LEDs Lighting Up the African Darkness 182
Peace Corps Online writes "In a non-electrified society, life is defined by the sun and little is accomplished once it sets around 6 pm. Only 19 percent of rural areas in Ghana have electricity. The rest use foul-smelling kerosene lamps to light their huts, which pollute, provide little light and are major fire hazards. But now Philips has partnered with KITE, a not-for-profit Ghanaian organization, to bring artificial light to villages that have no electricity. The new Philips products include a portable lantern which provides bright white light where it is needed, the Dynamo Multi LED self-powered (wind-up) flashlight that provides 17 minutes of light from two minutes hand winding, and the 'My Reading Light,' which is a solar-powered reading light with built-in rechargeable battery. 'People can now do things in the evening,' says Harriette Amissah-Arthur, KITE's director. 'If you could only see the joy these products bring the villagers. You look at their faces; you have to see it to believe it.'"
Where can I get mine? (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't the first product Philips have produced for developing countries.
See wood-burning stove: http://www.research.philips.com/newscenter/archive/2006/060227-woodstove.html [philips.com]
I wish they would make them available to buy in the developed world though. I'd love some of this gear for outdoor pursuits.
Re: (Score:2)
Driving up volume, cost down, in a buy-one-donate-one, OLPC kind of way...
Re:Where can I get mine? (Score:5, Insightful)
In my experience, most people would rather pay a fraction of the price of a second item.
Ex: $150 + $150 = bad
$150*1.25 (With a sticker: "20% donated to providing blah in 3rd world countries.") will get more buyers.
We see the same thing in the games industry. People don't want to pay $90 for a content-packed game. They want to pay $30, plus $30 for an expansion if they like it, and another $30 for another expansion.
In my opinion, it is somewhat likely that OLPC would've done better offering laptops in the developed world for slightly more, rather than double. It'd drive the cost of production down quite a bit, get more exposure(which means more donations and support), and it's cheaper for the consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Twice the price, none for you unless you are lucky and have to pay for two! But don't worry, none for the children either!
Must trusted vaporware ever. It's almost as if you can see it!
"100 dollar for a laptop? BS!", and yes, it was =P
Re: (Score:2)
For the most part when the people do real outdoor pursuits (I am not talking about campers and the like) Light Weight is key, A lot of these products for the developing countries are a bit heavy and hard to move. Also if they are too convenient then you get rid of the point of camping. The point of camping is starting a nice fire and slow roasting your food. Or use a small and light backpacker stove where you fill with a Light Gas Pump it up light it and whoosh you burn off you eyebrows but have a nice lit
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Also for developing countries it's a way to cook without using any natural resources.
Except...sunlight...and the materials consumed to make the stove in the first place...
I think you meant to say "non-renewable".
Whoops! Opened my mouth again...
Re: (Score:2)
High-efficiency stoves have been around longer than 2005. The rocket stove [wikipedia.org] design preheats intake air to improve efficiency. There are many designs and they can be built out of cans, drums, bricks, clay, et cetera. For that matter, I have a $3 solar flashlight I got from the Grocery Outlet that makes a dandy reading or work light (you can hang it on your shirt.) It's nice to see someone giving them to people who need them, though. The simple truth is that if you help people help themselves they'll remember,
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.zzstove.com/sierra.html [zzstove.com]
is similar, except simpler and AA powered. More to the point, it's actually for sale :-).
Also, while the Phillips' thermoelectric generator is really cool, I suspect it AAs+{solar,hand,etc}charger may be more available around the world. Fixing the generator might pretty challenging in certain parts of the world. OTOH, Phillips has some pretty good engineering chops, so maybe it never needs fixing! :-D
-Ghostis
Re: (Score:2)
Camping memories (Score:3, Funny)
I am the only one who thinks kerosene lamps actually do smell quite nice.
Re:Camping memories (Score:4, Informative)
I am the only one who thinks kerosene lamps actually do smell quite nice.
The smell depends on the fuel. Kerosene can contain varying amounts of sulfur and other odour-inducing substances. Better grades have less odour, and may even have some fragrances added, but cost more. I suppose that the nice-smelling varieties are less common in poorer countries. In fact, they probably mix other cheaper fuels (such as diesel) into the kerosene they do have, adversely affecting soot and smell.
