will not light. If they do, the glow is very faint until the bulb warms up. At 0F, CFLs are useless.

LED lights work just fine. I got some LED strips from IKEA, The strips are great for under the kitchen counter operation. I leave them on 24/7 (under 5 watts total). Now I can find my way to the fridge all the time

Re:Cooling is the issue

[aliquis]

Yeah. I wanted to add that thing with delay to my post to. But I had thought doing it to someone else.

That's one huge advantage of using LED in the shitter compared to regular CFLs. They light up "instantly."

But there's CFLs which light up faster than others to.

Your temperatures are annoying but it seems 0F is around -7 (C) and -20 was around -18 (C.)

The Intelligent longlife above work down to -20 C but it have to have a cover and not just sit in a socket (to heat itself obviously.) And it could withstand 500,000 on-off cycles.
http://www.lysman.com/sv/stavformade-lagenergilampor-OSRAM/dulux-intelligent-longlife.-stav-osram-dulux-intelligent-longlife-11w-e27-cool-white-840.php

Their Intelligent facility instead can withstand an "unlimited" amount of on-off cycles and will still survive for 20,000 hours.
http://www.lysman.com/sv/stavformade-lagenergilampor-OSRAM/osram-dulux-intelligent-facility-stav-osram-dulux-intelligent-facility-dint-fcy-14w840-e27.php

There's also this Megaman Liliput plus Booster Inside which can light up down to -30 C (-22 F) and got a booster which let it light up quicker:
http://www.lysman.com/sv/twist-liliput-MEGAMAN/stav-liliput-plus-booster-inside-e27.-mu111b-mu115b.-lagenergilampor-mu111b.-stav-liliput-plus-booster-inside-11w-e27.php

And here's another Megaman Liliput which instead of being made for dimmers got a dimmer in itself, so by switching your switch multiple times you can scale the light output on a four step scale:
http://www.lysman.com/sv/stavformade-lagenergilampor-MEGAMAN/stav-4-stegs-dimring-stav-dimbar-liliput-4-steg-e27-20w.-lagenergilampa.php

These aren't 6 for $10 but they got a different functionality.

Regarding the last thing you mention LIDL here in Sweden sold two IR-enabled LED strips this week which you could run on batteries or with the adapter, they was 99 SEK for two (about $15) and I thought somewhat about having them over my entry door on the inside because I normally leave the light on in the hallway to see the floor once I get inside (I guess if I had a celing lamp I wouldn't have to .. I don't. I've got one on the wall.)

Earlier I thought about building LED-strips on my own for my mother and her guy so when they woke up at night it would be easier to find the way to the toilet but I guess now there's no need to make things such like that oneself but these IR-strips would be pretty sweet for that. Or as you do under the kitchen sink, wardrobe, storage room or whatever.

Never thought about the later, down in the cellar there's no light in the rooms, maybe I should put one there?

Re:Cooling is the issue

[fotoguzzi]

If this is aimed at me, I was just trying to (over)simplify why an incandescent filament in a vacuum worked so well for a century or so and why it has been so much trouble to make leds work as well in standard fixtures. As to stupid and need, someone felt the need to reply, so I'm sorry to feed his desperation.

these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[rubycodez]

these are suitable for directional applications only, not a replacement for the common light bulb. just like every other LED light to date, just not quite right

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[Jaime2]

It won't be long before companies figure out how to get them to work. The Phillips L-Prize bulb uses the LED as a source of photons to excite a phosphorescent material. The actual light that the bulb emits comes from the outer surface of the bulb, so directionality of the LED is irrelevant, as long as they can excite enough of the phosphor.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[aaarrrgggh]

The hell are you smoking?! A highly directional source is much more desirable to an "A" (as in arbitrary) lamp. Optics for a good point source are much easier to design than a linear source.

At 200 lumens/Watt (assume 160 as a system), this is huge. It makes a whole lot of retrofit applications viable.

Wonder what year OLEDs will hit this level.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

At 200 lumens/Watt (assume 160 as a system), this is huge. It makes a whole lot of retrofit applications viable.

The current market leader, the Cree XM-L does 160 lumens per watt. So this is a 25% increase.

At 160 lumens/watt the XM-L is already way more efficient than fluorescent, HID, halogen incandescents, etc. Yet the industry still hasn't gone ahead to retrofit/adapt this to existing applications. I don't think this newer Cree MK-R is going to change the rate of adoption that much - the only industry that jumps on LED advancements is the torch industry.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

Note: this Cree MK-R isn't super suitable for torches - it's a multi-chip design that supersedes the MC-E and runs around 11 to 12 volts.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[Anonymous Coward]

All white LEDs are blue LEDs with a yellow phosphor. RGB doesn't emit a good spectrum for general illumination.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[killkillkill]

this Cree MK-R isn't super suitable for torches

Certainly not suitable. It produces less heat than other LEDs, which are themselves not even suitable. For my torches i tend to stick to propane, MAPP, and acetylene.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[dfghjk]

Not all white LEDs. Some have fairly broad spectrums.

There's a measure for that, though, and it's called CRI. A perfect CRI is defined as 100, and you'd think that incandescent would have a 100 CRI but it often doesn't. Great CRI is anything >=95 and halogens often achieves that, but general purpose incandescent lamps are usually less, sometimes horrifyingly less. LED is commonly worse than 95, but almost always better than CFL. For critical viewing LED isn't always the best choice unless it's made for the purpose, but that's true for any bulb. LED as a class looks better than FL and metal halide.

Here's a link to some LED bulbs with CRIs over 90: http://store.earthled.com/collections/high-cri-led-lighting-90-cri-led-lighting

If you want that looks good, LED is not problematic like CFL.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[killkillkill]

Don't know if your uncertainty is an attempt to be a smug asshat, or if you genuinely can not identify a weak attempt at humor.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[aaarrrgggh]

Cree lists the XM-L at 100 lumens/watt.

The retrofit kits for fluorescent troffers are getting better, they just need to add better control options to make retrofit a logic solution for people who pass operating expenses on and only care about capital expenses.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[Khyber]

"I don't think this newer Cree MK-R is going to change the rate of adoption that much - the only industry that jumps on LED advancements is the torch industry."

Oh how wrong you are. Horticulture is HUGE on LEDs right now, and with this sort of efficiency, game over high-pressure lamps.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

You are correct, but on the spec sheet you'll find the highest bin XM-L is 160 lumens at 350 mA. The efficiency drops from there such that at 3 Amps (max output) it can only sustain just over 100 lumens per watt. Same with the new MK-R - you'll see it says "Up to 1769 lm @ 15 W, 85C" which equals 118 lumens per watt at max output. I think they like talking them up.

I hope retrofits get better soon - LEDs are a pretty big boon for the world - the amount of waste and electricity they save will be pretty big.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

An example of a small industry that is using LEDs doesn't make me wrong (unfortunately I might add - I wish I was wrong).

LEDs are also being adopted for fish tank lighting. But torches, horticultural lighting, and fish tank lighting combined don't even begin to compare what I was referring too - which is household and business lighting.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

Haha - funny, a bit of a dad joke (the sort I do all the time).

As others have pointed out torch = flashlight (especially for UK and Australia), so we may not get the joke straight away.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[Khyber]

"An example of a small industry that is using LEDs"

The very industry that keeps you fed, SMALL?

With some of the tech I've developed, I could give the entire USA Agricultural industry to China and throw this country into a severe depression as farmers here in the USA can no longer compete.

Don't think your food supply as 'small industry.' That's a very foolish thing to assume.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

I don't think the food supply industry is small (and really I never wrote it was). My relatives are farmers in Australia - arguably the most efficient dry land farming community in the world - and it's one of our largest industries - I've seen first hand how big the food sector is.

I think the artificially lighted food growing industry is small. In fact it is tiny compared to the sun grown food industry. This was the small industry I was referring to (the LED artificially lighted food growing industry).

As above, compare this plus all the other industries that use LEDs to the household and business lighting sector and you'll find that they are minuscule in comparison.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[Khyber]

"I think the artificially lighted food growing industry is small."

Key word, think, not know.

As land space required to produce more crops increases, and the advent of vertical-tiered farming comes in, sunlight's going away. LED is also more efficient in terms of quantum yield, with sunlight getting at best 7-9% and LED getting 15+%. Those tests have been done, and the environmental impact (with fully-closed systems) is so negligible as to be laughable when you can use 1/8 of an acre to produce 2 acres of crop with nigh-nil pollution/runoff contamination/etc., and be able to do it even given the huge conversion losses in using solar panels and a battery bank to power the whole building.

And roughly 1/3 of Australia is banging on my door for my LED tech, plus Morocco, the UK, China, Japan, and the USA. That doesn't include people after my zero-light systems for meat farming, and the health food market (super-grasses, herbs, plants that typically cannot grow without light, like lettuce, etc.)

Whomever can pay enough for my full-blown tech (which happens to include bypassing traditional photon-driven growth and going to direct-feed to the plant via terahertz-range inductive currents through the hydroponic solution) will get close enough to owning world food production (assuming they have the land area.)

We're almost to the point where light is useless anyways, when we can give the energy directly to the plant. See, what would kill us off (like polyploid genetics) tends to make hardier plants. They tolerate direct electrical stimulation very well (so do mushrooms, and they grow almost exponentially faster. Thanks for that discovery, Japan!)

Sun-grown food is so inefficient that it's becoming passe, and every major country on the planet is realizing it.

And whomever pays me enough will own this world by controlling its food.

