November 3, 2006 12:27 PM PST

Expert: LEDs could start replacing lightbulbs soon

SAN JOSE, Calif.--Light-emitting diodes will become economically attractive as replacements for conventional lightbulbs in about two years, a shift that could pave the way for massive electricity conservation, according to a researcher.

Right now, consumers and businesses can buy a light-emitting diode, or LED, that provides about the same level of illumination as an energy-hogging conventional 60-watt lightbulb, Steven DenBaars, a professor of material science at the University of California Santa Barbara, said at the SEMI NanoForum, taking place here this week. A principal advantage of the LED: It lasts about 100,000 hours, far longer than the conventional filament bulb

Lumileds' LED tech

Unfortunately, the LEDs that can perform this task cost about $60, he said. (Prices vary on the Internet.) But prices have been declining by 50 percent a year, so two years from now the same LED should cost around $20.

"At $20 the payback in energy occurs in about a year," DenBaars said. The rapid return on investment will occur in places such as stores and warehouses, where the light is on through much of the day. A year after that, LEDs will be even more economical for more places as costs continue to decline.

Approximately 22 percent of the electricity consumed in the United States goes toward lighting, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

To make matters worse, traditional lightbulbs are incredibly inefficient. Only about 5 percent of the energy that goes into them turns into light. The majority gets dissipated as heat.

If 25 percent of the lightbulbs in the U.S. were converted to LEDs putting out 150 lumens per watt (higher than the commercial standard now), the U.S. as a whole could save $115 billion in utility costs, cumulatively, by 2025, said DenBaars, and it would alleviate the need to build 133 new coal-burning power stations.

In turn, carbon emissions in the atmosphere would go down by 258 million metric tons.

"Multiply that by three and you get the worldwide savings," he stated. DenBaars then showed a picture of the globe at night. The landmass of the U.S. could easily be picked out by nighttime lights.

"We shoot a lot of light into space that doesn't need to be there," he noted.

Rising prices of electricity, combined with the antiquated nature of lightbulb technology, has prompted several start-ups and large industrial concerns to get into lighting.

Fiberstars, for instance, has come up with a way to replace hot fluorescent tube lights with light-emitting optical fiber in freezer cases in grocery stores. Hewlett-Packard spinoff Lumileds is also producing LEDs for a variety of applications.

LED technology is improving as well. UCSB has created an experimental LED that can put out 117 lumens per watt, while a Japanese company has developed one that can put out 130 lumens per watt.

Getting LEDs to produce white light that is tolerable to humans has also greatly improved. Manufacturers can do it two ways. One is to package red, green and blue LEDs in a way that the combined light shines white to the human eye. The other way is to make blue LEDs and coat them with a phosphor--a luminescent substance commonly used on fluorescent lamps.

See more CNET content tagged:
lightbulb, light-emitting diode, diode, pricing, U.S.

60 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
a little dim
I just want an energy efficient bulb that I can dim that doesn't cost a few arms, legs, and my first born child.
Posted by chuchucuhi (233 comments )
Reply Link Flag
cost over time is cheap
Don't just look at the initial cost. You have to look at the return on that initial expense. Over time, the cost to purchase an LED bulb is recovered in energy savings and length of bulb life. So if you only had to change bulbs every 11 years assuming it's on 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, that initial cost to purchase is made over relatively quickly. Not to mention removing the need to actually spend time to change a bulb (like recessed lights).
Posted by jbob70 (4 comments )
Link Flag
Dimming a LED is no problem
Two ways, the best is by pulsing and varying the on time. The second (more difficult) would be to run them with a variable voltage.
Posted by JeffinMD (8 comments )
Link Flag
Available
There are companies that offer dimmable LED solutions that are reasonably priced and work pretty well.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
My LEDs
I'm amazed how much light the different LEDs onsome of my computer and camera equipment throw off. I have a battery charger that has a LED light on that throws off emough light that I use it as a night light.

I have just about replaced all of my 60 & 100 watt bulbs with those 13 & 27 watt fluorescent bulbs.
Posted by Foggy (32 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Efficient lighting
Our house has only two filament sockets lamps. Both are in locations where they are used less than an hour a week and one is difficult to reach and used even less. We use both 60 and 100 bulbs. The 100 is significantly better (it enables knitting, reading, etc.) than the 60 in floor lamps. The 60 is great when only TV is in use.