Kerosine lamps FTW! (Score:4, Informative)
I spent some time in northern Sudan as a child. We had kerosine lamps that used wicks, and Petromax pressure lamps that used a mantle (like the Coleman lamps in the USA). As an 8-year-old I loved having my own kerosine lamp to read by in bed. Yeah, it was dim -- but in a pitch black room with dark-adapted eyes, it was plenty.
They DO pollute, they ARE a fire hazard... but the world will be a little poorer when the last kerosine lamp is gone.
Not so long ago. (Score:5, Insightful)
"The rest use foul-smelling kerosene lamps to light their huts, which pollute, provide little light and are major fire hazards."
In other words, the exact same type of lighting my grandfather's household relied on when he was a child. It's easy to forget that there are many people alive today that only had access to very primitive technology when they were young. And it wasn't because they couldn't afford it, but because it didn't exist anywhere on earth.
While I am sympathetic to the plight of countries that cannot afford modern technology for their entire population, and the massive infrastructure required to support it, I do keep in mind that we are talking about a gap of only a few generations - not centuries or millenia.
Re: (Score:2)
While I am sympathetic to the plight of countries that cannot afford modern technology for their entire population, and the massive infrastructure required to support it, I do keep in mind that we are talking about a gap of only a few generations - not centuries or millenia.
Is your proposal that we wait a few generations and see if they've caught up?
While I understand where you're coming from, I don't think the fact that we're not far removed from "primitive" technology is a good reason to not worry about the state of the developing world.
It's striking to compare photos from the Great Depression to the conditions of some modern day countries, but the reason some places haven't caught up isn't simply because we had a head start. The history of colonialism, as well as current fo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, kerosene lamps don't have to be "foul-smelling". That usually means that a wick isn't adjusted right.
And you can easily get plenty of light from the right lamp - check out the Aladdin lamps that are used in parts of the US (don't know where else might use them). Simple lamp, cheap fuel, equivalent to a 60w bulb.
I like LEDs, most of my flashlights use them. But kerosene lamps have proven themselves over many, many years to be reliable and cheap. Introducing LED technology to countries without m
Re: (Score:2)
I use 1-K kerosene to heat my workshop. The Amish in our area use it to heat, cook, and light their homes.
Re: (Score:2)
Not such a fire hazard (Score:2)
They were plenty light to read by. So long as you are not trying to be wasteful (lighting your driveway or water features etc - which Africa tends to lack anyway) then low lighting is adequate.
Product Naming (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The Gimped Feisty gLight? No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if it makes you feel any better, Microsoft's going to release theirs (at least the second version) as "Reading Light", without the "my".
In other news, Open Source is communist because they're taking away the feeling of ownership...
Re: (Score:2)
Lighting up the world (Score:2)
Quote the summary... (Score:2, Funny)
'If you could only see the joy these products bring the villagers. You look at their faces; you have to see it to believe it.'
I bet their eyes light up!
Re: (Score:2)
Bogo Light has been doing this for a few years (Score:2)
SunNight Solar Enterprises Corp [bogolight.com] has been selling something like this for a few years. You can purchase a pair of rechargeable LED flashlights - one for you, one for charity - for between $50 to $60. You can choose where in the world you would like the donated flashlight to go.
The two I have are best flashlights I've ever owned. They're solid, heavy duty plastic with a durable power switch. I've been using my first one for two years now. The original rechargeable batteries are still working, and the
Re: (Score:2)
My shake-to-charge LED flashlight cost US$5 at the shop down the street. It's lasted for about 2 years so far as well, and has the advantage of working even if I didn't remember to leave it somewhere sunny all day.
I actually use it every day: As my conservation-geekiness has increased, I now use it whenever I have to go in another room at night to get something, pee, etc.
Until my gf moved in, I had my total energy bill (power + gas) down to about $8/month. She can't sleep without A/C so it's shot up again
Rechargable batteries don't last that long... (Score:2)
In my experience, inexpensive rechargeable batteries tend to last about a year. If they start dumping these lights on Africans, the only results I can see would be:
One is that they will become addicted--"Getting" to work later means someone will find a way to exploit that work, and it will become a way of life.