Hint: I'm never going to give it to the USA and will renounce my citizenship and move before they ever get a chance to figure it out or steal it.

So if you stay in the USA, you're on the losing team. Just a heads-up.

Re:these are not the bulbs you are looking for

[harlequinn]

Key word, think, not know.

And roughly 1/3 of Australia is banging on my door for my LED tech, plus Morocco, the UK, China, Japan, and the USA.

Sun-grown food is so inefficient that it's becoming passe, and every major country on the planet is realizing it.

And whomever pays me enough will own this world by controlling its food.

Hint: I'm never going to give it to the USA and will renounce my citizenship and move before they ever get a chance to figure it out or steal it.

So if you stay in the USA, you're on the losing team. Just a heads-up.

Think means the thought process going through my head. So whatever I think is what I know.

I don't believe 1/3 of Australian farmers are interested or intend to switch to artificially grown food any time soon. Go look at http://abs.gov.au/ for statistics on Australia - if you can show me some statistics or numbers from there or somewhere else showing that sort of demand then I'll believe it.

I'm sure there are lots of people interested in whatever lighting tech you have and I hope you succeed.

Re:420

[Osgeld]

eh phosphorus does not emit the same radiation as a hps or metal halide... its not about color its about spectrum

Re:Just hurry up!

[PNutts]

Wrong installation? I've stayed away from the dirt cheap bulbs and haven't had an issue with LED lights yet.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[kidphoton]

What's inefficient? My house needs both light and heat. 100% efficiency as far as I'm concerned.

Candlepower Forums...

[Anonymous Coward]

...seems to have the expert analysis. Some people are into flashlights so much and the LEDs that may be used in them, it's crazy what details they keep tabs on.

Post on the Cree MK-R LED at Candlepower Forums.

Re:Candlepower Forums...

[Charliemopps]

Wow... a forum about lightbulbs. The true power of the internet is it lets people with similar interests, even if their interests are totally insane, get together. It never ceases to amaze me.

Re:Candlepower Forums...

[mrchaotica]

Obligatory XKCD.

Re:light and color quality

[Osgeld]

its pretty common, if not standard issue now to put a patch of phosphorous over a UV led to generate the final visible light in these high powered LED's. so its very similar to what you can expect out of a CFL (course these things measure in cm)

you do get advantages though, the starting UV is generated by a crystal and not an electric arch in a vacuum so its more "rich" and if its not half assed you dont get flicker

Re:420

[bmo]

Color *is* spectrum.

HTH.

--
BMO

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

"100% efficiency as far as I'm concerned"...the other option is a lower wattage/same brightness light bulb that is still 100% efficient and using a lot less electricity to operate a heat pump that is 350% efficient. 350% is better than 100%.

jaffa...

[Anonymous Coward]

jaffa cree!

Re:I am sick and tired...

[pla]

I am sick and tired... of the government banning perfectly good items

Then consider yourself in luck! Because, y'know, TFA has nothing to do with anyone banning anything. Don't let me interrupt a good rant, though - Carry on, good sir, you rage against that machine!

Some of us would rather spend our money on more fun things than literally "keeping the lights on". Do whatever you want with your money.

Re:420

[Osgeld]

yea but a LED putting out damn near perfect X kelvin isnt going to give you the same effect as a wideband ball of fire in gas

Re:I am sick and tired...

[epyT-R]

How about letting people use the energy and resources they buy as they choose, instead of punishing them for it?

Re:Just hurry up!

[aliquis]

Obvious issues are quality of the light.

(Nothing of the following is about quality though:)

I have a very bright and 300+ lights christmas uhm.. "thread of lights" but I also use one of those older with small regular bulbs and those burn at a much much much yellower color so they look very miss-matching (the LED one is more "snow-white."

Also at the beginning the 3000k led spotlights I bought was rather disturbing because I wasn't very comfortable with the light color then but now I've got adjusted to it and don't think about it on day to day basis.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[aliquis]

But they will be less efficient than heat-pumps even if you use electricity for heating and in my case I live in an appartment in Sweden and as such I've got long-distance heating which is very efficient and like in VÃsterÃ¥s they are builing one huge one which will run on garbage (of which half(?) will even have to be imported.)

Though. Came to think about it one can produce electricity like that to. And they do. That's kinda what they actually do. They produce electricity and the steam is cold down using "a series of tubes" running to peoples homes :)

Energy efficiency

[girlintraining]

For comparative purposes, an incandescent bulb puts out about 52 lumens per watt. This LED is therefore about four times more efficient at converting electricity into light than the traditional lightbulb. That said, one of the big problems with LED lighting is that the light tends towards the blue end of the spectrum, whereas incandescents tend towards the red. Studies have shown that it is blue light that suppresses melatonin production, which in turn upsets the sleep/wake cycle. Similar problems have been found with LCD monitors compared to CRT monitors.

We may be improving energy efficiency, but we're actually creating health hazards in doing so -- because people assume all light is equal. It isn't.

Re:Energy efficiency

[Mike_EE_U_of_I]

For comparative purposes, an incandescent bulb puts out about 52 lumens per watt.

That's the theoretical maximum, that no bulb actually gets near. For example, a typical 60 watt bulb will give you 15 lumens per watt.

http://www.efi.org/factoids/lumens.html

Re:Energy efficiency

[timeOday]

an incandescent bulb puts out about 52 lumens per watt.

If only! "An upper limit for incandescent lamp luminous efficacy (LER) is around 52 lumens per watt, the theoretical value emitted by tungsten at its melting point" (wikipedia). In fact a 40W tungsten bulb outputs 12.6 lumens/watt, up to 17.5 for a 100W bulb. Incandescent bulbs aren't even in the ballpark anymore.

As to whether some people assume all light is equal, I suppose some do. But others take it very seriously. It is not an overlooked issue.

Re:Energy efficiency

[WaffleMonster]

The studies I've read that involve what you are referring to only applied to blue lights being on when a person is sleeping.

Just because you think white leds look white does not mean they don't have a nasty blue spike in their output spectrum. What you can't see can still hurt you.

Re:Energy efficiency

[Osgeld]

you can take the exact same die, slap a different phosphorous on it and make it orange, red, green whatever

and just FYI CRT monitors use the exact same theory, there is no light bulb, its a electron beam exciting a patch of phosphorus. CRTs can produce the exact same color temperatures as any other monitor

so please, continue with your ignorant health FUD

Re:Energy efficiency

[Jeremi]

We may be improving energy efficiency, but we're actually creating health hazards in doing so -- because people assume all light is equal. It isn't.

On the plus side, a 12-pack of Jolt cola is no longer necessary for your all-night coding sessions. Good riddance too, that stuff was insipid.

Re:Energy efficiency

[girlintraining]

"An upper limit for incandescent lamp luminous efficacy (LER) is around 52 lumens per watt...

Do you have a problem with comparing the optimal case for incandescent lamps with the average case for this new technology -- and noting that it is multiples more efficient? Clearly, the point is adequately represented here... nobody would argue that I chose the worst case scenario to justify them... here we have the optimal and it still doesn't come close. I'm just not sure what you're trying to say by restating the obvious...

It is not an overlooked issue.

Then why, when the federal government mandated we kick incandescent bulbs out the door, that we also update the requirements for the replacements -- namely that they have a similar spectral profile, or that they are red-shifted so as to reduce this well-known and documented effect? Perhaps you haven't overlooked it, but a great many people have -- most people are unaware of these problems outside of the medical and peripheral fields and even then, often are not aware simply because it hasn't been part of their clinical experience.

Visibility (pardon the pun) is quite low on this problem.

Re:Energy efficiency

[imsabbel]

Sorry, but that is NOT an "maximum for the existing technology". The value you give is like saying "lightspeed is the maximum speed for a Space Shuttle".

Re:Energy efficiency

[Twinbee]

White is white, and so a 6500k (or thereabouts) colour temperature is desired for the LCD backlight (being close to the colour of the sun). If you have a problem with the screen displaying a screen which is too bluish, then how hard is it adjust the colour settings on your PC? You can adjust it to bluish for daytime, and yellowish for nighttime. In fact, there's an app to do just that: http://stereopsis.com/flux

Re:Energy efficiency

[ChrisMaple]

LEDs of all types (lasers excluded) have no "spike". Typical half-power bandwidth is 20 nm. It's not smooth enough for color comparisons of paint or makeup, but it's nowhere near the monochromatic implied by "spike".

Re:Energy efficiency

[WaffleMonster]

LEDs of all types (lasers excluded) have no "spike". Typical half-power bandwidth is 20 nm. It's not smooth enough for color comparisons of paint or makeup, but it's nowhere near the monochromatic implied by "spike".

Since we're talking about cree lights check out their data sheets on their own LED lighting products. The graph on pg5 looks like a spike to me.

http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/Cree/LED%20Components%20and%20Modules/XLamp/Data%20and%20Binning/XLamp7090XRE.pdf

Re:Energy efficiency

[bill_mcgonigle]

the light tends towards the blue end of the spectrum

Last year I made a connection between an engineer at [popular LED company] and a Japanese researcher who has a direct-to-white (non-UV/phosphor) LED technology. Hopefully this means in a few years I can buy more efficient bulbs for less money.

Re:light and color quality

[girlintraining]

its pretty common, if not standard issue now to put a patch of phosphorous over a UV led to generate the final visible light in these high powered LED's. so its very similar to what you can expect out of a CFL (course these things measure in cm)

And we can of course trust that the manufacturing quality is 100% on these -- that the UV light isn't leaking out. There are health problems with certain wavelengths. However, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about...

