PeakOil is You
LED Light Bulbs (Merged)
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by Keith_McClary » Thu 28 Apr 2011, 01:07:50
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'H')ey who remembers when Tensor lamps were "cool" with the little incandescent bulbs?
Jay Monroe, 80, Engineer Who Invented Tensor Lamp, Dies
Facebook knows you're a dog.
-
Keith_McClary - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 7344
- Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Suburban tar sands
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by Narz » Mon 02 May 2011, 00:43:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'I') bought a $20 LED desk lamp at Costco. It's a lot like a halogen lamp, but I like it quite a bit.
Recently?
I bought a couple a few months back but they don't seem to be in stock anymore.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
-
Narz - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2360
- Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by kublikhan » Mon 16 May 2011, 19:19:47
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')wo leading makers of lighting products are showcasing LED bulbs that are bright enough to replace energy-guzzling 100-watt light bulbs set to disappear from stores in January. The new bulbs will also be expensive -- about $50 each -- so the development may not prevent consumers from hoarding traditional bulbs.
Osram Sylvania, a unit of Germany's Siemens AG, said it has overcome the heat problem and will be showing a pear-shaped 100-watt-equivalent LED bulb this week. It doesn't have a firm launch date, but it usually shows products about a year before they hit store shelves. Lighting Sciences Group Corp., a Satellite Beach, Fla.-based company that specializes in LED lighting, will be showing several 100-watt-equivalent prototypes, including some that solve the problem of cooling the LEDs by using microscopic devices that move air over the chips, like miniature fans. Before the 100-watters, there will be 75-watters on the shelves this year. Osram Sylvania will be selling them at Lowe's starting in July. Royal Philips Electronics NV, the world's biggest lighting maker, will have them in stores late this year for $40 to $45.
However, LED prices are coming down quickly. The DoE expects a 60-watt equivalent LED bulb to cost $10 by 2015, putting them within striking range of the price of a compact fluorescent bulb. But, he said, "it's not necessarily clear to people in the lighting industry that LED chips were ever meant to go into a bulb." What's really needed, he said, is a new approach to lighting -- new fixtures and lamps that spread out the LEDs, avoiding the heat problem.
LED bulbs hit 100 watts as federal ban loomsOsram Sylvania, a unit of Germany's Siemens AG, said it has overcome the heat problem and will be showing a pear-shaped 100-watt-equivalent LED bulb this week. It doesn't have a firm launch date, but it usually shows products about a year before they hit store shelves. Lighting Sciences Group Corp., a Satellite Beach, Fla.-based company that specializes in LED lighting, will be showing several 100-watt-equivalent prototypes, including some that solve the problem of cooling the LEDs by using microscopic devices that move air over the chips, like miniature fans. Before the 100-watters, there will be 75-watters on the shelves this year. Osram Sylvania will be selling them at Lowe's starting in July. Royal Philips Electronics NV, the world's biggest lighting maker, will have them in stores late this year for $40 to $45.
However, LED prices are coming down quickly. The DoE expects a 60-watt equivalent LED bulb to cost $10 by 2015, putting them within striking range of the price of a compact fluorescent bulb. But, he said, "it's not necessarily clear to people in the lighting industry that LED chips were ever meant to go into a bulb." What's really needed, he said, is a new approach to lighting -- new fixtures and lamps that spread out the LEDs, avoiding the heat problem.
The oil barrel is half-full.
-
kublikhan - Master Prognosticator
- Posts: 5064
- Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
- Location: Illinois
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by Narz » Wed 08 Jun 2011, 14:48:30
Prices are really coming down. Saw an 18-watt (75-watt replacement) at Costco for $30 (after $10 rebate) so I bought it up. It really does compare.
A few years ago you could pay $30 for a 15-watt replacement.
A few years ago you could pay $30 for a 15-watt replacement.
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
-
Narz - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2360
- Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by RankineCycle » Wed 10 Aug 2011, 21:23:57
The problem with LED is heat dissipation. Heat can't be extracted from the higher-wattage chips fast enough to keep them at a reasonable temperature, at least not without fans or absolutely enormous heat sinks made from copper. You'll notice that the bulk of an LED bulb consists of heat sink, as they don't get rid of much heat through radiation (like incandescent or metal halide) and don't have a large surface area (like fluorescent) to dissipate via convection.
I'm not sure why LED is being promoted as a method of general area lighting. Fluorescent and metal halide has had better efficiency, better light, and in many cases longer life than today's LED for years if not decades. Thermal management on these lights is also much simpler. And as long as people are educated and informed of the real (and not imaginary) hazards and disposal procedures, mercury content is not an issue.
When trying to light large areas rather uniformly, such as houses, offices, streets, and industrial buildings, things like fluorescent and metal halide work the best. When the need for accent or task lighting arises, or the need for a rugged or compact light source arises, LED has advantages. I have bought LED bulbs (4 watt PAR 20, 4100K, 145 lumens - $10 at Wal-mart) that I use as task lights in my work shop. My main general light, however, is 4-foot T12 fluorescent, 2 x 5000K 34-watt tubes with electronic ballast. I don't see any LED(s) matching that any time soon.
