New energy standards are causing major innovation in incandescent lightbulbs, a family of bulbs that some thought would not survive.
(From The New York Times)
The story "Incandescent bulbs return to the cutting edge" published July 6, 2009 at 1:31 PM is no longer available on CNET News.
Thank goodness they mentioned the mercury. No discussion involving CF lightbulbs is complete without mention of the deadly, deadly mercury inside each and every one. No death bulbs will ever enter my house. I'm bothered by the fact that my office has DB's installed.
It's excellent that American innovation has once again overcome government stupidity. I bet private industry even created at least 1 job for every 2.2 jobs destroyed by this idiotic California legislation, just like every hidden tax those morons dream up.
Whilst the amount of mercury used in production a CFL bulb is at most 6mg, the average mercury content is 4mg. The total emissions of mercury created by a CFL bulb from electricity consumption over its lifetime is about 2.4mg of mercury. In comparison the emissions from an incandescent light bulb is about 10mg. Therefore overall CFLs result in a reduced amount of mercury emitted over the lifetime of a CFL bulb. The real gain is the reduction of 38kg of Co2 per CFL per year and an overall saving of 14% on your electricity bill.
The government stupidity you refer to passed a bill that requires these companies to stop producing inefficient and outdated incandescents and instead come up with new innovative incandescent technology to meet those new standards. Sometimes good old capitalism needs a kick in the rear.
Oh please, If you're that worried then you should be living in the dark in some cave somewhere. You're probable living in a home with various devices that also contain mercury. The very computer system you're reading this article with most likely contains trace amounts of mercury. Another question is why aren't you also worried about the lithium, cadmium, lead and various other compounds used to make everything from iPods to Microwaves? Or are you really delusional enough to think all modern products are made with recycled materials? ...yeah, maybe the box they came in was recycled.
Paranoia and Stupidity are more deadly then anything.
To all you tree-hugging wackos who think mercury is no big deal go read what you're supposed to do if you drop a CF bulb and it happens to break. You have to treat the broken CF bulb like it's toxic waste. It's very very very safe to say CF bulbs are dangerous to have in your house especially if you have children. Mercury can permanently damage your children if they happen to break a bulb and then touch the toxic waste.
I tried a Halogena bulb once, the performance overall was great, but the waist heat was horrendous. So much so, I took the thing out in fear of fire and have never looked at them since. I'll take the mercury over a fire hazard any day of the week.
First - learn how to spell 'waste'. Most lamps have a wattage rating, so I'd expect a 100 watt Halogena to not exceed a standard 100 watt bulb in terms of heat / safety.
Second, when it's 20*F outside, heat is a very welcome feature of light bulbs. I could run a 1200 watt space heater in the dark, or run a few 100 watt light bulbs in my office, and lighten it's load.
But don't just look at mercury, look at the coal being burned and released into the air to power the 1000000000000000000000 old style bulbs. You think that is fun to breath?
...ever try to use a CFL in a dimmer-switch light fixture? How about in a 3-way light fixture? Is there a CFL out there that doesn't generate a 60Hz headache?
(hint: CFL's don't work worth a crap in either fixture, and they aren't exactly gentle on the human iris - hence the headaches in individuals sensitive to such things).
--
OTOH, I rather enjoy not paying out the nose for lighting bills, and lvoe the fact that the last CFL bulb I replaced died off after two years of near-continuous use.
--
Not for or against either type, but rather, I'm saying that there are perfectly normal uses for both types. I'd prefer LED over CFL, though, but that can get a bit pricey...
Here's an article that details the original experiment and some of it's other uses: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080201090845.htm
But basically this laser can change the surface properties on a light bulb filament, and by doing this researchers can create a mental that is much more efficient at emitting light. Now imagine if this technology was coupled with high quality gases and special coatings that turn the excess heat into light. You could probably augment the efficiency 100 fold.
They did mention it in this article. "Both Cunningham and Deposition Sciences have been looking into the work of Chunlei Guo, an associate professor of optics at Rochester University..."
I think LED technology will leapfrog this new incandescent technology to market. LED bulbs that were costing $60 or more a few years ago are down to $10.99 at Costco. It didn't take very long for $20+ CFLs to get to $1. Getting full-spectrum LEDs to $5 or less in 5 years is quite possible, in my opinion. The technology is changing rapidly and with 90% of the bulb market still using old incandescents...volume possibilities are staggering.
See my experiences regarding LED lighting at home and get a link to a recent NY Times article at
The bulbs sold at costco are Crap sold as new tech( led technology is not new )they are inferior with regard to the led chip( low binning low quality)- thermal mgmt poor - optics get a c- or d+ the construct of the wannabes is like that of a yugo or trabant( really bad cars ) Buy quality or enjoy your decision ( mean"t to say endure it)
Borealis is an outstanding example of a quality product - full line of lumeniares par 20,30,38s Mr16- fluorescent replacement options ,street lighting decor lighting this exemplifies A great product from the Usa
Costcos lighting is like going to a taco bell expecting fine cuisine you can't get it there !