If they are cheap and in plentiful supply, they will end up in landfills of otherwise mostly organic material--something that certainly can't be good for the environment (We don't dump our batteries
Re:Gunfire (Score:5, Funny)
A small price to pay for not being eaten by a Grue.
Re:Gunfire (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He's probably in the Congo.
Ghana is actually one of the most stable countries in Africa. One that has just finished it's third General Election [guardian.co.uk] (with universal suffrage too) this year. It's first was in 1992, with 1996 letting the same guy in again. But considering it spent most of the 20th century ruled by a military Junta, it's come along way.
Re: (Score:2)
Ghana is actually one of the most stable countries in Africa.
That was precisely my point. Talking about the threat of banditry in one of the safest countries in the world, is.... well stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing several people from Africa, or currently living there, I'm going to hazard to say that the "US groupthink" isn't all that far from the truth. I would love to spend some time there, but as a whole it's not a particularly safe place right now.
Re: (Score:3)
It is utterly typical africa==bandits US groupthink that got your "tech in Africa means you get robbed" got modded up.
Utterly typical non-US groupthink that everyone in the US thinks alike. The US is a pretty big country.
Re: (Score:2)
Utterly typical US groupthink that the rest of the world thinks alike. The US is a pretty small country.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all of Africa has bandits roaming around all night, and in much of the continent people actually sleep in huts and houses - even where there is no electricity. (I spent some time in Eastern Congo some years back and it was certainly the case then.)
As for not having books, I suspect that if people had more time in which they could read, they might read more. So books would be more desirable and people would print/import/write more.
As for mosquito netting, the fact that governments are corrupt, or
Bookfire (Score:2)
"Most people in Africa don't have an abbundance of books, so why do they need a solar powered reading lamp in the tent? Especially if it's only going to attract bandits anyway. "
An Epiphany just occurred to me. Something like the Kindle would be perfect for a third-world country.
Biased article... phillips (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.ucalgary.ca/oncampus/weekly/nov4-05/schulich-lutw.html [ucalgary.ca]
http://www.google.com/search?q=philips+lutw [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I think it is biased against oil lamps. People "did things in the evening" long before electric lights. And they didn't have to crank anything.
Re: (Score:2)
so much for the Prime Directive [wikipedia.org].
giving them technology they have no means of creating themselves definitely conflicts!
Biased butter... phillips (Score:2)
People "did things in the evening" long before electric lights. And they didn't have to crank anything.
The wife may disagree with you.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for posting those links. I can picture a young Dave Halliday 'repairing' a light bulb, only to have it blow up in his face. Perhaps that should have been categorized as an unwise lightbulb experiment ;)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
If god wanted them to see at night he wouldn't have made it dark!
So this is either against the will of god, or, hmm no, no other alternative.
Re:God bless (no text) (Score:4, Funny)
So Philips is the agent of the Devil?
think of this:
"In an electrified society, life is defined by the television and little is accomplished once it starts around 6 pm".
Philips makes lots of TVs too.... case proven :)
Re:At the same time, European Union bans incandesc (Score:5, Informative)
The EU has done no such thing. Yes, it banned the sale of classic lightbulbs (effective September 2012). But what you replace them with is your own choice, you are not forced into buying fluorescent tubes.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, you are not forced to buying fluorescent tubes.
You could always :-
1 - Sit in the dark
2 - Burn some books to make a dim campfire
3 - Harness the power of naturally light emitting bugs
Of course 1 is no solution at all, just the effect of the initial cause, 2 will piss off the "global warming/cooling/change" crowd, and 3 will piss of the "save the ant crowd".
Any more bright (excuse the pun) ideas ?
Other lamps (Score:2)
and, if you want to get away from electricity, a gas mantle.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why doesn't it just tax them at a higher rate?
As big a fan of CFLs as I am (my house lighting is 99% CFL), banning incandescents is stupid. What do you use in the oven? CFLs NOR LEDs can withstand the heat. (Then there is the dryer and freezer, although leds might do the job, CFLs won't fare well there).
