Comments on: One Sailor Beefs About Lights, Navy Responds with New High Efficiency LED Technology

By: Navy Tests Biofuels and Energy Efficiency at RIMPAC

Navy Tests Biofuels and Energy Efficiency at RIMPAC — Tue, 24 Jul 2012 00:24:20 +0000

[…] One recent example is the replacement of the humming, flickering old fluorescent bunk lights with high-quality LED lighting. That program began when a sailor reported that the old lights were interfering with rest, and the […]

By: Diesel Denim

Diesel Denim — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:56:00 +0000

I spent 8 patrols on nuke sub’s. I am a Navy Nuke. Don’t think for a minute that at the end of the day fuel usage is not importatnt on a nuke powered ship, esp. a submarine. It is. We senior engineering folks were always competing against the other shifts for efficiency – Reactor fuel usage is recored daily, diesel fuel is measured and recorded daily. When you make your own water, then after that, make your own oxygen from it, it takes a lot of energy just to make the air to breath in the sub. Every imaginable effieciency helps the operation and effective endurance of the submarine and its crew. Woe be unto the man who takes a long, hot “Hollywood” shower! Nothing worse than a water waster! It was no fun when we had to run on our battery during reactor scrams (shut downs) at sea underwater. First action is to turn off all unnecessary loads. That means A/C. The ship and war fighting is what’s primarily important. Humans get what’s left after that and in very metered degrees. Life is good when the reactor is running again – relatively.
Suffice it to say doing more with less is always the goal. I fully agree with the post that encourages us to use the “drop in” LED tubes to replace the fluorescent bulbs (I hated the hum from my light in my bunk, too!!). I just bought some on Amazon for $50 each. No one has mentioned the Mercury hazard in any fluorescent lighting technology. Even new ones can only boast “low Mercury.” Mercury is a prohibited and ‘hazardous’ substance on most all larger US Navy vessels, esp. Nuke ships. LED drop ins need to get pushed. Appears to me to be the lowest cost for the savings, not to mention the ease of upgrading the fixtures. I have done this already with several 4 ft fluorescent T8 bulbs at my job. Got to love those electricians on the sub’s. They had a dirty job and were usually involved in repairing any casualty because electricity is everywhere on the sub.

By: Underwater Lights

Underwater Lights — Tue, 03 May 2011 14:21:00 +0000

I have CFL’s throughout my house and some of them hum, so I don’t think they would have been a good solution. Maintenance and durability are where the LED’s will really help the Navy.

By: Kitchen clearance

Kitchen clearance — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:25:00 +0000

I noticed that most of the homeowners avoid to installed fluorescent lighting. Even my father also avoid to use this lighting in my home. I could not find the reason behind for it. While on otherside virtually The demand of LED light in increase.

By: MD

MD — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:01:40 +0000

Another thing to consider, LEDs are a lot tougher than tubes. In the event that the Navy does get into a shooting match, LEDs are better suited to survive the shock of an impact or nearby explosion.

By: Tina Casey

Tina Casey — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:40:41 +0000

Thank you mds with your insights, it sounds like you have an insider’s perspective.

By: mds

mds — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 19:36:17 +0000

1. Certainly not all US Navy craft use nuclear reactors. Most use diesel and reducing their dependency on liquid fuel is a strategic priority.
(Adds to Bob’s point on having to supply less liquid fuel to battle craft and remote combat stations.)
2. As Tina has already stated, reduced maintenance is one of the important advantages. On a large craft you will free up a significant amount personnel time equivalent to a number of crew positions. You can re-assign these men/women to more pertinent duties or reduce your crew size …saving money.
3. What if your generator (nuclear or diesel) is taken out during a battle. You still need lights to see below deck and electrical controls to continue firing. Those light and other electrical controls will last much longer on the same battery power if LED lights are used, reducing your consumption.
4. Many Naval craft connect to shore power when in port. Reduced use of shore-side electricity means lower operating costs.

By: Tina Casey

Tina Casey — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 18:46:03 +0000

Thanks for all the extra info, Bob. You’re right that military sustainability is a real eye-opener once you start looking into it. Check out some of the things said by the head of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the head of the Navy, regarding defense — of the environment. Some of these programs go back to the Bush administration but they were cruising along way below the radar. The Obama administration has really picked up the ball and they are doing some really exciting things.