It is instructive to look at Home Depot or Lowes and see what a small fraction of space is devoted to screw in efficient lamps! Lots of long tubes, huge display of filament bulbs.

On the screw in special lamps, they are now available in reflector flood, 150 watt spiral lamps, and a few others things like candle lights.

I look forward to the LED lamps. I have three battery operated ones on my key chain. One has been used in four long power outages and it still lights. Two newer ones are three time more light and used when big light is needed. All this using a tiny lithium cell.
Posted by bigduke (78 comments )
Link Flag
I buy
fluorescent bulbs at 99 cent stores and they last 4 to 5 years.
Posted by paulsecic (298 comments )
Link Flag
Not quite
Good fluorescent lamps are at 100 lumens per watt. They are a small fraction of what LEDs cost. All of the commercial fixtures you see today with LEDs use LEDs that are around 30-60 lumens a watt. That's right people - currently LEDs ARE NOT as efficient as fluorescent . Don't let the marketing hype fool you. While it's true some labs have been demonstrating LEDs at a 100 lumens per watt they are FAR off from mass production and even farther off from being as cheap as fluorescent.

After they tackle efficiency, they have to tackle color so you will all find it visually acceptable to put in your home.

There are many ways to save energy you don't have to wait for LEDs - which are A LOT more than 2 years away from replacing current light bulbs.

Also keep in mind when an LED goes out - you have to replace and entire circuit board and heat sync - not just a lamp.
Posted by casademike (23 comments )
Reply Link Flag
LED's vs. incandenscent vs. fluorescent
Why didn't they mention fluorescent at all? The energy savings of LED's are about the same as compact fluorescent if not more, and the light quality of compact fluorescent have come a long way and is pretty darn nice now, unlike current LED's.

The advantages I see of LED's vs C.F. is true instant start (though most CF 'almost' do that now), full brightness right away (most CF take a minute to get to full brightness), better low temperature performance, some see the flicker, better performance on a low voltage DC source, perhaps longer life.
Posted by k2dave (213 comments )
Link Flag
Replace Circuit Board?
Why would you have to replace a circuit board if an LED burns out? All bulbs have positive and negative contacts. An LED is not different. I plug lower output ones into and out of solderless breadboards. They could be made to be easily swapped out.
Posted by MrHandle (71 comments )
Link Flag
Don't Overlook CF Down-Sides
I agree that CF is becoming a more viable alternative to incandescents, I have dozens now in my home. However, there is a significant disposal problem due the mercury contained within CF, you cannot just throw them in the trash. There are also concerns on lifetime vs orientation - vertical, down, sideways which make them not last as long.

Regarding LED replacements, it is certain than consumer LED solutions will have all the electronics and control systems necessary inside the socket, just like CF does now... or did you never wonder where the ballast and such disappeared to?
Posted by TT One (2 comments )
Link Flag
Don't Overlook CF downside
I agree that CF is becoming a more viable alternative to incandescents, I have dozens now in my home. However, there is a significant disposal problem due the mercury contained within CF, you cannot just throw them in the trash. There are also concerns on lifetime vs orientation - vertical, down, sideways which make them not last as long.

Regarding LED replacements, it is certain than consumer LED solutions will have all the electronics and control systems necessary inside the socket, just like CF does now... or did you never wonder where the ballast and such disappeared to?
Posted by TT One (2 comments )
Link Flag
Worst Light
CF may save money, but it is some of the worst light out there. It is harsh, sensitive to a variety of environmental conditions and teriibly noisy in the RF bands. Right now, I prefer Halogen, but have used some LED with success.
Posted by adlyb1 (123 comments )
Link Flag
Just a couple things
I don't know about the amount of lumen-per-watt from either fluorescent or LED bulbs, but I do know that an LED is quite easy to make replaceable like a Christmas string light. They only have 2 leads in the actual bulbs, so they can be made so they pop in and out of the circuit board quite easily.

Also, the tech in LEDs is not the bulb its self, it's the circuitry that is required to make them play nice with our 110-120VAC 60Hz home electricity. LEDs are super easy to produce, and crazy cheap in and of themselves. Oh, and the color issue. I've seen white LEDs and they are sort of painful to look at, and put out a bluish light. So there's some work to be done in that dept..