Oven use (Score:4, Funny)
Indeed! Neither CFLs nor LEDs give off enough heat to work in an oven [hasbro.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Hear, hear! I'm a big fan of tax credits for this thing-give people an incentive rather than a punishment. Why use a stick when a carrot works just as well?
A legislative ban on incandescents is just plain stupid for the reasons you mentioned. If you follow the electrons incandescent bulbs aren't a problem. Hell, what is the problem in the first place? Greenhouse gas production and pollution, which comes from many sources including electricity production. Look at overall energy use to see the heart of t
Re: (Score:2)
The EU has done no such thing. Yes, it banned the sale of classic lightbulbs (effective September 2012). But what you replace them with is your own choice, you are not forced into buying fluorescent tubes.
Quite true. You can sit in the dark.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The LED's are here now, if you have access to the vast pool of $'s you need to implement them. One article said on the order of $60k to do a nice big home. Even if your home is 1/60th of "nice big" that's still $1k.
Re: (Score:2)
How can it be "your choice" what to have for dessert if the gubmint won't allow you to have pot brownies?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The mercury problem is easily solvable. Just institute a deposit recycling system for the fluorescents, like there exists for bottles in many countries.
By the way, am I the only one to find the light from white LEDs irritating? Somehow I find it harder to see in LED light than with alternatives, even when the light output is theoretically comparable
Don't say it's no (dumb) move to push fluorescent (Score:2)
It mandates that classic lightbulbs be phased out before equivalent, affordable LED replacements are ready for prime time. As in Australia [bbc.co.uk], this does amount to triggering their large-scale replacement with fluorescent ones, and all the calculations and public pronouncements have been precisely to this effect.
Re:At the same time, European Union bans incandesc (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, that's because the LEDs actually are missing (large) components of the spectrum!
Even when your eyes are tricked into believing the light is white (by equally stimuling the three kinds of color-sensitive cells), the light reflected off of objects isn't "correct".
Imagine two green objects. One has true green pigment, the other has a mixture of yellow and blue pigment. Both look the same under incandescent light, because the light from a glowing filament emits a full spectrum .
When an LED doesn't emit a full spectrum the two objects don't like alike. The "true" green objects only reflects "true" green, not yellow + blue. The "yellow + blue" object doesn't reflect "true" green.
That's why it's hard to see in such light.
Your eyes (or brain) can adapt very well to changes in color temperature (yellowy incandescent light, or the blueish halogen light), but it can't cope with holes in the spectrum.
This goes for compact fluorescent lights as well, even as they keep getting better. The cheap ones are really crappy in this respect.
For fluorescent tubes there is a rating [wikipedia.org] for color temperate and color rendition. It isn't used (as far as I know) for compact fluorescents as they score way to low on this scale. That would make the public relations department of the manufacturers unhappy.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
But, as an experiment you can do at home: find something that has a lot of different colors, but it must not be printed (as the print proces only uses 4 inks to make up all the colors). Perhaps a box of crayons, or paint samples. During daylight (or incandescent light) sort them into a gradual rainbow. Wait until dark, and shine your LED headlight on them. See the differ
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to be even cheaper, make your own. National Semiconductor LM3405 driver chip [national.com] and half a dozen associated components (this link [national.com]has what I consider to be the snazziest design software I've ever seen, that'll crank out a list of the precise parts you need and even send them to you) plus a couple Philips LumiLED LXHL-BW02's from Future
Electronics (the cheapest source) and you have a lovely little light that'll run for days off a 9v battery. Since a 9V is a crappy way to run a light, price/perform
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(I'm only quoting the most relevant part of your text, but I'm responding to the whole post).
Imagine two green objects. One has true green pigment, the other has a mixture of yellow and blue pigment. Both look the same under incandescent light, because the light from a glowing filament emits a full spectrum .
BS. Normal incancesdents are NOT full spectrum. That's why they produce such a nasty yellow light (color temp around 2700K).
LEDs are available in a variety of color temps, but it is true that it is very difficult to make "full spectrum" LED light. OTOH, Fluorescents, including CFLs, are widely available in full spectrum. Yes, your average $1.50 CFL from Walmart is NOT full specturm, but they are easily availabl
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, let me rephrase that. Incandescents have a spectrum without gaps, but are (as all black body radiators) limited in upper frequency. Normal bulbs emit a yellow light (stronger in the red part, not so much towards the blue part of the spectrum), halogen bulbs go somewhat further up the spectrum and thus appear more white. Compared to daylight, even halogen is yellow. The point being m
Re: (Score:2)
BlueMax offers 94CRI CFLs. There are others.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why they produce such a nasty yellow light (color temp around 2700K).