Theoretical Maimum

[MyLongNickName]

Is there a theoretical maximum lumens / watt ratio? My 30 second search on Google does't show any relationship between the two terms, but I have to imagine there is some type of maximum...

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[MyLongNickName]

A 90 second search revealed the following "A common choice is to choose units such that the maximum possible efficacy, 683 lm/W, corresponds to an efficiency of 100%"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[queazocotal]

It's way, way, way more complex than this.

683lm/W is the maximum luminous efficacy for light, yes, but that's green light.

To reproduce in full the solar spectrum so that it is indistinguishable from white light requires you to produce a 'white' that produces light from about 400-700nm (UV to IR borders).
If you take into account flourescence and its effect on colour, perhaps 350nm is the top end.
This would take perhaps 180lm/W.

As you move from near-solar (or tungsten) identical bulbs to more limited 'whites' - you get about 250-400lm/W being the maximum.
This varies from pretty good white that you won't notice being different from actual white to something rather more limited, with just blue at 430nm or so, and greenish yellow at 560nm.
This will to a cursory glance look right, but will have truly wretched colour reproduction.

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[AmiMoJo]

I was happy when CCFLs first appeared and were mostly "daylight" colour, but for some reason everyone else seems to prefer a sickly yellow colour and most bulbs have moved to that now. There is a happy medium, but most people seem to want the dull yellow glow of a filament instead of something that helps them see well.

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[marcosdumay]

Yep, I for one don't like to have "daylight" around at night. I like "firelight" way more. I have enough trouble to sleep alreay, there is no need to pretend that it's noon at 2 AM.

Have you ever looked to the window in an office and discovered that it's night already? That's not a good thing.

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[green1]

Depends on the use. In my kitchen I want white light, as bright as possible, so I can see where I'm putting sharp objects in relation to my hands and the food I'm preparing, bathrooms too. In my living room and in my theatre area I like the "warmer" yellow colour in dimmable bulbs as an ambiance thing. of course I say dimmable, because I want to be able to turn them up bright some times so I can see what I'm doing too. (Too bad neither CFL, nor LED bulbs are dimmable (regardless of what they say on the package, or what the dimmer switch says on it's package)

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[Guspaz]

Cree publishes the wavelength distribution for the different colour temps of MK-R:

http://www.cree.com/led-components-and-modules/products/xlamp/arrays-directional/~/media/Files/Cree/LED%20Components%20and%20Modules/XLamp/Data%20and%20Binning/XLampMKR.pdf

They don't look terribly useful for anything like image projection, but they'd be fine for a flashlight.

Of note is that they only hit 200 lumens per watt at 1W. If you crank it up to 15 W, they'll do 1769 lumens, which is only 118 lumens per watt. That's still an improvement over their previous best, the XM-L, which did 1040 lumens at 10 W, but it still means that if you want to maintain that 200 lumens per watt, you're going to need a bunch of LEDs to hit higher brightnesses.

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[queazocotal]

Indeed. I wish I had the energy to compute the integral of the total power under that curve, and work out an actual radiometric efficiency.
(how many watts of light out vs watts in).

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[stonecypher]

A common choice is to choose units such that the maximum possible efficacy, 683 lm/W

It's way, way, way more complex than this ... but that's green light ... near-solar (or tungsten) identical bulbs to more limited 'whites' ... truly wretched colour reproduction.

You seem confused by the phrase "maximum possible."

Re:Theoretical Maimum

[queazocotal]

The average human being has less than two legs.

While true, this is misleading to the casual reader.

(assuming for the moment they don't know that humans have two legs)

Comparing white light as mentioned in the initial post, to green is somewhat misleading.

you seem to misunderstand colour temperature

[Chirs]

When someone talks about "X Kelvin" as a colour temperature, they mean the spectrum emitted by a black-body at that temperature, which by definition is full-spectrum.

To a first approximation the sun emits radiation at 5800K.

Re:you seem to misunderstand colour temperature

[MarkRose]

Growing up at 54Â N, the "daylight" colour temperature setting on monitors never made sense to me. The closest to daylight was 9300K. It never made sense until I spent a week in LA one January and saw that the sunlight really was 5800K orange when you are that far south.

Re:you seem to misunderstand colour temperature

[MakyoDetector]

No, they don't. When somebody talks about X Kelvin in the context of lighting they usually mean CCT: a spectrum that has a similar hue as a black body at that temperature. Its color rendering could still suck.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[kidphoton]

OK. Let me know when you want to install that heat pump, and I'll start bitching about the inefficiency of light bulbs. Until then, they are just as efficient as the electric furnace I can't afford to replace.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[erice]

What's inefficient? My house needs both light and heat. 100% efficiency as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, but for *heat*, 100% efficiency from an electrical source is not the end. Any heat not supplied by lighting can be made up for with a heat pump ( > 100% efficiency) or direct heating from fossil fuel ( saves the losses in converting heat to mechanical energy and then to electrical energy). Waste heat from industrial uses can sometimes be used to. It's not hot enough for effective power generation but it is enough to heat a house.

what?

[ArchieBunker]

There is nothing to figure out. Its a problem of physics. LEDs produce heat that must be dissipated somehow. Its no good if your replacement bulb has a huge heatsink attached to it. It also brings up the problem of lights in enclosed spaces, something incandescents have no issue with.

Re:what?

[ArchieBunker]

Bullshit. I bought a 20 watt white led array and it needs a heatsink suitable for an i7 core cpu. Anything smaller and it would be too hot to touch.

Re:what?

[blackraven14250]

Considering that the entire surface of an incandescent, and most of the surface of a CFL, is the area where it dissipates heat, and that both incandescents and CFLs are ALREADY too hot to touch, it's a serious improvement.

Re:what?

[willy_me]

LEDs produce very little heat compared to alternatives. Something like 1/10 what a CFL uses and even less compared to an incandescent.

LEDs that produce the same amount of light as a CFL are typically less efficient then the CFL. So for a 1W light, LEDs are looking good. Try to make a 100W (incandescent equivalent) light source and the CFL will be better. If this were not the case then LEDs would have already replaced CFLs. The 10x difference you claim is completely unreasonable.

But the picture is changing. The efficiency of CFLs has peaked where the efficiency of LEDs is still improving. LEDs are starting to reach the efficiency of CFLs - we are now at the point where we will start to see things change. In 5 years time LED lighting could be where CFL lighting is now. But even so, I doubt LEDs will ever be significantly more efficient then CFLs. Their main advantages are the lack of mercury, increased durability, instant startup, smaller size, and the potential of being produced at a lower cost.

Re:what?

[dfghjk]

"LEDs that produce the same amount of light as a CFL are typically less efficient then the CFL. So for a 1W light, LEDs are looking good. Try to make a 100W (incandescent equivalent) light source and the CFL will be better. If this were not the case then LEDs would have already replaced CFLs. The 10x difference you claim is completely unreasonable."

Not true, and the reason LED hasn't already replaced CFL has nothing to do with this efficiency curve you don't understand.

It is easy to scale a CFL, or incandescent, bulb. You just make it bigger. That is not so for LED. LED is also not inherently omnidirectional. These differences lead to different cost structures having nothing to with lumens/watt. Of course, this argument matters only to those who don't care what the light looks like. For those that do, CFL isn't part of the discussion anyway.

100W equivalent LED is doable at high efficiency, there are simply other factors to its marketability.

Re:what?

[Khyber]

What shitty efficiencies are you getting from those LEDs? Ten percent? I've got a 100w array in a 30mm x 30mm package, cooled by a stock Intel 775 heatsink and delta fan.

Crappy or Cree, that is the question for importers

[D4C5CE]

flashlights ... and the LEDs that may be used in them, it's crazy what details they keep tabs on

They have to, since these things are typically ordered from overseas, with prohibitive return postage fees, and many times some manufacturer or vendor will try to become the cheapest by changing to LEDs of a crappy (i.e. fake) rather than Cree variety. When the item arrives, one usually has just a few days to ascertain whether it is genuine or if a refund needs to be requested from the payment service.

Re:420

[timeOday]

No, but outputting a mixture of just 4 pure wavelengths works well in initial studies.

luminous efficacy

[terec]

Wikipedia has a list of luminous efficacies:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficacy

200 lm/W seems pretty good; the theoretical limit is around 300 lm/W for LEDs, and that's about 44% overall efficiency.

Re:luminous efficacy

[ChrisMaple]

That's for white LEDs. According to ahref=http://www.rp-photonics.com/light_emitting_diodes.htmlrel=url2html-24510http://www.rp-photonics.com/light_emitting_diodes.html> quantum (i.e. power) efficiencies should be able to get close to 100%. Currently, quantum efficiencies in the range of 70% to 90% have been achieved. Alas, high efficiency and high power density don't go together, and the high efficiencies are at the ends of the visible spectrum (red for one, blue and violet for the other). Where high efficiency would produce the highest efficacy, in the greens, we cannot currently get very high quantum efficiency.

Re:luminous efficacy

[terec]

Yes, we're talking about white LEDs and lighting applications. And who cares about "internal quantum efficiency"? That has little to do with how efficient the thing actually generates light.

Re:light and color quality

[Anonymous Coward]

And we can of course trust that the manufacturing quality is 100% on these -- that the UV light isn't leaking out. There are health problems with certain wavelengths. However, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about...

Oh, spare us your scaremongering. This is exactly how fluorescent tubes work.