As for fluorescents, they require similar circuitry to work as a LED, but they are filled with harmful crap, easily broken, don't last quite as long, are much bulkier, and to some people they notice a flicker from them due to the 60Hz. So LEDs will eventually be a better alternative to them.
Posted by MadJoe75 (1 comment )
Link Flag
Re: Not Quite
While you do bring us some good pros you are also leaving out
some important cons.

Low Voltage, most HF ballasts deal with low voltage poorly, or
for that matter deal with wrong line frequencies.

Dimming, dim-able hot cathode setups are pricey and often
noisy (They can really drive home audio system nuts even more
than incandescent dimmers.)

Temperature: Fluorescent lamps regardless of their particular
design are rotten at low temps. You can't use them in the fridge
and cold climates without significantly reducing their light
output.

I would agree with the '2 years away', that's just a bit 'pie in the
sky' however mass production is closer than you realize.

Their uptake is likely to be no faster than CF lamps which have
been available for consumer use for almost 20 years now.

The right bulb for the right application :)
Posted by mathue_tax (56 comments )
Link Flag
Re: Not Quite
While you do bring us some good pros you are also leaving out
some important cons.

Low Voltage, most HF ballasts deal with low voltage poorly, or
for that matter deal with wrong line frequencies.

Dimming, dim-able hot cathode setups are pricey and often
noisy (They can really drive home audio system nuts even more
than incandescent dimmers.)

Temperature: Fluorescent lamps regardless of their particular
design are rotten at low temps. You can't use them in the fridge
and cold climates without significantly reducing their light
output.

I would agree with the '2 years away', that's just a bit 'pie in the
sky' however mass production is closer than you realize.

Their uptake is likely to be no faster than CF lamps which have
been available for consumer use for almost 20 years now.

The right bulb for the right application :)
Posted by mathue_tax (56 comments )
Link Flag
This saves only 258 metric tons of CO2?
Quote: "In turn, carbon emissions in the atmosphere would go down by 258 metric tons."

That is nothing. I suspect someone lost 6 magnitudes or something and the number should be 258 million tons. Otherwise, why bother?

LEDs are terrific but energy saving is already mighty easy with fluorescent lights. Those are super cheap too (less than $1 a piece depending on the type) and fit in regular light fixtures. That's what will have to happen with LED lights too.

Dimming of these compact saver bulbs is an issue although some are made that actually are dimmable. Of course they are so expensive it's not worth the trouble.
Posted by NocturnalCT (301 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Yes, obviously the writer goofed
Though by how much is hard to know.

Just another example of non-technical reporters getting in over
their heads trying to report on technology. (I have twice seen news
stories giving the capacity of a new power plant in "kilowatts per
year," which makes no sense at all. The writer of one actually
admitted to me that he used this nonsense term because the
correct "kilowatts" just looked lonesome sitting all by itself.)
Posted by GRobLewis (61 comments )
Link Flag
Where is the DC home wiring support?
Where are the code updates for having a DC subsystem? And with more solar options, what about more DC-friendly fixtures? (I know, appliances and some devices that need AC for motors will always be AC)
What about efficient cooling (solar roof vents)?
And will the LED really be cost-effective? Some of the flourescant GREEN bulbs cost more than 2x the lifespan in incandescant bulbs (remember the startup of the green bulbs uses more power).
I look forward to better home codes, better lighting and I hope, better efficiency.
Posted by Below Meigh (249 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The closest thing on the horizon is
Power over Ethernet (PoE), which can deliver something like 20
watts at 48VDC over regular CAT 5 wiring. It's intended for things
like Internet phones and similar appliances, but there's no reason it
couldn't power LED lamps (perhaps with high-tech networked on/
off/dim control!)

Currently the infrastructure is quite expensive but if it took off in a
mass way, the cost would of course come way down.
Posted by GRobLewis (61 comments )
Link Flag
low-voltage DC can be expensive
The problem with wiring a house with low voltage DC is that the cable is massive. Look at the cables for your car battery. With the price of copper and difficulty of installation, it would cost 10 times more to wire your house. The other alternative is high-voltage DC, but you can't use use cheap transformers to get the voltage back down. The fact is, AC is less expensive. It is less expensive to step down the power and convert to DC all over the place than to either wire for low-voltage DC or use DC/DC voltage converters with high-voltage DC.
Posted by waltsjc (19 comments )
Link Flag
Warm Lighting
My only concern is achieving the same warm glow that incandescent bulbs have. Lighting can really make a huge difference in the feeling and appearance of a room, and I'm afraid that will be forgotten with LEDs because there seems to be a lot of emphasis on creating white light. I'm definitely excited about the prospect of the dramatic energy savings that are possible, and I love LED flashlights and headlights. It's an amazing technology, but I only hope that we are able to avoid the classical sterility that plagues fluorescent lighting.
Posted by nozai (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
12V home system
Yes, I was wondering about that too when I bought my house earlier this year. It would be great to have a 12 or maybe 24V system for everything that can use it. That would include PCs, stereos and other entertainment equipment. I was surprised that I didn't find a whole lot of ready made solutions. Maybe I didn't search hard enough :)