You mean that's why they produce such a gorgeous soft yellow light. The only light superior to incandescent is candle light.
What really gets me is when they advertise "daylight" bulbs that give off a blue light, when sunlight is clearly yellow.
sunlight is not yellow (Score:3, Funny)
You need to count the sunlight that gets spread out by the atmosphere, making that lovely blue sky. Add up the blue sky and the yellow-looking Sun, and you get a bluish-white light.
The result is that natural shadows have a bluish cast. People look more natural outdoors because the shadows of their face get this.
To reproduce, method 1:
Cover your ceiling with an array of colored LEDs that point down. Focus the red and green ones to a 1-degree angle. Spread out the blue ones. Of course, this requires about a m
Re: (Score:2)
Actually sunlight is blue, the sun looks bluish in space. Its only because the blue frequencies are scattered across the sky that the sun looks yellow on the ground. Bizarre but true.
Understanding of vision is incorrect (Score:2)
Re:Understanding of vision is incorrect (Score:5, Informative)
Birds have a 4-color system, the last I heard; mammals lost theirs when they became nocturnal, and we have not fully recovered ours because, basically, primate evolution has not had long enough for it to reappear- perhaps the selection pressure is not that great.)
Actually some humans (and presumably, other primates) do have a 4-color system. It tends to occur more frequently (but still rarely overall) in females than males, perhaps for the same reasons that color-blindness tends to be more frequent in males. If I recall correctly the extra receptor is toward the violet end, and to these people indigo is actually a different color rather than just a shade of blue.
(Compare with mantis shrimp that have 12 color channels, extending into the ultra-violet and infra-red, plus receptors to distinguish circularly polarized light.)
Color Vision - Humans have _5_ colors (Score:2)
Actually almost all people have 4 colors, and some have 5.
RGB are the 3 you think of, and the exact wavelength moves around depending on the person. Many (men, usually) are RG colorblind - their R and G are very close together or identical. Many (women, usually - often mothers of the RG blind men - usually called tetrachromats) get a 5th receptor somewhere.
But the _4th_ receptor that everyone has is basically ultraviolet. Most light in this spectrum is blocked by the fluid in our eyes, so we get very, ve
Re: (Score:2)
You're probably right on the extra color; as I think on it that sounds more familiar than my dimly remembered 'violet' receptor.
There are still some people that see indigo as a more distinct color than the shade of blue that I (and many) people see it as, that may be yet another variation on the cone genes (or not).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It is as if the frequencies in its spectrum just miss the the ones my photoreceptors are tuned into...
Well, that's because the LEDs actually are missing (large) components of the spectrum! :-)
Even when your eyes are tricked into believing the light is white (by equally stimuling the three kinds of color-sensitive cells), the light reflected off of objects isn't "correct". Imagine two green objects. One has true green pigment, the other has a mixture of yellow and blue pigment. Both look the same under incandescent light, because the light from a glowing filament emits a full spectrum .
No!
Incandescent light is extremely blue deficient. It's not at all "full spectrum".
Colors look approximately right under incandescent illumination because your eyes are extremely good at color-adjusting the signal to the brain to compensate for the ambient light, and "most" things you tend to look at don't have sharp spectral bands. But in the case you describe, where a green color is synthesized from a blue and a yellow reflectance band, it will look very different under sunlight and incandescent light
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The Dulux series by Osram is marked with color temperature and CRI in one number: An 827 CFL is a 2700K light with a color rendering index >80. Osram makes compact 930 lights (CRI>90 3000K), but not (yet) in the "normal" E27 socket format. Consumers looking to replace incandescent bulbs should go for 827 CFLs, as they're the drop-in replacement with a light color and color rendering quality closest to incandescent bulbs. ("Daylight" and other color temperatures >3000K are what most people associate
Re: (Score:2)
The mercury problem is easily solvable. Just institute a deposit recycling system for the fluorescents, like there exists for bottles in many countries.
