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
There are LEDs putting out over a hundred lumens per watt, getting brighter all the time and they think they are going to touch that tech with their little forty lumens per watt technology?
To all those who are breaking out the poo-poo gun on this one, I say take it easy!
“The first ESL prototype is expected to output 40 lumens per watt with a 6,000 hour lifetime.”
KEY WORDS: THE FIRST ESL PROTOTYPE
If this product isn’t vapor ware, then it will take some time to mature, and the efficiency will get better over time, just as CFL and LED are maturing.
I don’t know if any of you have actually tried the dimmable CFL’s, but they’re currently a complete joke. Uneven dimming, buzzing at any level below 100%, and extremely short lifespans. This is according to reports from just about everyone who has tried them (including mysef), and this is with bulbs from many different manufacturers.
If this company’s claims are true (I know, a BIG IF), then this product will fill the needs of many like myself who have dimmers installed where appropriate.
Since the US congress has decided to OUTLAW normal light bulbs, we need a variety of products and competition in this marketplace.
Give these guys a chance!
40 Lumins per Watt? Isn’t that about the same as Florecents?
I might potentially by these. I can’t stand CFLs. They buzz, the light’s off, and the electric radiation gives some people headaches.
But if these are as efficient and cheap as CFLs then that’s great.
Tracy
Another couple of days and we will be in the 2nd quarter of 2009 - the product is now due sometime in 2009.
CFl’s are designed to be utilized in applications where they are turned on and left on for some time. They are not designed to be on for a minute or two and that will shorten their life.
I don’t understand the part about the patents pending but not available for public view. I thought once the filing is made it is a public document.
Hopefully this is more than just smoke & mirrors.
SEE: “A £2 energy-saving lightbulb that lasts for 60 years has been developed by scientists at Cambridge University. The researchers have designed a bulb that is three times more energy efficient than today’s best offer and can cut lighting bills by 75 per cent.The bulbs are 12 times more efficient that conventional tungsten bulbs and three times more efficient than compact fluorescent “energy efficient” bulbs. They can burn for 100,000 hours and they illuminate instantly and can be dimmed, unlike energy efficient bulbs.”
http://theinfochief.com/
Betcha the “Big Boys” in “Black Suits” beat the snots out of this discovery and bought up the patents real fast! I haven’t been able to fine even a trace of this science since this article was published? Help, please, anybody out there know anything else?
how much is it,i think CFl is enough