The problem is of course that 110V (220V) is so conveniently transformed into any DC power you need. Telecom equipment requires DC power because of the backup batteries they use to make the phones ring when the power goes down. So these types of boxes use DC-DC converters. Not that cheap.

I suppose having a 12V net just to power the lights would be nice. Couple of car batteries and solar panels would get you quite far.
Posted by NocturnalCT (301 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Why compare with incadescent bulbs?
Shall we abandon the advances in Compact Flourescent Bulbs altogether?

You know why?

The LED is WAY TOO EXPENSIVE when compared to Compact Flourescent bulbs.

A 10 watt CF bulb gives out the equivalent of a 60 watt incandescent bulb. I bought loads of CF bulbs on sale at Albertson's one time when there was a promo, a set of 3 CF bulbs costs only $0.99! Regular prices now are less than $1 per CF bulb. Lumen per lumen, LED is less efficient than CF bulbs, last time I checked.

they have to bring the prices of LED bulbs, and fr an equivalent 60 watt incandescent bulb, the LED bulb should be sold for about $3 or less.

CF bulbs currently lasts 5 to 6 years, or 20,000 hrs, factor in terms of present values, the LED which they claim would last 5 times as long as CF bulbs, it should be sold for $3 or less, right now, and not in the future. If they can't do that, that technology is useless compared to CF bulbs!
Posted by Joe Real (1217 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You're exactly right
LED's will be amazing in the future I'm sure. They already have made inroads in the automotive industry. However CF bulbs offer the kinds of benefits discussed in the article -- today. From the US Govt's energy star website:
"Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs
If every American home replaced just one light bulb with an ENERGY STAR, we would save enough energy to light more than 2.5 million homes for a year and prevent greenhouse gases equivalent to the emissions of nearly 800,000 cars."

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=cfls.pr_cfls" target="_newWindow">http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=cfls.pr_cfls</a>
Posted by Spimby (61 comments )
Link Flag
Great logic
"...it should be sold for $3 or less, right now, and not in the future. If they can't do that, that technology is useless compared to CF bulbs!"

That makes a lot of sense. Just like talking about plasma and LCD TVs years ago.

"What??? $25,000 for a 42" plasma TV? That technology is useless! We should choose to use CRT televisions FOREVER because the early flat panel TVs were expensive! If they aren't cheaper RIGHT NOW, the whole plat panel display technology is useless compared to CRT technology."
Posted by KTLA_knew (385 comments )
Link Flag
You're right, but CF has some issues
In general, I agree, but there are three points which do argue for LED eventually:

1. CF pricing is artificial; it's subsidized in order to achieve the public polcy goal of reducing energy requirements for lighting. CF has been around for 20 years, but has only moved when price is made comparable to cheap incandescents.

2. CF has mercury and other non-green aspects - an issue for disposal. There are so-called "green" fluorescents that do not have hazardous materials, but they are reported to not work so well.

3. Ultimately, LED, or some other form of solid state lighting should be the most efficient form of lighting, because the production of light is some form of direct conversion of electricity to light, without having to go through some intermediary process, such as heating a filament, or creating a plasma that then excites a phosphor.

Having said that, in the short term, CFL is a pretty good deal for consumers. The national energy savings quoted for large scale LED use start somewhere around 2016, with 2025 being quoted as the year of really big energy savings. LEDs do make sense right now for a number of (large) lighting niches that are not so sensitive to up-front cost and present technical limitations in light output, but the case for general purpose LED lighting in the home appears to be a ways off.
Posted by Sidman (1 comment )
Link Flag
Settle down children.
Not that I always agree... or do so in this case with the article. But the article is about LEDs and how they are becoming cheaper and a viable solution over what we have now. Yes there could of been made mention in short about other solutions that are being worked on but this was just about LEDs.