They will end up in the trash in most countries anyway.
By the way, am I the only one to find the light from white LEDs irritating?
Nope. They're fluorescents too. There also exist tri-color white LEDs which have red/green/blue LEDs and some circuitry to balance the color out, but they're far more expensive and don't necessarily converge properly, leading to colored ghosts around the edges.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't someone do the sums on this and figure out that the mercury in one of these CFL 'bulbs' was offset by the lower pollution (itself containing some mercury) coming out of the power plant as a result of using the CFL?
Or maybe that was just propaganda from the CFL camp... time to do some reading.
Re:At the same time, European Union bans incandesc (Score:4, Informative)
According to wikipedia [wikipedia.org] ... assuming a coal fired plant this statement is correct - the total amount of mercury is lesser when using a CFL:
Re: (Score:2)
That's assuming *one* CFL can produce the equivalent light output of one incandescent lamp, which is where it all falls down. To get the equivalent of a 60W bulb using CFLs, you need about 40W worth of them.
Get a light meter and try it.
I have tried it - use the meter correctly (Score:5, Informative)
My own experiments, years ago, showed that in real world use CFLs are equivalent to about four times the wattage of standard 1000 hour incandescents, whereas full size fluorescents produce maybe 5 times the output of the same wattage incandescent. Linear 8W CFLs as used on boats and caravans give about the same actual illumination as a 20W tungsten-halogen bulb, because their light output is much less directional, but then they are much better at illuminating dark corners.
Case in point: when we moved to our present house, the kitchen used 3 100W bulbs. These have been satisfactorily replaced with 3 20W CFLs for the last 20 years. As different types of CFL have evolved, there has been no deterioration in light output, though it is important to buy good quality - GE or Philips - bulbs.
I note that the cost of LEDS is now becoming comparable in lifetime cost with CFLs. The main issue is that LED drivers are relatively inefficient because most of them waste a lot of power in series resistors. What is needed is a really efficient current driver IC for LEDs. This would drive up the efficiency of conversion and make them even more useful in the Third World.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, case in point: When I replaced the lights in my living room with CFLs, I needed twice as many to be able to see well enough to read. One was dim and eyestrainy. I'm well aware of the difference between spot and incident metering.
Another thing I noticed was that during power cuts, the genny used about twice as much diesel when I switched to CFLs. Somehow they use more power, the fuel bills prove it.
Re: (Score:2)
When I replaced the lights in my living room with CFLs, I needed twice as many to be able to see well enough to read
The CFLs have narrower spectrum peaks than the incandescents. The page is not one color and if it were it probably still wouldn't be the color the CFLs illuminate best. Most of the light from the CFL won't bounce off a book. Magazines will usually be better because the paper is usually whiter.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the light from the CFL won't bounce off a book.
Kind of defeats the purpose, then, doesn't it? Maybe I should stick to oil lamps or something - I certainly don't see the point in spending a lot of money on ineffective lamps that use more power.
Re: (Score:2)
I use a 4W LED spot as a reading light, it puts the vast majority of the light where I need it so that I can read even though the spectrum reflection is poor. The light is admittedly quite blue (cool) which is kind of annoying, but at least there's no flicker. If this doesn't work for you, I suggest that you go back to incandescent for reading, which probably still has a lower environmental impact than using the oil lamps. GE reportedly is coming out with incandescents which reflect some/most of the IR back
Re: (Score:2)
Contrary to what the poster above says, CFLs generally emit a broad spectrum of light, and in most cases it's actually broader than incandescents. That said, not all CFLs are created equal, so it's possible you picked a poor model. A comparison is available here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/home_journal/how_to/4215199.html?nav=hpPrint&do=print [popularmechanics.com]
In any event, a CFL certainly DOES NOT use more energy, so if you think they do based on some past experience, then your test methodology was flawed. Plug y
Re: (Score:2)
Heating hasn't really got much to do with electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
>What is needed is a really efficient current driver IC for LEDs.
They exist in large, large quantities. My company makes three dozen, currently, with another three dozen in development. So do half a dozen of our competitors.
