New Lighting Technology Offers Alternative To CFLs and LEDs
Residential Lighting reports that a new energy-efficient lighting technology, dubbed ESL (electron-stimulated luminescence) was patented in June by a startup company called Vu1.
The technology works by using accelerated electrons to stimulate a phosphor coating on the inside of the glass bulb. In contrast, incandescent bulbs run a current through a filament inside the bulbs, and LEDs stimulate semiconductors to create light.
The first ESL prototype is expected to output 40 lumens per watt with a 6,000 hour lifetime.
So why is the ESL bulb any better than CFLs or LEDs?
- » See also: Group Buying = Lowest Price for Solar. Ever.
- » Get CleanTechnica by RSS or sign up by email.
Vu1 claims that their bulbs do not have the trace amounts of mercury that CFLs contain, and they do not require the manufacturing energy of LEDs. At $12, the ESL bulbs cost about the same as dimmable CFLs. We can expect to see these on the market fairly soon—Vu1 says the first screw-in models could be available as early as September 2008.
With all the news about the growing popularity of LED bulbs, this development could be just the thing to keep the public eye on energy-efficient alternative lighting.
Posts Related to Lighting:
- Chicago Suburb Preserves Night Sky With Innovative Light Ordinance
- Look Into The Light: The CFL
- Recessed Lights and Greenwash
It’s good to see companies like Vu1 taking steps toward sustainability. As consumers we need to support these types of companies. Another, http://www.simplestop.net stops your postal junk mail and benefits the environment.
While its great that there are people trying to create the next best thing; the LED technology is evolving rapidly and big steps are being made. The manufacturing process is becoming cheaper and better, while new materials are being used in the process.
See: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=12436
So they have turned the light bulb into a small TV tube?
That technology isn’t new but I guess it’s application to light bulbs is.
I think LED’s will win in the end becsuse they last so long and draw so much less power.
the argument that these take less energy to manufacture just won’t relate tot he consumer as much as the power they draw and how long they last.
[...] New Lighting Technology Offers Alternative To CFLs and LEDs : CleanTechnica Vu1 claims that their bulbs do not have the trace amounts of mercury that CFLs contain, and they do not require the manufacturing energy of LEDs. The ESL bulbs, which will cost $12, are about the same as dimmable CFLs. [...]
It’s great to see we have a potential clean solution on the near horizon. I’ve been following the LED story but GE has now pulled all of it’s LED r&d in the residential space. “Mark Rea, director of the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, said he expects limited success for L.E.D.’s, especially in outdoor and track lighting “I do not see a major step toward change in general illumination. To say L.E.D.’s will change everything, I don’t buy it. I think a lot of it is hype.” I think we will see led’s in automotive, retail, stop-lights but probably never in a ceiling fixture.
40 lumens/watt? That’s not exactly stunning – CFLs get 45-60 lm/W, and high-temperature incancesdents already get 35 lm/W. Good tube fluorescents with electronic ballasts can get 80-100 lm/W.
This is what happens when “Energy Efficient” becomes a checkbox.
$12 a bulb is great for new construction or those that can afford this luminescent luxury, but what of the Pro Wrestling/NASCAR families? I see lots of them procreating adding the value of WWW stock - will John Bill Kelly Smith choose a light bulb or that case of cheap beer? just a thought
I dunno dude, LEDs are pretty cool and VERY cost effective!
JT
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
apparently Edisons original light globe is still burning.
CFL’s: supposed to last longer and be as-good as traditional bulbs. Reality check: they don’t and they aren’t. LED’s: um, they are where? These: judgment withheld.