Re:Slashvertisment

[Anonymous Coward]

While it indeed is a commercial product, it's also a new industry milestone.

Poor Spectrum

[Anonymous Coward]

While I *do* love to hear stories like this, and I believe that LED lighting, in some form, is the future, it dissappoints me to see that so-called "white" LEDs still produce quite poor spectra. Check out the spectrum on page 4 of the datasheet given on the MK-R series page. Compare this to the sun's spectrum. Because these are phosphor-based LEDs, you get a relatively narrow blue-violet peak (the true colour of the LED), followed by a wider hump, peaking at about yellow (the broad emission spectrum of the phosphor coating, which is down-converting those blue photons). While this looks "pure white" when you look directly at the beam, it renders colours very poorly (i.e. the reflected light from objects looks the wrong colour). This is what causes LEDs and fluorescent lights to often make a room appear sickly and food look unappetizing. Ideally, we should strive for a light which closely emulates the sun's spectrum, but this is obviously challenging.

Fortunately, there are a few next-gen LED technologies on the horizon. Quantum dot-based LEDs seem promising. By making dots of a specific size, you can precisely tune the output wavelength of a QD LED. Presumably you can combine a whole bunch of QD LEDs, each tuned to a different wavelength, to approximate the sun's spectrum. Alternatively, certain types of organic LEDs offer the ability to tune the wavelength, and similarly, produce a composite device which has a more ideal spectrum.

Still, until these materialise, plain 'ol incandescents are the only cheap light sources which produce a nice, continuous blackbody spectrum. Sigh.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dr2chase]

In reply to a previous Slashdot article on LEDs, this minor effort: http://dr2chase.wordpress.com/2011/02/26/led-color-rendering/
The summary is, if you take decent LEDs (CREE or Luxeon) and mix the color temperatures (warm/neutral/cool) it's not bad. Your eyes adapt; the camera is much less forgiving.

And decent LED kicks the crap out of fluorescent.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure how combining the warm, neutral and cool LEDs would accomplish much. If you look at the relative spectral power distribution plot in the Cree datasheet, you'll see that all three bulb types pretty much overlap in their spectra. They just have different relative powers in the blue and yellow peaks. Warm, neutral, and cool spectra all have that large gap centered at 480 nm, and they all have little power towards the red end. Therefore, combining the three bulb types would not "fill in" any missing part of the spectrum, just change the yellow/blue balance.

Also, I don't see how that demonstration proves anything. What you see on your monitor is vastly different from what your eyes would percieve if you were standing at the scene. And while you're right that the eye can adapt somewhat, that's only true to a certain extent. There's no way you can adapt to that gap at 480 nm, for instance. If an object is reflective at that colour, and it is illuminated with a phosphor LED, then that object will appear darker than it should, no matter what. Your eye can't compensate for such spectral "notches".

Re:Poor Spectrum

[fnj]

You can get good fluorescent. Ordinary cheap fluorescent uses crap phosphor and has very poor CRI (60-70) and sickening tint, but good fluorescent uses much better phosphors to yield damn good full spectrum light at 90+ CRI, albeit at a somewhat lower efficiency and higher cost.

So no, any good LED DOES NOT "kick the crap" out of GOOD fluorescent if we are talking about light quality.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dfghjk]

"Also, I don't see how that demonstration proves anything."

And I don't see how your interpretation of a datasheet proves anything either. There is an objective measurement of a light's ability to render colors and that information is also available from Cree. There are variations of the MK-R with CRIs of at least 90. If you don't know what 90 means, look it up.

Virtually all light sources have lumpy spectra.

"Still, until these materialise, plain 'ol incandescents are the only cheap light sources which produce a nice, continuous blackbody spectrum. Sigh."

Many incandescents have CRIs in the 60s. including many typical household bulbs. Incandescent does not mean they don't suck. Meanwhile there are many LEDs with CRIs over 90. That's good enough for a lot of photographic work.

You would be best served by not looking at spectral graphs but instead looking at direct measurements of what you are concerned about.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dfghjk]

But typical LED kicks the crap out of typical fluorescent, and most fluorescent is not good fluorescent. ...and even if you have a good fluorescent it's still a fluorescent. It's got the same environmental concerns, the same balast, the same problems with dimmers, the same size constraints...so yeah, every once in a while CFL makers fix their horrible light quality. That doesn't change the typical bulb. LED kicks the crap out of fluorescent and will replace it entirely soon enough.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dr2chase]

Thank you for that, and I think I need to retract my remark somewhat. I may be buying some of those, because screw-in LED is picky about being in some ceiling fixtures (because LEDs really don't like to be hot). It's damn annoying that the market for lights is so heavily skewed towards "cheap".

Re:Poor Spectrum

[russotto]

Many incandescents have CRIs in the 60s. including many typical household bulbs.

All typical household bulbs, except the stupid neodymium ones (e.g. GE Reveal), have CRIs of 100. A few HIRs have CRIs in the high 90s.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dr2chase]

I think you're being misled by the height of the spike at the blue end, versus the (lack of) width. And if you had a powerful need to fill that gap around 480nm, they make LEDs around that color, called "blue" (470nm center) and "cyan" (505nm), so you could mix 5 (cool, neutral, warm, blue, cyan) and get pretty good coverage. In particular, Luxeon Rebel, Blue, bin codes 4 and 5 -- 475-480 and 480-485. This is really, truly, not an insurmountable problem, if you really want quality.

Fluorescent bulbs, even high-quality ones (see below) have the problem that their basic light is not just "around" particular frequencies, it *IS* a small set of particular frequencies. You can see this with a diffraction grating: http://dr2chase.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/spectrum-led-vs-fluorescent/ Interestingly, you can see the 480nm dropout in the LED spectrum (narrower part of the smear) and you can get a feel for what color that is -- truly, blue-cyan.

I am a little curious whether it would be possible to make a two-part "white" LED for diffuse light; have a separate glass with phosphors on it, and illuminate that with royal blue.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[Khyber]

"I am a little curious whether it would be possible to make a two-part "white" LED for diffuse light; have a separate glass with phosphors on it, and illuminate that with royal blue."

That's how it's been done for years, directly on the substrate instead of with a separate component.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[ChrisMaple]

I looked at your citation. They do indeed all have a bad dip around 480 nm. There is a significant difference (50 nm) between the yellow peaks of the "warm" and "cool" devices, enough than using those two at the same time significantly improves the spectrum flatness. The GP post photos illustrate the improvement quite well.

Re:Poor Spectrum

[dr2chase]

I know it's done that way now, I was wondering if there are any advantage from the POV of delivering a diffuse light, moderating the blue peak, choice of phosphors, or improved cooling. I'd be surprised if being on the substrate didn't bring some constraints with it. This would be useless for the handy-flashlight market, but that's a tiny market compared to lighting in general, and once LEDs take over we might change how things are done.

Re:light and color quality

[rubycodez]

Do some research, there is high correlation between flourescent light exposure and many diseases by credible scientists

Re:I am sick and tired...

[timeOday]

The basic problem is there is no consensus on how to price the destruction of non-renewable resources, nor generalized damage to the environment. I would not expect a tidy solution to that issue, ever.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[jones_supa]

And where did that "/hour" come from? The power that flows through a 5 watt lamp is 5 watt even if you run it for an hour or a microsecond.

Power output level

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read the datasheet, you'll see that the CREE MK-R is rated for a maximum of 15W, but the measurement of 200 Lumen/W is done at 1W output. It is known that LED's efficacy drops off quickly as the output power increases.

In the past, CREE have released similar news, claiming certain lumen per watt LED is available, all of them are measured at 1W output, but none of them have a power rating as high as 15W. I think comparing the efficacy of these chips @ 1W while they have completely different power rating is actually kind of misleading.

How bout the stock price

[Anonymous Coward]

Couple years ago I invested in Cree cuz of their LED lights, lost about 15% in a couple months before I could get out. Now they're at about 1/3 of what they were when I got out.

Re:How bout the stock price

[ChrisMaple]

Looks like you bought in near the stock's peak. Cree has been doing OK for a decade. However, their profit margin is very small and growth is moderate, so I'd guess that the stock is overvalued based on its fundamentals.

Re:light and color quality

[dr2chase]

You could go look at the data sheet, and see that these LEDs don't emit any wavelengths shorter than about 410nm, and the primary color appears to be "royal blue" (445nm).

No need to be "concerned".

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Kohath]

Do whatever you want with your money.

I think he wishes he had the choice to do that. But he doesn't, because that choice was taken from him by government do-gooders and the Federal electron police.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[WaffleMonster]

What's inefficient? My house needs both light and heat. 100% efficiency as far as I'm concerned

Gas heat is at least 300% cheaper than electricty.

Re:420

[WaffleMonster]

Color *is* spectrum.

What your eyes think they see and what "spectrum" is actually emitted are separate items.

Re:light and color quality

[Osgeld]

I work with LED lighting every single day, and in one instance we had an issue where a soft dome got knocked off, the spectrum is actually so near blue it looks blue, its probably safer than a blacklight you used for your posters in college

Re:I am sick and tired...

[kidphoton]

So if I install a gas furnace and start hauling tanks in every month (I'm out in the sticks), someone will pay me twice what I'm paying now for heating? Cool. Sign me up.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Mashiki]

Gas heat is at least 300% cheaper than electricty.