I'm not sure why LED is being promoted as a method of general area lighting. Fluorescent and metal halide has had better efficiency, better light, and in many cases longer life than today's LED for years if not decades. Thermal management on these lights is also much simpler. And as long as people are educated and informed of the real (and not imaginary) hazards and disposal procedures, mercury content is not an issue.
When trying to light large areas rather uniformly, such as houses, offices, streets, and industrial buildings, things like fluorescent and metal halide work the best. When the need for accent or task lighting arises, or the need for a rugged or compact light source arises, LED has advantages. I have bought LED bulbs (4 watt PAR 20, 4100K, 145 lumens - $10 at Wal-mart) that I use as task lights in my work shop. My main general light, however, is 4-foot T12 fluorescent, 2 x 5000K 34-watt tubes with electronic ballast. I don't see any LED(s) matching that any time soon.
-
RankineCycle - Wood
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Thu 30 Sep 2010, 13:24:10
Re: Why the heck are LED bulbs still so expensive & weak?
by rangerone314 » Wed 21 Sep 2011, 23:06:30
My experience with LED bulbs I bought in 2008... I got about 12, 4 still work, and they weren't used in dimmer switches or anything.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
-
rangerone314 - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
- Location: Maryland
US introduces $60 LED light bulb, bans bulbs 40 watts & over
by Sixstrings » Sun 22 Apr 2012, 21:42:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/59772000/jpg/_59772420_philipsledbulb.jpg[/img]
US introduces $60 LED light bulb
Made by Dutch electronics giant Philips, the bulb swaps filaments for light-emitting diodes to provide illumination.
Using LEDs endows the light with a long life and a hefty price tag. The first versions are set to cost $60 (£37).
Philips has arranged discounts with shops that will sell the bulb meaning some could buy it for only $20 (£12).
Production ban
The bulb triumphed in the Bright Tomorrow competition run by the US Department of Energy that aimed to find an energy efficient alternative to the 60-watt incandescent light bulb.
The DoE challenged firms to develop a design that gave out a warm light similar to that from an incandescent bulbs but was much more energy efficient.
Philips was the only entrant for the competition and its design underwent 18 months of testing before being declared a winner.
A cheaper and less efficient version of the LED bulb is already sold by Philips in the US and Europe.
LED bulbs face competition from compact fluorescent lights which are almost as energy efficient and cost a lot less.
Sales of more energy efficient bulbs are being aided by official moves to end production of higher wattage incandescent bulbs.
Production of 100 watt bulbs has ceased in the US and Europe. Production of 60 watt bulbs has been stopped in Europe and is being phased out in the US. From 2014, incandescent bulbs of 40 watts or above will be banned in the US.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-17788178
US introduces $60 LED light bulb
Made by Dutch electronics giant Philips, the bulb swaps filaments for light-emitting diodes to provide illumination.
Using LEDs endows the light with a long life and a hefty price tag. The first versions are set to cost $60 (£37).
Philips has arranged discounts with shops that will sell the bulb meaning some could buy it for only $20 (£12).
Production ban
The bulb triumphed in the Bright Tomorrow competition run by the US Department of Energy that aimed to find an energy efficient alternative to the 60-watt incandescent light bulb.
The DoE challenged firms to develop a design that gave out a warm light similar to that from an incandescent bulbs but was much more energy efficient.
Philips was the only entrant for the competition and its design underwent 18 months of testing before being declared a winner.
A cheaper and less efficient version of the LED bulb is already sold by Philips in the US and Europe.
LED bulbs face competition from compact fluorescent lights which are almost as energy efficient and cost a lot less.
Sales of more energy efficient bulbs are being aided by official moves to end production of higher wattage incandescent bulbs.
Production of 100 watt bulbs has ceased in the US and Europe. Production of 60 watt bulbs has been stopped in Europe and is being phased out in the US. From 2014, incandescent bulbs of 40 watts or above will be banned in the US.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-17788178
Hm, I didn't know this.. according to the article 100 watt incandescent bulbs are already banned and even 40 watt incandescent will be banned by 2014. 100 watt use way too much juice anyway I've never used those BUT -- people should have an equivalent option though if they really require a bright light in their home or business. Also a 40 watt ban, that's harsh, 40 watt is normal that's not a bright light but I guess the intention here is for everyone to use fluorescent which is fine with me.
I'm on the fluroescent bulbs now. I can't remember last time I checked if those come in a 100 watt option, but what I have is fine with me it's like what $5 or $7 and they last five years or so.
Now an LED bulb.. 20 year life for $60, I think you're better off with the 5 year life on a fluorescent.
-
Sixstrings - Fusion
- Posts: 15160
- Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