What if in 4 years LEDs work 10 times better then any other bulb? When the first run flat tires came out they were super expensive. When the first LCD TVs/Monitors came out they were super expensive. Things dont happen overnight so relax.
Posted by viperedge (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
In the Future
It will still take several years for LED's to become truely economical, but one of the big advantages of LEDs are that you can achieve all kinds of different lighting effects (colors and combinations of colors). It will look very cool when it comes about.

Of course, potentiometers can be used for dimming and electronics can produce all kinds of programmable color patterns etc...

As far as the incandescent thing goes, they are more efficient than 5 percent (as the article claims) from everything that I've read. Still, they are very wasteful as far as electricity being converted into a good bit more heat than light. I just wish the government would offer things like tax amnesty for the purchase of incandescent alternatives such as florescent (assuming they aren't in bed with the energy companies and actually want energy waste--just an excuse for the energy companies to make more money lol).
Posted by MrHandle (71 comments )
Reply Link Flag
LED's
LED's are still expensive but yet they are making their mark in technology I wouldn't be suprised if they came down even more. I have installed LED's in my front turn signal lights of my Daewoo Leganza. As for home use the prices are still a bit high. The base pricing of a LED light bulb that are made in China currently run $5-12 a pop depending on power and type thats not even retail price. Which in the states the probably sell them upwards $30+ each even in the $100 range
Posted by kyle172 (65 comments )
Reply Link Flag
White LEDs
White LEDs are now available in what is known as "Warm White" typically 3300 K colour temp. This is less harsh than the general white which can be as high as 8000 K.

Carey Pickard
Posted by careypickard (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
None of my concerns were addressed!
The two major concerns of consumers looking to replace incandescent bulbs with more energy efficient models are:

1. The amount of red light produced.
(Red light is far easier on the eyes than blue light, which can actually trigger migraines in some consumers)

2. The stability of the light source in areas that experience frequent brownouts and blackouts.
(we have frequently been courted with promises of five to ten years of bulb life, only to find out that this is significantly shortened by our less than dependable electrical companies. This was not so much an issue when a bulb cost fifty cents to a dollar, but an investment of five to twenty dollars for a bulb that is even more susceptible to power variances, causes the average consumer to question the veracity of the manufacturer's grandiose claims!)

LEDs may be better, more efficient, and even more attractive, but until these questions are addressed, they will never be more popular than the inexpensive (at least to purchase) Edison model.
Posted by cconsaul (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I would think that leds would last longer if ran at a lower voltage.
Brownouts should extend the life of your light. Perhaps by as much as 15 minutes per year.
Posted by ralfthedog (1589 comments )
Link Flag
Answers
Regarding color, LEDs can be tuned to emit light in any color you want. They are frequently built by combining several different color leds in one unit. By altering the power of each component you can tune your light to make it as red, blue or green as you want. Beware that, while red is easier on the eyes, it is less efficient (the eye is less sensitive in that part of the spectrum) so you end up wasting part of your savings.
Regarding tolerance to brownouts or blackouts, LEDs are electronic devices, so they don't run on your main power. They use an electronic power source to adapt your power source to their internal requirements. If the power source is reasonably well designed it could make the external power level irrelevant, and blackouts shoudn't produce any damage. Of course, that's a big IF, but the technology has the capability of doing what you want. Let's see if the manufacturers do the right thing.
Posted by herby67 (144 comments )
Link Flag
Solar / 12 volt D.C
News of any energy saving bulbs is good. I live on the eastern seaboard of Australia, and in the community I live and work in Solar Powered Housing has become a reality already, (in some cases since late seventies / early eighties). It is interesting to read the talkback as though this is a technology that has some merit, but whose time has not come. Someone forgot to tell us.
Posted by m.o.t.u. (96 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Solar LED
M.o.t.u.

Would love to dialgoue with your regarding the influx of solar LED technology. I am currently in the process of launching a family of solar and hybird (solar+battery) powered LED lighting for both commercial consumers and endusers like yourself.

I am particularly intersted in extending my product sourcing to Australia.