Unless you're already using the lighting for a particular purpose. Than that "waste heat" is already going towards the heating, which is the parents point, and mine. In Canada this is the case as well. CFL's are nice and all, but regular incandescents help with general heating costs here in the winter when you're already in a room doing something.

comparison

[slashmydots]

Those mega bright HID headlights usually come in around 3000 lumens at 35 watts. So an LED that bright is pretty insane.

Re:comparison

[Sique]

To continue the comparision: The theoretical maximum you could get out of a light source is about 251 Lumen/Watt for a source of white light at 5800 K. So this new type of LED is near 80% efficiency.

Re:Just hurry up!

[mrchaotica]

They're making "warm white" LED Christmas lights now... but I like my "cool white" ones better anyway because my icicle lights look more like icicles that way.

Re:420

[mrchaotica]

Sandia National Laboratory did a study on growing marijuana using LEDs?!

Re:light and color quality

[Jeremi]

And we can of course trust that the manufacturing quality is 100% on these -- that the UV light isn't leaking out. There are health problems with certain wavelengths. However, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about...

People are so delicate, it's a wonder the human race has survived this long. I hope you don't ever go outside during the day, sunlight is full of nasty UV wavelengths.

Re:light and color quality

[TooMuchToDo]

The NIH says you're wrong: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=fluorescent%20light

Care to provide any proof?

Re:I am sick and tired...

[WaffleMonster]

Unless you're already using the lighting for a particular purpose.

Irrelevant.

Than that "waste heat" is already going towards the heating, which is the parents point, and mine

Natural gas is cheaper per BTU generated than electricty.

If you use electricity effeciently and use gas for heat you save the most money on your energy bill.

Waste heat from ineffecient electricty usage costs you MORE than cheaper heat from gas.

Not everyone has access to gas. Where you do trying to make silly assertions the waste heat is not being wasted because it is being used to help heat your home will still result in a higher energy bill than necessary.

Indeed

[MyFirstNameIsPaul]

If they had produced an LED that put out more light and more heat for the same energy, that would REALLY be something.

Whar my Cree LED Bulbs?

[BenJeremy]

Seriously, though.... I have not seen Crees used in household-type LED Bulbs. I would love to see these, if they can sell them for less than $10 and make them dimmable, too.

As for current bulbs, I've been pretty happy with LED Bulbs I bought at Microcenter for $7.99 ($8.99 for dimmables). They have nice heatsinks and have worked great, unlike my early experiments with LED Bulbs (when nobody carried them in brick and mortar stores). They put out as much light as a 40watt incandescent, and use half the electricity as a CFL - and best of all, I haven't had any burn out.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[WaffleMonster]

So if I install a gas furnace and start hauling tanks in every month (I'm out in the sticks), someone will pay me twice what I'm paying now for heating? Cool. Sign me up

Do you have cows? If you bottle enough cow farts heating is free!1!!

Cree and me

[steveha]

A year ago, I had no idea who "Cree" might be.

Then I bought one of these:

http://www.fenixlight.com/viewproduct.asp?id=151

It's the best pocket flashlight I have ever owned. Bright and useful on "low" power (32 Lumens) and very bright on high (105 Lumens). 500 minutes of light (over 8 hours) from a single AA cell on low, or 110 minutes on high. (I'm trusting the manufacturer's numbers here, but I can verify that it actually is bright and lasts a long time.) Anyway, that's a Cree LED, and it doesn't have the horrible bluish tint of older LEDs I have bought in the past.

More recently I bought an Ecosmart light bulb at Home Depot. "Ecosmart" is a Home Depot house brand, and uses Cree LED chips. For $10 I got a light bulb that claims to give equivalent light to a 40 Watt incandescent bulb, but seems brighter than that (I think because it's much more directional; it's in a downward-facing fixture so that's fine).

http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1v/R-202188260/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053

And just two days ago I got a fixture that retrofits a 6" can fixture with an LED light. I bought one with the 2700K color temperature, because I like that better than the "colder" lights (bluer, which actually have higher color temperatures). I walked into the store planning to just buy a bulb for my can light fixture, and now I'm very glad I bought the whole Ecosmart fixture. I found an LED light geek web site, and the guy bought one of these just to do a teardown; he found 5 Cree LED chips inside it. Where I live, the power company is subsidizing these lights, so I only had to pay $20 for this light. This dissipates only 9.5 Watts, yet it's very bright. I love the design: it includes three spring fingers to hold it into place, but if you rotate it the fingers collapse and stop holding it. So two decades from now when the LED stops working, it will be easy to remove.

http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1v/R-202240932/h_d2/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10053

So now I want to see Cree make some sort of flush-mount ceiling fixture. I have only found a few flush-mount LED fixtures, and they are all super expensive and I can't find the 2700 K color temperature. I did find one promising looking cheap fixture, but on eBay only and it's an import from China... I have no way to be sure of the quality, other than just buying one and trying it.

My current plans are just to install some fixtures that have air gaps for circulation, so I can use the Phillips LED bulbs (omnidirectional, not directional like the Ecosmart ones). I'm going to install one of these tomorrow and see how we like it. In case the URL doesn't work right, this is a "Project Source 2-Pack White Ceiling Flush Mount" from lowes.com.

http://www.lowes.com/pd_394606-43501-87822-01_0__?productId=3745415

Based on my experience with these lights, we are just on the cusp of these becoming mainstream and common. I've been buying these because they are subsidized, but electronics always gets cheaper over time, and within a couple of years or so LED lights should be cheap enough without subsidy that everyone starts buying them. (Even without the subsidy, they make sense long-term versus incandescent bulbs. If you have incandescent lights, consider LED rather than compact fluorescent.)

P.S. I haven't bought these, but I wish the office where I work would buy them. These are Cree replacement lights for standard fluorescent fixtures. Some companies are making LED lights that are the exact size of a T8 fluorescent bulb, with matching pins; for $60 or $80 or so each bulb, you can replace fluorescents (but you must rewire the fixture to bypass the ballas

Re:Cree and me

[SuperQ]

When i was looking into replacing a whole bunch of T12 fixtures, I liked the idea of doing LED. But just upgrading the balasts from magnetic to electronic and switching to good quality T8 tubes works out to be a way better deal. T8 bulbs already do about 90 lumens/watt for a lot less money. I also talked to a good lighting contractor who does efficiency upgrades. He said the tube retrofits don't work so well. It's better to just replace the fixtures and get LED specific fixtures. What we will hopefully get around to doing is a mixture of T12->T8 retrofits for a base lighting level, and then standard LED (PAR-20) spots to light up work areas.

Re:Cree and me

[imsabbel]

If you like your fenix, you would be blown away by something like a Quark Mini CR2, or a Jetbeam RRT-01 with 18350 cells (0.001 lumen to 800 lumen with seamless control via a dimmer ring).

Also, yes, those LEDs are getting cheaper, quickly. 5 Years ago you had to pay $15-20 for a led that put out 150 lumen at 50 lumen/W. Now you can get a led that puts out >1000 lumen at >100 lumen/W for $6.

Re:Cree and me

[Khyber]

You're making a mistake as T-12 and T-8 are getting phased out, somewhat like incandescents (though the T8s will get to stick around longer,) leaving T5 lamps.

Might as well go to solid LED and not worry about maintenance costs.

Re:Cree and me

[SuperQ]

The problem is we have 8 foot fixtures which can easily be converted from 2x 8 foot to 2x 4 foot T8. The conversions for T5 are possible, but I need to make sure the conversion parts will work with our fixtures. We don't really want to replace the fixtures since it requires a bunch of permits we don't want to deal with. Retrofits are easier for us to do.

Re:Cree and me

[Khyber]

You can do the T5 the same way, the conversion is simply the adapter to fit the ends in since T5 is shorter by a couple of inches (4-foot is actually 46 inches.)

Ballasts shouldn't need to be replaced. dual 4-foot T5s would only use 96 watts nominally, which is what your 8-foot T12 ballast should push. All you need is the conversion to 4-foot parallel hookups, then drop the T5 mount adapters in place. MUCH cheaper option if LED is not your route.

Also, T5 lamps have better luminous efficacy anyways, so you might as well jump straight to those.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[ryanov]

That would be great if they lived on their own little planet. Not so much here, though, where I have to share it with them.

Re:light and color quality

[queazocotal]

It's basically not UV in white LEDs.
It's deep blue.
It is quite visible, and is the same colour as most normal blue LEDs.

The memories - anyone heard of the LM3909?

[cheros]

When I started working with LEDs they just introduced the LM3909 oscillator - it allowed an LED (only red in those days) to blink for an entire year on a single D cell.

What keeps amazing me about LEDs is just how little energy they need to start lighting up. I'm not really into electronics anymore (was only tinkering with it since I was 11), but I recall that by using a FET for constant current meant you could be pretty flexible about the supply voltage (within limits, of course, the dissipation has to go somewhere), and by researching what it was (been a while) I came across other interesting ideas.

As a single, simple component, I find LEDs are about the most interesting ones to experiment with (and LDRs, and NTCs, and .. :) ). They are nice to introduce children to electronics because they instantly do something visible..

Re:Just hurry up!

[aliquis]

It looked awesome in the store with 384 very bright lights but I've got a 40/60/80 or so regular one in my kitchen window at the top edge and to use up some more of the length I made it into a christmas tree in the middle.

But now when looking from outside I've got a yellowish christmas tree and "line" in the kitchen window and the very white one on the balcony..