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:56:06 +0000

Actually the US military is stepping out front of the parade of efficiency and renewable energy.

The US military has acknowledged that gloabal climate change is a major danger for our country and the world. They recognize that if we let the climate spin out of control then they will be facing new wars over water and other resources.

The US military also recognizes that it needs to cut its budget and efficiency is one way to get that job done.

They also realize that they put many service members into high risk situations unnecessarily because they rely so heavily on liquid fuels in war zones. By moving to more efficient gear and on-site PV generation they are able to be more self-sustaining in front line positions and reduce the amount of fuel transported.

Switching on board lights to LEDs, even on a nuclear powered vessel frees up more power for things such as desalinization.

By: Tina Casey

Tina Casey — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:04:52 +0000

Joe: If you would like to retract your comment let me know, I will be happy to delete it. Please re-read the post. The point of the program is to solicit new ideas from the people who are living and working with military technology every day, in order to improve efficiencies and effectiveness.

By: Tina Casey

Tina Casey — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:03:21 +0000

Candance, thank you for your comment. Building a better widget is the easy part. On the business side, the hard part is getting people to notice your widget among all the other great widgets that are out there, finding a price point that works, and fending off unfair or predatory practices by other widget-makers, retailers, shippers, etc. On the consumer side, there’s sorting out which widget will actually do the best job for the money among all the widgets out there, and that lives up to its advertising, won’t fall apart in three days, has a decent customer support system, etc. It’s just not as simple as you make it out to be.

By: Candance

Candance — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 09:21:57 +0000

Correction, Ron Paul does not have a weird thing for old light bulbs but rather the constitution of the United States and free markets rather than obtrusive government dictating the free market.
Build a better widget and the people will buy it without the government getting involved.

By: joe

joe — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 03:50:50 +0000

Cry baby sailor whom doesn’t want to stand watch.

By: Tina Casey

Tina Casey — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:24:44 +0000

Gman you have a point, the equation may be somewhat different depending on what kind of fuel the ship is using, but there are still storage/space/logistics advantages for LEDs.

By: SolidApollo.com

SolidApollo.com — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 21:03:45 +0000

Being that we also are in the LED business we understand how this process can seem the obvious step to take to improve, in this case Sailors environment when at sea.
If you look what Boing is doing in their new air-crafts, implementing RGB LED lighting, to offer passengers a new experience on their flight.

If you know how to use lights you are able change spaces and dimensions, in other words if you use the right lighting you can make small places look bigger, warmer, taller, enhancing specific areas, etc.

By: Gman

Gman — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 19:22:03 +0000

Hehe, well I doubt the navy care so much about the power consumption when they are sailing with a nuclear reactor!

By: charles

charles — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 18:08:07 +0000

I’m with the Navy’s way of looking at the transition to truly energy efficient and luminescencewise flexible LED tech.

CFL is rather inferior in illumination, and dimmable ones are too expensive. I’m using CFLs for years now, but getting rid of some applications like over the sink in the kitchen, where they gone dim in a few months of use, same as basement and shop lights that come on dim and by the time it comes to design illumination level.

They are ok in some applications, but I’d rather use solid state as soon as they are affordable. Subsidy money at the consumer level should be spent promoting LRDs.

By: steamer551

steamer551 — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:37:25 +0000

You can already buy LED replacement bulbs for florescent fixtures on the web for $50.00 Why does the government have to start a program to develop this? They use 10 watts instead of 40, and you don’t need the ballast. They come in 2 ft, 4 ft and 8 ft lengths and use the same prong ends as a florescent tube. Ron Paul get your staff to do some research before wasting money on projects not needed.

By: Tweets that mention One Sailor Beefs About Lights, Navy Responds with New High Efficiency LED Technology – CleanTechnica: Cleantech innovation news and views -- Topsy.com

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:31:16 +0000

[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Green Economy Post, CleanTechnica, globalbuzzonbiz, ES KTN, Zachary Shahan and others. Zachary Shahan said: One Sailor Beefs About Lights, Navy Responds with New High Efficiency LED Technology http://su.pr/1KCtTk […]