They also add about $1 to the cost of the lightbulb, and consumers mostly buy the bulbs that cost $1 less.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you name these "many applications"?
The slowest fluorescent bulb I have is in a little bedside lamp and it starts in under a second. It's not fast, but it's not as if I could actually do anything in the time between pressing the button and the light coming on.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you name these "many applications"?
Incandescent bulbs are still very useful, if only because they still have advantages over their current low-cost replacement (fluorescent bulbs) - instant turn-on, stable color rendition, operation at very high or very low temperatures and unity power factor. Never mind the toxcity and disposal issues with CFBs. LEDs address most of these points though.
Incandescent may be loosing its relevance, but banning them altogether is stupid IMHO.
Applications requiring incandescent lamps (Score:2)
If I were a hippie ;-) I'd cite lava lamps and illuminated blocks of salt, but suffice it to wish you you best of luck with an LED in your oven and a CFL in your fridge or snow-covered yard.
Oh, and the latter (unlike lightbulbs) even at room temperature do take significantly longer to reach full brightness than the "one second" you postulate.
Re: (Score:2)
While those whose may be applications where incandescent bulbs have advantages none of them (or any of the other replies) seem to be applications that "require instant operation" which is what you said and what I asked about.
I asked about that specifically because whenever this comes up someone talks about them being slow to start up but I practical terms I can't imagine how the small delay can pose an actual problem worth worrying about.
Re: (Score:2)
And all the praise about LEDs comes with the caveat that they often won't fit standard lamp bases/sockets just yet - though they are quite excellent for the use described by TFA.
In other words, neither technology can replace lightbulbs in all applications, which is exactly why one may consider outlawing these a bad idea at this point in time. (Left to the market, the
Mercury From Coal (Score:2)
If you live in a region where electricity comes from coal power, much more mercury will be put in the air from burning coal to power an incandescent bulb, than is contained in a CFL (which can be safely recycled). Granted a CFL won't work too well as refrigerator light....
Mercury is found in many rocks including coal. When coal is burned, mercury is released into the environment. Coal-burning power plants are the largest human-caused source of mercury emissions to the air in the United States, accounting for over 40 percent of all domestic human-caused mercury emissions.
from US EPA [epa.gov]
What's wrong with Halogen Bulbs? (Score:3, Interesting)
Halogen light bulbs use tungsten filaments, JUST LIKE ORDINARY BULBS.
Two main differences:
- The filament is run at a much higher temperature, resulting in higher efficiency (around 20%).
- The gas inside the quartz "bulb" (the inner bulb, if you're buying a large bulb as a replacement) is a halogen gas (thus the name). These molecules combine with tungsten evaporated from the filament and effectively redeposits the tungsten on the filament. This results in longer lifetime.
End result: Longer lasting bulb, hig
Re:At the same time, European Union bans incandesc (Score:2)
I don't think we are replacing them with fluorescent tubes, we have had those for long and most of my light-bulbs are already of that kind. I know where to get LED lights here to so .. Not that I would buy them at their current state since they suck but anyway.
I think people should be allowed to choose themselves though, especially for those who need light with a good range of wavelengths. I have my TV on now even though I'm in another room, all light on, receiver probably on, and so on, people waste lots o
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and if the medicine, technology and many other breakthroughs don't kill them, guaranteed their brother who happens to live in the next tribe WILL.
Africa will always be the raped continent, unfortunately most of the time it's their own people doing the raping ... Hutus and Tutses for example.
Bunch of tribalistic savages, the lot of them ... especially the ones with honorary OBE's.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't get your point, is it that they shouldn't get any help since they fight wars? Care to re-write it in a way which people can understand?
Re:Very cool. (Score:4, Interesting)
The OLPC was justified on a purely financial basis. The OLPC replaced heavy physical textbooks which require expensive physical distribution with one time laptop physical distribution and then electronic distribution of textbooks. Furthermore, in addition to the financial win, the textbooks could be updated with no distribution costs, they could be in the native language, and the students no longer had to carry all those heavy textbooks on their miles long walks to school; they had all their textbooks in one container, lightweight, with them at home and at school.
Regardless of how incompetent the OLPC management was, the laptop itself was fully justified on the financial basis alone, and the side benefits were a tremendous side benefit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)