Also since it's an appartment the neightbours of course got their different styles :D

Sadly Sweden is so filled with immigrants now that it's not much christmas decoration at all in this neighbourhood. I guess it would had been more in one with more (born) Swedes. Maybe not.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[hawguy]

OK. Let me know when you want to install that heat pump, and I'll start bitching about the inefficiency of light bulbs. Until then, they are just as efficient as the electric furnace I can't afford to replace.

There aren't a whole lot of people in your situation where not only is it cold enough year round to need to use the heater, but you have one of the most costly heat sources available -- electric resistance heat.

If you have any top floor ceiling fixtures or wall sconces on outside walls, much of the heat is being conducted out of your house anyway so you're not getting 100% of the waste heat into your house so you could still save some money with more efficient lighting.

A heat pump system can save significant energy - you should talk to an HVAC dealer about systems, tax credits, and financing options, if you really are in a climate where you're using your heat year round, the energy savings could pay for the monthly finance charge and the system could pay for itself within 5 years.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[hawguy]

So if I install a gas furnace and start hauling tanks in every month (I'm out in the sticks), someone will pay me twice what I'm paying now for heating? Cool. Sign me up.

My parents get their propane tank (500 gallons?) refilled every couple of months in the winter (Northeastern USA, so they have a "real" winter), and including the delivery fees, it's still about 40% cheaper than when they had electric resistance heat. YMMV, of course.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it does not make energy from nothing, but by pumping heat from the outside (concentrating it, sort of) you input only the energy required to pump the heat, and you get, on the inside, a lot more heat than you would have by just converting the raw electricity to heat. In effect, you get a lot more energy than you put in, by stealing it from the outside air.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[mysidia]

If you use electricity effeciently and use gas for heat you save the most money on your energy bill.

Ashame, my only heater is electric, and draws a heck of a lot more amps than a lightbulb when it cycles on.

If the lit bulbs dampen the rate of temperature drop, resulting in fewer cycle ons of that massive equipment, the useful heat they emit could produce a total beneficial effect...

Go backwards: History got it right

[CdBee]

On my bicycle I use a 30 or 40 year old chrome headlight made for use with a dynamo.

I replaced the 6v 2.4watt filament bulb in it with a high power white MES LED module designed to have 100 degree illumination. Powered by a single PP3 radio battery under the saddle, it produces a 15 foot cone of light on the road ahead of me lighting everything up to handlebar height (yes, I'm overvolting a 6v LED module but it doesnt seem to cause any problems, it still runs cool)

I hope these don't end up as car lighting

[hackertourist]

I've noticed a disturbing trend. Car manufacturers have been using the new lightning technologies to cram e.g. the headlights into ever smaller spaces. The resulting light beam still conforms to regulations, but because the peak intensity is much higher, those headlights are much more likely to dazzle oncoming traffic. The higher the light intensity of the lamp (lm/cm^2) the worse this will get.

Re:I hope these don't end up as car lighting

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true, at all.

By placing them into smaller housings, they are using lenses to spread the bright LED or HID light.

Also, using directed beams and lenses (aka projectors) they can direct the light where it should be, THE ROAD, and not your eyes. Since the lumen output of light is only capable of lighting a certain distance anyway, properly adjusting the headlights is important too.

Don't hate the player (LED/HID lights) hate the game (the dickheads who don't adjust their headlights.)

Re:I hope these don't end up as car lighting

[karnal]

There's another piece to this too. There are people in the world that will take a halogen (either projection or non-projection setup) and retrofit an HID setup in it. This causes issues:

1. The non-projection setup has no cut-off - so the light goes everywhere, which is not how good HID setups are implemented.
2. The halogen projection setups - while similar to an HID setup (I have a halogen projection setup in my car) don't have some of the additional pieces to make the HID setup functional. For instance, factory setups for my vehicle have auto-levelling lamp housings to not blind oncoming traffic. Also, the cut-off (metal in the projection path to limit light output out of the top of the lamp) is in a different spot comparing non-HID projection to HID projection.

Ultimately, if you're being blinded by HID lamps - part of it could be caused by incorrect implementation. HID light, even in a correct implementation is harsher - and those sensitive to light are probably more affected; myself included.

Re:I hope these don't end up as car lighting

[hackertourist]

Directed beams work reasonably well on a perfectly straight and level road. Anything else and those directed beams end up directly illuminating other drivers' eyes. Even if they're correctly set up.

I'll agree that there are lots of idiots out there with incorrectly set-up headlights. But the number of new cars with factory-standard lighting that blind me is too high for it to be an 'incorrect set-up' issue only.

Re:I hope these don't end up as car lighting

[ChrisMaple]

At 50 feet, a 6 inch headlight subtends 0.6 degrees, a 3 inch headlight 0.3 degrees. The eyeball in that 3" headlight's beam sees a light four times as intense as in a 6" headlight's beam, and it's four times as intense when it reaches the retina. It's not a good thing.

YES!!

[CdBee]

When I was about 7 I was first introduced to electronics. I can still remember the anticipation of ripping into a Tandy (Radio Shack in the UK) mixed box of LEDs. So many bright colours and shapes.

Nowadays I buy them in bulk from China to refit my friends homes to save money. In certain cases such the the popular GU-10 50w downlighter bulbs, LEDs have been up to the job for quite some time if you ignore the high-power LED versions and buy units with 60 to 80 individual warm white LEDs. Been doing this for 2 years now and only seen a few failures, and all the recipients report lower fuel bills to an extent that paid for the bulbs in months. Failures are a fact of life with Chinese LEDs but if you make sure you buy 10% more than you need, you;re covered and the savings materialise as expected.

Re:420

[Teun]

Weed farmers are even more than other farmers keen on saving power.

http://www.lemnislighting.com/en/about_greenhouse.html

Re:Slashvertisment

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope it's interesting to hydroponic geeks.
Not necessarily the right light color, but that will soon follow.
I got strawberries year round. Whatchoo got?

Re:light and color quality

[AmiMoJo]

I don't want to alarm you but the atmosphere doesn't filter out 100% of UV from the sun either.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[AmiMoJo]

Do whatever you want with your money.

Actually I'd prefer if he didn't. Pollution has already damaged my health enough without people adding to it just so they can "stick it to the man".

He's not allowed to buy plutonium either

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't see why he wants to buy incandescents. Is it because he's told he can't? Therefore, like a temper-tantrum-two-year-old, they are whining about how they wanna wanna wanna wanna incandescent?

Really, kids, grow up.

Incandescents waste most of their energy in heat and it's not even heat you use to warm your house (else you'd have your radiators stuck up on the ceiling) and about the only people who would have a problem would be those growing drugs in their home.

If you want to heat your place use an IR lamp.

If you want to illuminate your place use a CFL/LED light.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[BitZtream]

And still, that doesn't make it 100 or 350% efficient.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[BitZtream]

Yet you're okay with replacing bulbs with new ones full of dangerous heavy metals and/or created with extremely toxic chemicals.

Power generation isn't all there is to pollution.

Re:Slashvertisment

[demonlapin]

Heh. Strawberries.

I thought it was orchids that needed the grow lamps?

Wake me up when they invent one

[Hentes]

that doesn't flicker.

Re:Wake me up when they invent one

[marcosdumay]

Time to wake up.

LEDs never flicked. Crappy power bricks flick, and today's non-crappy bricks cost 15 cents each in bulky. If your LEDs are flicking, you need to spend a few cents more on them.

About those Dangerous Heavy Metals...

[sirwired]

When you say "Dangerous Heavy Metals", I assume you are referring to the mercury used in CFLs. Well, it would probably be good for you to know that if you consider the proportion of the nation's electricity generated using coal, an incandescent bulb is responsible for the injection of far more mercury into the atmosphere than is contained in a CFL tube.

Internal parts aren't all there is to heavy metals.

Re:About those Dangerous Heavy Metals...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the fear of breaking a CFL in your house overblown or justified?

I'm all for cutting pollution for the sake of pollution. But I have a libertarian bent to things as well. I don't like banning things as I originally put in my post. (Poster #42424089 here.) I don't even like cities banning plastic bags, even though I don't live in one of those cities. I'd much rather see a tax on plastic and/or paper bags to encourage environmentalism. I'd much rather see a tax on inefficient bulbs and high-flow showerheads and toilets rather than a ban.

Where do I use incandescents? The bathroom and outside. From experience, it just seems like those CFL bulbs burn out so much faster in extreme (humidity and temperature fluctuations) environments. I haven't done the math to see if the extra 45 or so watts per bulb is worth the expense when compared against replacing a CFL every few months. I don't know the power on count for the bulbs, but given how little the bathroom is used compared to any other room, it seems like CFL bulbs should be lasting longer.

Re:About those Dangerous Heavy Metals...

[dbIII]

I'd say no, but then again I used to bubble mercury through sand to see if it was packed in tight enough.
To be perfectly serious, the stuff is going to condense out within a few minutes and then you can clean up with a vacuum cleaner, and the amount involved is tiny since those bulbs are at a very low pressure and the mercury is only a trace anyway. I'm pretty sure I saw that on a MSDS, which is bound to be on the net somewhere so track it down if you like so you don't have to take my word for it.

CRI is a poor measurement

[Sycraft-fu]

It takes 8 colour swatches and measures the rendering of those. It does not do a good job of looking at actual spectrum, and there are far more than 8 colours to worry about in the real world. Look at the spectrum of an LED vs CFL some day. The CFLs are very, very spikey with lots of holes, the LEDs are continuous with more gentle peaks.

We need a new system for measuring light quality, and indeed standards agencies are looking in to it.

