I am leading a panel discussion about The Future of Incandescent Lighting tomorrow at the RDC show. Personally, the incandescent bulb should be outlawed (then only outlaws will have incandescents), because it is only 10% efficient, lasts about 5 months and emits 90% of its energy as heat. That's 300 degrees, which will turn on your air conditioner.
A 100 watt bulb will cost Mass citizens $45 dollars a year to operate if used only 6 hours...(How many people left the lights on at home as you are reading this.)
Below is my presentation to the trade...
Big thanks to www.michaelbluejay.com and his energy calculator....
WEll prepared. Well said!
ReplyDeleteWere you there
ReplyDeleteI would've loved to have seen this presentation! Thanks for putting the incandescent bulb in its place.
ReplyDeleteGinny,
ReplyDeleteWhen is Cree marketing a LED bulb....LR6 is a home run, but there is greater demand for just the bulb
S
Until the price profile of LED lighting is more cost effective the market will not switch en mass to new technology. The current green technology has more toxic chemicals per unit and presents a real safety hazard in the home if the bulb is broken. Also a clear problem if not disposed of correctly.
ReplyDeleteSupply and demand good ole capitalism should sell your product if you need to resort to outlawing a product either the replacement product is either not ready or no good.
Stick to selling appliances
LED is toxic? Its a semiconductor. I will have to look that one up Mike...You may be referring to CFC
ReplyDeleteAlso, disposal is not a problem as it lasts 15 years. I am also not suggesting "en mass" switching, but the product is cost effective in most commercial applications and residential undercabinet and recessed
My electric bill is $110 less using LED recessed. Thats fact. The payback is less than 3 years
The outlawing part is sarcasm, Mike, but I think there are solutions to a 130 year old bulb