What's cutting edge about this? Incandescents woefully lag other light sources. Save for a recent innovation with nano-altered filaments, incadescents largely have done nothing over the years to improve and could go the way of the dinosaur.
The arrogant smugness in your comment is just misplaced. The light bulb is a product that all of us have used for years without any regard to improvement. You are just as guilty as the rest of us for continuing to use this "dinosaur".
Up until the government mandated change there was no need to improve the incandescent light. The point of the article is now there are changes and improvements being done to the lightbulb and those changes are making them viable again. While you appear to have some exaggerated misconceptions about what constitutes "cutting edge" these improvements are in fact very significant.
Halogen lights convert the heat from the incandescent filament into more light.
They've always been more efficient but more costly.
This is just putting infra-red "mirror sunglasses" on the gas capsules.
woo - high tech
Still a 70 watt bulb instead of a 40 watt for about the same light as an incredibly inefficient 100 watt one.
Back in the old days I used nothing but halogen light - it's the best light.
Now I use flourescents overall and a halogen desk lamp for when I need to see detail.
This *is* the 21st century - consume less.
Web giant is spending $120 million to beef up its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters, according to filings with the city reviewed by the San Jose Mercury News.
The Samsung Galaxy Mini 2 S6500 could make its debut at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona later this month, according to a leaked promotional image.
MIT creates a simulation to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Spacewar. A relic of the early days of minicomputers, it was one of the first computer video games and set the stage for many others, including Asteroids.
It's excellent that American innovation has once again overcome government stupidity. I bet private industry even created at least 1 job for every 2.2 jobs destroyed by this idiotic California legislation, just like every hidden tax those morons dream up.
Whilst the amount of mercury used in production a CFL bulb is at most 6mg, the average mercury content is 4mg. The total emissions of mercury created by a CFL bulb from electricity consumption over its lifetime is about 2.4mg of mercury. In comparison the emissions from an incandescent light bulb is about 10mg. Therefore overall CFLs result in a reduced amount of mercury emitted over the lifetime of a CFL bulb. The real gain is the reduction of 38kg of Co2 per CFL per year and an overall saving of 14% on your electricity bill.
Paranoia and Stupidity are more deadly then anything.
Second, when it's 20*F outside, heat is a very welcome feature of light bulbs.
I could run a 1200 watt space heater in the dark, or run a few 100 watt light bulbs in my office, and lighten it's load.
But don't just look at mercury, look at the coal being burned and released into the air to power the 1000000000000000000000 old style bulbs. You think that is fun to breath?
(hint: CFL's don't work worth a crap in either fixture, and they aren't exactly gentle on the human iris - hence the headaches in individuals sensitive to such things).
--
OTOH, I rather enjoy not paying out the nose for lighting bills, and lvoe the fact that the last CFL bulb I replaced died off after two years of near-continuous use.
--
Not for or against either type, but rather, I'm saying that there are perfectly normal uses for both types. I'd prefer LED over CFL, though, but that can get a bit pricey...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090529121556.htm
Here's an article that details the original experiment and some of it's other uses:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080201090845.htm
But basically this laser can change the surface properties on a light bulb filament, and by doing this researchers can create a mental that is much more efficient at emitting light. Now imagine if this technology was coupled with high quality gases and special coatings that turn the excess heat into light. You could probably augment the efficiency 100 fold.
See my experiences regarding LED lighting at home and get a link to a recent NY Times article at
http://nedrep.org/node/565
the led chip( low binning low quality)- thermal mgmt poor - optics get a c- or d+ the construct of the wannabes
is like that of a yugo or trabant( really bad cars ) Buy quality or enjoy your decision ( mean"t to say endure it)
Borealis is an outstanding example of a quality product - full line of lumeniares par 20,30,38s Mr16- fluorescent
replacement options ,street lighting decor lighting this exemplifies A great product from the Usa
Costcos lighting is like going to a taco bell expecting fine cuisine you can't get it there !
CF is alchemy, a attempt of turning mercury into gold.
Up until the government mandated change there was no need to improve the incandescent light. The point of the article is now there are changes and improvements being done to the lightbulb and those changes are making them viable again. While you appear to have some exaggerated misconceptions about what constitutes "cutting edge" these improvements are in fact very significant.
They've always been more efficient but more costly.
This is just putting infra-red "mirror sunglasses" on the gas capsules.
woo - high tech
Still a 70 watt bulb instead of a 40 watt for about the same light as an incredibly inefficient 100 watt one.
Back in the old days I used nothing but halogen light - it's the best light.
Now I use flourescents overall and a halogen desk lamp for when I need to see detail.
This *is* the 21st century - consume less.
expect a 30% reduction in lifespan ( due to the gases ) they can't be phased out soon enough.
Get Leds ( Quality Leds) I use them - last months Comed bill was $31.00 for a family of 4
Really do it soon start reducing consumption; but by 2012 the will be commonplace due to the ban