Re:Slashvertisment

[Sponge Bath]

The farm in the back
Is hydroponic
Good, fresh things
Every day of the year

-- Trans-Island Skyway

Re:I am sick and tired...

[kperson]

Is this like "100 times colder", or "10 times as dark", or "twice as quiet"? If 100% cheaper is free, what would 300% cheaper be?

Re:Slashvertisment

[fahmi_bbi]

Good idea

Re:I am sick and tired...

[JimBowen]

Energy saving lights are great in hot countries where any heat generated by appliances is doubly wasted because there is an air conditioner running to remove it, but in cold countries, where instead of an air conditioner in every room we have a radiator, they are not so good.
Firstly, any energy saving needs to be expressed in terms of the difference in cost (money or carbon) between electric and gas (or if the home has electric heating, then energy savings are _completely_ irrelevant)
But secondly, the perceived warmth in a room to a human is an extremely subjective thing. The "warm" light from an incandescent bulb, including the infrared part, might make the human inside the room less likely to turn the radiator on!

Here in the EU, where they have banned incandescent bulbs, it just feels like a product of the usual shovels of pigswill between corporate lobbies and politicians.
On the one hand, heavy metals are banned to the extent where an electronics lab can't use proper solder, and a chemistry lab can't buy cadmium, while on the other hand, we are only allowed to buy light bulbs containing mercury!!

Re:I am sick and tired...

[snspdaarf]

No one expects the FEP!

Re:Slashvertisment

[mellon]

So what are you using for your strawberries now? We need to set up some supplemental grow lighting so we can grow tomatoes and bok choi, and we've been having trouble figuring out what lights to buy. There's also the concern about whether the lights have a bad power factor—some go as low as 50%.

Why light bulbs are not ideal heat sources

[sjbe]

Ashame, my only heater is electric, and draws a heck of a lot more amps than a lightbulb when it cycles on.

Drawing more amps is irrelevant in this instance. Your heater will not be on constantly and what matters is how effectively it turns power inputs into useful (heat in this case) output. The efficiency of a light bulb in creating heat is not much different than an electric heater but the effectiveness is significantly different. While there are some cases where a light bulb is appropriate for use as a heat source, this is not typically the case in home heating applications.

There are several factors you do not seem to be considering:
1) You (probably) do not need to operate your furnace all year. This means that you are wasting large amounts of energy from the light bulbs any time you are not utilizing them as a heat source which in most of the world is the majority of the year. If you are running an air conditioner then you are generating unnecessary waste heat from the light bulbs which you then have to use additional unnecessary energy to remove from the building. This effect greatly reduces the utility and net efficiency of light bulbs as heat sources. A furnace is only turned on when you need/want heat but is off otherwise. This is not true for light bulbs.
2) Light bulbs are not designed as heat sources so they tend not to disperse the heat they generate in a particularly effective distribution. The heat will tend to be conducted locally and usually relatively high in the room which since heat rises isn't especially useful. Your heater on the other hand has ducting or other systems to distribute the heat it generates in a much more effective manner.
3) Light bulbs aren't useful as a heat source when you want heat but not light. Such as when you are trying to sleep.

Re:Why light bulbs are not ideal heat sources

[Immerman]

Actually, most of the heat generated by lightbulbs is transmitted as infrared radiation rather than via conduction - as such it directly heats the floors, furniture, and you, without heating the intervening air. As it's only hot air that rises, and most heat loss is due to warm air escaping the house, this can actually be considerably more efficient since you can maintain a much lower air temperature while still being comfortable. Just as you can be perfectly warm sitting on a sun-warmed rock on a freezing, sunny day, or sitting in front of an open fireplace in a cold drafty house.

Obviously electricity is still a horribly inefficient *source* for radiant heat since over half the energy is typically wasted in generation and transmission, something like propane IR heaters would be much more efficient, but whatever your radiant heat source a down-facing radiator near the ceiling is actually a very efficient arrangement. Other favored designs are radiant-heat floors which have much the same effect in terms of air heating, but lack the "basking in a sunbeam" quality of direct high-energy radiant heat, and things like tile-oven stoves which are extremely efficient but expensive and difficult to adjust.

Re:Slashvertisment

[amiga3D]

Those don't look like strawberry plants. No wonder you posted anon.

Re:Slashvertisment

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Those don't look like strawberry plants. No wonder you posted anon.

That's just the light color, it's confusing you.

Re:Just hurry up!

[dbIII]

Obvious answer is change your paint, because the "quality of the light" depends a lot on what bounces off the walls. Of course changing the bulb is vastly cheaper :)

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Ellis D. Tripp]

It should be noted that power doesn't "flow through" the lamp, it is DISSIPATED BY IT.. Electrical CURRENT "flows through" the lamp...

Re:Slashvertisment

[Cassini2]

Avoid Green. It is the only colour of light that is not absorbed by chlorophyl. I would suggest using red LEDs, as most of the suns energy is in that end of the spectrum. Blue LEDs and White LEDs will appear brighter for a given energy input, however that is because our eyes are much more sensitive to blue than to red.

Shopping at Walmart or Sam's hurts America

[falconwolf]

In what way? I actually contend the opposite, international trade helps most people. The less paid for an item the more money people have. That money can be used to buy other items, pay down debt, or be invested. Of course, until recently, people here in the US lived beyond their means. They continuously borrowed money the buy more stuff.

As for Walmart/Sam's, Walmart now has stores in China. And Chinese make enough money to buy from Walmart, as well as upscale stores. I don't recall what newspaper it was but one reported the first week Apple's new iPhone was available in China more than 1 million were sold there. Seeing as Apple products are only affordable to the wealthy, there are a lot of wealthy people in China. And those people buy American products sending money to the US. Another American company making money in China is Caterpillar, which builds construction equipment in Indiana employing thousands of people. John Deere based in IL does business in Brazil, China, and around the world. There are many other US based multinational businesses who also are in Brazil, China, India, and Russia (BRIC) helping employ more American workers.

And without international trade you would not be using a PC, or a cell phone. The US does not have a ready supply of a number of metals used to make these products. A major source of Coltan, columbite–tantalite, is Congo. Unfortunately it's mining fuels the conflict there.

GE leads a call to develop rare earth minerals in the US to reduce our dependence on Chinese suppliers. If China wanted to it could shutdown a number of US businesses by stopping exporting these minerals ton the US.

So who's the jerk?

Falcon

Re:Shopping at Walmart or Sam's hurts America

[ChrisMaple]

Although tantalum capacitors are used widely in PCs, they are not essential. Niobium (columbium) has no significant use in PCs AFAIK. Your broader point is correct.

Re:Shopping at Walmart or Sam's hurts America

[falconwolf]

Although tantalum capacitors are used widely in PCs, they are not essential. Niobium (columbium) has no significant use in PCs AFAIK. Your broader point is correct.

I also said cell phones, and notice one of the links I provided is from cellular-news.com. What I didn't mention was all the other things we take for granted that use coltan and other rare earth mineral. Quite simple the US has little of the rare earth minerals and has to import most of it. I think given the tyme necessary the US can solve these problems, however even then it may be imported people (immigrants) who do it.

Falcon

Just in time for Canadian weed growers

[future assassin]

With the end of personal production licenses in March 2014 to mandatory sentences of 6 month for 6+ plants we'll see a bigger evolution in LED technology soon.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[pla]

I think he wishes he had the choice to do that. But he doesn't, because that choice was taken from him by government do-gooders and the Federal electron police.

Sorry, could you clarify what, exactly he can't buy? Or did you mean these instead?

The "ban" doesn't work quite like most people think it does. We can still get crappy old low-efficiency lights, manufacturers just need to make them 30% less inefficient - Which they've known how to do for decades (just make them more insulating so they lose less energy as heat)... But, that costs a bit more (perhaps a buck each rather than a dozen for $1.99). So, everyone hating on the CFLs and now LEDs can still choose to "vote with their wallets".

The fellow to whom I responded, however (along with one amusing AC troll that replied to me), won't bother letting facts get in the way of their ranting. The Man stole their 100W bulbs, Nevar forgit!

Re:Shut Your Hole, Doucheronimous!

[pla]

I'll do you the favor, Mr. AC, of linking you to my response on this topic. If you want to troll this topic further, please move here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3347899&cid=42426921

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Kohath]

So you're saying he can choose to do what the government tells hm to do? What a luxury! Where should he send the "thank you" gift?

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Immerman]

Not technically, no. But if I can use 100W of power to scavenge 350W of heat that would otherwise be wasted, then for most intents and purposes I have in fact achieved 350% heating efficiency. Certainly so for economic comparisons to alternative heating systems.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[pla]

So you're saying he can choose to do what the government tells hm to do? What a luxury! Where should he send the "thank you" gift?

Nope.

No, I said he can choose to pay whatever the market, not the government, demands for the product he wants.

He could also make his own inefficient light-bulbs, if he so chooses. Of course, using non-UL-approved bulbs will probably void his homeowner's insurance, so he'd better pray his house doesn't burn down all for the sake of wasting 30% more on electricity...


Look, I consider myself basically a libertarian; but some things that work on a small scale simply don't work on a larger one. We have a finite energy budget on this planet, and we've spent the last century heavily "dipping into capital". If the government had outright banned 100W incandescents, I'd stand along side you and tell them where to stick their prohibitions. But setting modest targets for energy efficiency? Sorry, I consider that not only an environmental issue, but a matter of actual national security (not in the BS "Security Theater" sense, but as regards the long term sustainability of our country).