Hope to hear from you!
Posted by jhuanger629 (2 comments )
Link Flag
Couldn't LEDs blind you with UV light?
My understanding is cheap LEDs disperse UV - enough to make your bleached white clothes glow in dim lighting. Wouldn't that deteriorate our corneas? Or is that "ok" since the manufacturers could sell us bulbs at the same high price, but cost them less to make? :-P

-Auri
Posted by AuriRahimzadeh (17 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Does sunlight blind you?
Last time I checked I could still see after I went out in sunlight - which is a far stringer source of UV.
Posted by richto (895 comments )
Link Flag
Couldn't White LEDs blind you with UV light?
My understanding is cheap white LEDs disperse UV - enough to make your bleached white clothes glow in dim lighting. Wouldn't that deteriorate our corneas? Or is that "ok" since the manufacturers could sell us bulbs at the same high price, but cost them less to make? :-P

-Auri
Posted by AuriRahimzadeh (17 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Much Less than Sunlight...
The UV spectrum emmitted from an LED is first primarily longwave UV which is relatively harmless to the human eye but the small amout of shortwave UV that an LED does emit is much less that that of regular sunlight.
Longwave UV will also make certain chemicals glow.
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
Much Less than Sunlight...
The UV spectrum emmitted from an LED is first primarily longwave UV which is relatively harmless to the human eye but the small amount of shortwave UV that an LED does emit is much less that that of regular sunlight.
Longwave UV will also make certain chemicals glow.

The holy grail of LED technology is to get a coherent source of very short wave UV light (ie; very small wavelength UV laser diode)
Posted by fred dunn (793 comments )
Link Flag
Tons of CO2
Actually, Rob that is a simple typo, not a lack of understanding of the issues. Million. got dropped
Posted by michael kanellos (65 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Energy
It is true that LEDs (and fluorescent lights, as others have noticed) are more luminically efficient, in that they convert a higher percentage of energy to visible light.
But it is also true that the remainder is transformed into heat. For places that have cooling needs most of the year, that's a double advantage: you save energy on powering your lights, and you save on cooling. But for places needing heating most of the year, the advantage is almost null. Every watt you save on lighting you are going to have so spend it on heating. And since most heating comes from sources identically as efficient as a lightbulb (the only exception being heating air conditioning, which is more efficient) then lightbulbs are a decent heating source for those places.
So it depends on where you live. If you live near the equator, go for them. If you live nearer to the poles, keep the filaments.
Posted by herby67 (144 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Hidden Savings Less Heat = Less Air Conditioning
The heat efficiency of LED lighting translates into lower air conditioning costs.

In the winter, when you need the heat anyway, its no biggie. But in the summer, every watt of lighting is another watt of heat that must be removed, at rates in the neighborhood of 3 watts of AC power per watt of light..
Posted by disco-legend-zeke (448 comments )
Reply Link Flag
IC bulbs are not efficient in winter either
Yes you don't have to run the a/c to cool the extra heat they produce, but unless you have electric resistance heating you are still wasting money with IC lighting.

Gas, oil, Kero, electric heat pump, wood, or coal is MUCH CHEAPER then electric resistance heating. A IC bulb is basically a electric resistance heater, just like a portable space heater - it's a expensive way to get heat and saves you nothing, you would be far better using your home heater to provide heat efficiently and use CF lighting.
Posted by k2dave (213 comments )
Reply Link Flag
To Almost Everyone Who commented
Your arguments would have more impact if you would LEARN TO SPELL! Ever try a spell-checker?
Posted by Jenny3426 (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Fluorescents more efficient?
The comparison to inefficient incandescent lamps is inappropriate; how do LED lamps compare, lumen/watt, with various fluorescent lamps (efficient cool-white, warm white, color balanced)? At the present, LED lamps, I believe, lag behind.
Posted by bresnik (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Maybe Gates and Buffet should learn from Branson
If they would take some small percent of the foundation and invest in these technologies they'll have a nice cash flow in return and it will help save the planet. I'm sure some big cash will speed up the process by ten times.
Posted by josephatshop (9 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Try LED light bulbs @ reasonable price
Industry R &#38; D is making great strides in upping the lumens and lowering the cost of LED lighting, but we still are years away from getting something on store shelves that will adequatly repacae the CFL. If you want to try some LEDs at a reasonable price www.shop.donsgreenstore.com is one place you can try. Granted they are dim bulbs, but it does give you a taste of things to come, and they work great as night lights.
Posted by newmexhik917 (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.