subscribe

Once a day
Get Articles by e-mail:

Also
Get Today's Climate by e-mail:

Climate Science Links

U.S. Government

International

Academic, Non-Governmental

Explosive Growth for LED Lights in Next Decade, Report Says

Next-generation bulbs to capture nearly 50% of lighting market by 2020

By Amy Westervelt

May 13, 2010

In 2008, for instance, researchers at Purdue University to replace the expensive standard substrate used in LED production — sapphire — with low-cost, metal-coated silicon wafers. The switch would greatly reduce the cost of LED manufacturing, assuming another silicon shortage does not come along.

Even without a cost breakthrough, though, reports suggest that paying more for LEDs would be worth it. In a recent LED-to-fluorescent comparison, Greentech Media found that while LEDs are clearly more expensive at first, they are far more cost-effective in the long run.

Comparing an installation of 40 LEDs and 40 fluorescent tubes, the report found that in the first year it would cost $3,069 for the energy and initial purchase of LEDs, while the fluorescent tubes would cost $1,071. Given that every year thereafter the energy costs of the LED tubes would be lower than fluorescents — $269 versus $431 — the analysis found that after 16 years the LEDs offered a six percent cost savings.

Still, as with most green building products, the long-term cost savings of LEDs won't necessarily convince building owners right away. It's likely to take awhile for them to warm up to the idea that they should increase their lighting budget by a few thousand dollars, even if it means reducing their energy bills.

In the meantime, during the ten years the study predicts it will take for LEDs to overcome obstacles to their adoption, fluorescents will continue to replace incandescents, the authors say. To fill that future market demand, companies are emerging with controllers and sensors to help boost the efficiency of flourescent bulbs.

Cavet: 'Save Energy and Money Now' 

One such firm is the venture-backed Toronto company , which recently launched its LumiSmart Intelligent Controller, a device that connects directly to lighting circuits and automatically adjusts voltages to improve efficiency.

With its 'save energy and money now' approach, Cavet is likely to be appealing to building owners.

"A 100,000 square foot property can be outfitted with LumiSmart in one afternoon and benefit from an immediate savings of 30 percent with an ROI payback period of between 12 to 24 months," Albert Behr, president and CEO of Cavet Technologies, told SolveClimate.

According to the company, a single LumiSmart ILC can manage lighting loads of up to 6.9 kilowatts, or around 130 fluorescent lights. The product provides power savings by altering the power waveform and then applying what Cavet calls an "adaptive power factor correction." By inserting on-off pulses into the sine wave, LumiSmart is able to dramatically reduce electrical consumption with minimal impact on lighting levels.

So far, Cavet has caught the eye of venture capitalists and as-yet-unnamed utilities in Canada, Europe and the U.S., all eager to test the company’s controller. It also won praise from cleantech analyst Dallas Kachan, former managing director of The Cleantech Group, who released a of the company via his market research firm, Kachan & Co, last week.

The key benefit of Cavet's controller, analysts say, is that it is relatively inexpensive at $2,000 per controller and is quick and easy to install. While it still needs to be installed by an electrician, it's about as plug-and-play as such a device gets, the company says.

"There are other lighting controllers, but they generally take a lot of time and money to install, so the more lights an organization has, the more expensive these other solutions are," Kachan says in the company’s launch video.

The LumiSmart product has been in trials throughout Canada and Europe during the last year, including at the Canadian headquarters of electronics manufacturer Celestica, which is both making and testing the product.

LED technology is still

LED technology is still costly in comparison to fluorescent bulbs. Fluorescent light bulbs contain small amount of mercury (4 to 20 mg). When fluorescent light bulb shatters, it releases mercury vapor.

|

Good Post

Nice Post, thanks for sharing.

We are Energy Saving Solutions provider offering various solutions by utilizing the energy of the Sun or providing alternate means to reduce your energy consumption levels and save the environment.

LED Lighting saves up to 70% of your Lighting bills.

 

LEDs

I thought your post on LED lighting was very interesting.  LEDs are far superior than its predecessors in that they use less energy, they have a longer life and they are better for the environment.   While the initial cost of LEDs is higher than incandescents and CFLs, it will be offset by the energy savings and the long life of the bulb.  It would be beneficial for any household to make the switch over to LED lighting.  I currently work with Sharp, but I have always been a fan of their products they have to offer.  If you are in the market for lighting, I recommend you check out their <a href="http://www.sharpusa.com/ForBusiness/LEDLightingCommercial/LEDLighting_Commercial.aspx">LEDs</a>

Cost is coming down

The cost of the led lights are coming down. In few years time it will replace CFL and other outdoor lights

LED Lights

After observing the massive growth of , it can be said that in the upcoming future, advertising and marketing of any business will be done completely from them. With the spend of time, their quality is also improving. Their softwares are also introduced in the market due to which a big LED lighting system can be controlled and operate from a software.

Lighting Design

We are a Design, Manufacture and Installation company who has helped many companies add impact to their signage by changing there lighting system to LED. We have also designed, manufactured and installed for casino across the country using the LED lighting system and have been able to really give our customers a good deal with a lighting system that is energy efficient, last longer, can be programmable to change colors etc... and is safer for the environment.

While I don't feel the

While I don't feel the technology has fully matured, it's definitely reached a point where it's at least good enough to use for many applications. There are some applications where I don't think we'll see LED lighting in large scale but for every day use, I believe the writing is on the wall.

LED lights will save our planet...

LED light bulbs are non-toxic and not made from hazardous materials.

Fluorescent light bulbs contain small amount of mercury (4 to 20 mg). When fluorescent light bulb shatters, it releases mercury vapor. Mercury is hazardous and the quickest way for mercury to enter your body and absorbed into your bloodstream is by breathing in mercury vapor.

More info from the link below:

LED Lights is far from being mass applied

Hi, guys. Although we can list tens or hundreds of benefits of LED lighting, the barrier is the price. As developed countries can afford that price for saving the planet, 4/5 of the human will still not regard this as an alternative to incandescent bulbs.

While LED has come a long

While LED has come a long way, there are still some major disadvantages to using it.
First the light output is considerably lower than that of fluorescent bulbs. Yes it consumes less, but it doesn't light the area as well as a linear bulb. What's more the angle at which the light is emitted is extremely narrow making it difficult to use LED to light up a wide area.
Secondly, as mentioned in the article, LED technology is still costly in comparison to fluorescent bulbs.
Thirdly, there is not product standardization at this point, meaning that when your LEDs start to burn out you may find yourself having to replace the entire system.
This article is great to read to learn more about the difference between LED and fluorescent technology:

White LED is already there and improving so fast

That article os lumiversal is completely uncredible and probably designed to "eat" uninformed minds. Is not scientific at all, they dont show the light sources used, they do not give any reference at all or the way the testing was undertaked. And they have good reasons to put down leds due to theyr main bussines lines.
LED technology has overcome T5 performance more than 2 years ago, you just have to ask CREE or Seoul Semiconductors or OSRAM among others.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <h1> <h2> <h3> <ul> <li> <ol> <b> <i> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Youtube and google video links are automatically converted into embedded videos.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.

More information about formatting options