And as such, I can suck it up and pay a few cents more if I really hate the thought of saving electricity that much - Though of course, I won't, because I don't have some screwed superstitious crusade against CFLs.

Re:420

[Khyber]

"and narrow it down to the ideal red and blue spectrum ranges for vegitative and flowering growth"

Green has higher quantum yield versus red or blue at higher levels of photon flux. This is why HPS works so well for growing pot, despite having a rather lacking spectral profile.

Red/blue only lighting is okay for small food crops, like lettuces, herbs, etc. Larger plants benefit from the additional boost green gives in the long run.

Re:Slashvertisment

[Khyber]

"Avoid Green. It is the only colour of light that is not absorbed by chlorophyl."

Wrong. Green has a higher quantum yield at sunlight intensity.

http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full

Not 200 lm/W

[lalleglad]

I looked at the data sheet of the Cree XLamp MK-R and even though they state "Delivering up to 200 Lumens per Watt" in the header, looking closer the best I found was nominal 147.25 lm/W and top luminance bin = 157.51 lm/W (which I wonder if I can order and at what price?).

Forward voltage is 11.7V at 700mA = 8.19W

The highest lumen output I found was 1206lm at 5700K and 6500K at a CRI of 65, which makes an efficiency of:

1206lm / 8.19W = 147.25 lm/W

If you can live with such a low CRI and cold white then that isn't bad, but not even the best.

I have seen 150 lm/W from other manufacturers at 5000K and CRI 70, which is a more natural white and slightly better CRI and perhaps even with a better R9 (Red), but the Cree data sheet doesn't state the individual values of R1 to R14, it is difficult at this point to compare.

What is however very good of this Cree LED is the thermal resistance at 1.7 C/W. Together with the max. junction temp at 150C it provides a component that is very well suited for high power and high luminance lamps.

An interesting development, but not the 200 lm/W I was hoping to see.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Kohath]

So you're a "libertarian" who thinks liberty is secondary to light bulb efficiency. People should be free to do anything you think is a good idea. If you don't think something is a good idea, send in the police. Because ... some bullshit about national security.

Re:Slashvertisment

[harlequinn]

Wow - that's crazy stuff - I would not have guessed that. Good link.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[ChrisMaple]

I can move a portable electric fan heater or radiant heater to warm me and nothing else. Try that with circulating hot water or central hot air.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[ChrisMaple]

The U.S. government has a long history of writing specifications to exclude or include certain things. In some contexts, it's called bid rigging and it's part of the reason that the cost of living is higher than it should be.

Re:Bad marketing

[harlequinn]

Yes, it will be at low junction temperature and low current (which will last for all of 3 seconds). All of their real world figures are at J/T of 85C. The K2 bin gets max 1290 lumens at 700mA (85C), at about 8.2W according to their charts, which would be 157 lumens/watt in a real world user scenario.

cost of CFL

[falconwolf]

There is virtually no selection of dimmable CFL, the few that exist are incredibly expensive

• GE CFL 26wt Dimmable Spiral - 3 bulbs $15.44. Just over $5 a bulb.
• Earthmate 27W Dimmable Spiral 2700K Bulb, 6pc $71.94 $12 bulb.
• Bulbrite Industries 13W Energy Wiser Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Coil in Warm White (Set of 3) $35.97. $12 a bulb.
• Feit ESL23T/DM/65 23 Watt Daylight Dimmable Twist Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb $13.87. $13.87 for one bulb.
• Bulbrite Industries 40W 3000K Dimmable Rapid Start Compact Fluorescent 4-Pin Long Twin Tube in Soft White (Set of 2) $13.72. $6.81 a bulb.
• Feit ESL23T/DM/65 23 Watt Daylight Dimmable Twist Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb $13.87. $13.87 for one bulb.
• Bulbrite Industries 40W 3000K Dimmable Rapid Start Compact Fluorescent 4-Pin Long Twin Tube in Soft White (Set of 2) $13.72. $6.81 a bulb.

I think that's enough examples to show there are inexpensive dimmable CFL bulbs. However Walmart has more.

CFL sucks. We're better off with incandescent in the meantime.

I've used CFLs for more than 20 years and have not had a problem with them. That's not entirely true, I have had problems with them. In photography, photos on film show color casting with florescent bulbs, and with incandescent bulbs as well. The first CFL I bought I paid $20 for, and over the next 15 years it paid it's cost back in avoided cost. That is in energy not used and in not having to replace incandescent bulbs. I wonder if you enjoy wasting money.

Falcon

Re:cost of CFL

[bill_mcgonigle]

We have a New England chain called Ocean State Job Lot where I get dimmable CFL's for $4.50 or so. My daughter uses one for a bedside reading light which is on an incandescent-era dimmer. The light looks good to my eyes. Since she leaves her light on whenever she leaves the room ... I'm glad it's no longer an incandescent.

I'd rather not live under a heat lamp

[sjbe]

Actually, most of the heat generated by lightbulbs is transmitted as infrared radiation rather than via conduction

Which is perfectly useless when you want heat but no light from a standard light bulb since a standard bulb cannot emit radiation without some of it being visible light. It also is of limited value outside the room the light is located within which matters fairly often. A bulb is also omni-directional so you need a reflector of some sort.

As it's only hot air that rises, and most heat loss is due to warm air escaping the house, this can actually be considerably more efficient since you can maintain a much lower air temperature while still being comfortable.

So I'm supposed to sit a few feet from a light bulb in my house to stay warm like a pet turtle? Thanks but no thanks. Nothing wrong with using infrared heaters but there is a reason they are mostly used as localized space heaters. While you are correct regarding the radiation, my comment stands that this is not a particularly useful means of distributing heat in most homes. I'm sure we could design a home to take maximal advantage of this type of heating but I'm equally sure that it would be less costly to simply use a more efficient heat source like a gas furnace. You'll also note that such a heating arrangement tends to only heat the side facing the heating element. This means that light bulbs up high will heat your head up considerably more than your feet. I had an IR heater in my garage a few years ago. Kept my heat roasting hot and my feet unpleasantly cold. If I walked to the other side of the garage, it was of essentially no value as a heat source.

Bear in mind that I'm responding to the rather ridiculous argument that we should keep incandescent light bulbs around because they generate heat as a byproduct. This is an absurd argument because A) light bulbs are not a particularly efficient means of generating heat and B) the need for heat and the need for light often does not overlap and C) for 3/4 of the year the heat light bulbs generate due to their use as a light source is waste heat that then has to pumped out of the house at additional expense. Light bulbs can be used for heat in some cases but most of the time it is a costly, inefficient and not particular effective means of heating a space.

This is bad news...

[ReverendLoki]

... for the Scrulls.

Re:Slashvertisment

[Khyber]

This explains why HPS, despite a lacking spectral curve, does so damned well overall in yields.

why?

[SebNukem]

Oh why, why can't they install those in projectors, instead of those nuclear mini power plants?

cost of CFLs

[falconwolf]

The reduced cooling should help in lowering the costs of the LED versus the CFL and the reduced energy consumption will be a help as well.

Yesterday I went to Walmart to get new light bulbs, old CFLs I had burned out. There Walmart had LED bulbs in stock, at around $20 a bulb. I ended up going to Sam's to get CFLs, an 8 pack cost less than $6.

Falcon

And 3 years ago CFL's were going for as high as $10+ per bulb.

There are still $10 CFL bulbs, Walmart has bulbs for $12 as well as under a dollar.

Falcon

Re:light and color quality

[rubycodez]

plenty of peer reviewed studies say the NIH is wrong. look it up, google boy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamps_and_health

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Subjective]

l2thermodynamics.
You already have as much free energy as you want, if the kind of energy you want is heat.

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Subjective]

Ah, units. "it does 20mph per gallon!". Watt is a measure of flow. He meant "pay for that 100 watt/hour times hours for your lamp". The 1/hour and hour eliminate each other - "that 100 watt for your lamp". He's paying that watt-hours - 100watthour every hour. I said hour so much it lost all meaning. What is it? some kind of boar?

Re:I am sick and tired...

[Richy_T]

Not mutually exclusive.

CFLS

[falconwolf]

My first one, bought around 1997, lasted one week. They weren't cheap back then either.

I bought my first one about 10 years earlier, in the late 1980s. And it wasn't cheap, it cost about $20, but it lasted me more than 15 years without a problem. In that tyme I moved once across country and four tymes across town, bringing it with me.

Falcon

Apple product costs

[falconwolf]

Until the number of competitors come along, and the market gets filled, you will pay for leds in the same style you pay for Apple Products.

I don't understand. One, Apple does have competition, for every single product it sells. Two, while I haven't compared Apple pricing lately I compared the price of the MacBook Pro I'm typing this on to laptops from other OEMs before I bought this one. Comparing prices of laptops with comparable specs, I found one laptop $50 cheaper but others more. A Dell, or an Alienware which was owned by Dell, was $200 more for instance. A comparable HP and IBM was more too..

Of course a person can't start with a PC from some OEM like Dell or HP then compare it to a Mac because Apple does not offer all the configuration options the other companies do.

What's really bad now is that Apple has not released a new Mac Pro in more than 2 1/2 years. All Apple has done is bump up the CPU speed. While the 2011 MacBook Pro included the Thunderbolt interface the Mac Pro still does not have it. Tim Cook promised a new Mac Pro in 2013, but he didn't say when other than that. And as my MBP is more than 5 years old I wanted to replace it with another one, however Apple dropped 17" MBP, which is what I have and wanted to replace it with.

Falcon