Gallery of Lights
The Site => General discussion => Topic started by: Silverliner14B on June 20, 2012, 02:16:09 AM
-
It may not happen, but it may. Just better watch out guys. Here's the link:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/led-street-lighting-trial-in-12-of-worlds-largest-cities-shows-up-to-85-energy-savings-2012-06-17
Philips is involved in the last link. This isn't the first time. Look at the next link from late 2006:
http://www.newscenter.philips.com/main/lighting/news/press/2006/call_for_action.wpd
See the pattern here? Maybe the HID thing will be different, I don't know if it will happen but it's possible, especially Philips has been successful with the inc thing.
-
So what do you think guys? I think it is plain stupid. Not speaking of my hobby or your hobby in lighting, just more about politics and manufacturers wanting market share, etc.
-
i don't see this moving up to a ban of all HID lighting. metal halide is pretty efficient these days and is getting moreso all the time. sodium vapour remains technically the most efficient light source out there, although the colour cast depreciates the "eye lumens" that people can actually see.
how i feel about the current incandescent and mercury vapour bans in the US is, well, not so great. unlike many of you on here i'm not really a mechanics person, i'm more of a "big picture" person— i could care less how the light works, the concern to me is how it looks, and i think the mercury vapour lights are beautiful. regardless of that, however, i have a degree in political science and even though i don't use incandescents much anymore and think they're probably outdated, they certainly should not be banned.
getting people to use more energy efficient light sources does not have to be enacted by a ban. for example, the ban on mercury vapour luminaires was completely pointless. almost all of these sorts of fixtures in the US have been replaced for cost-efficiency. when the ban came around, nobody was using them anymore anyway— and at that point it doesn't hurt to have some people using them because they simply like them, it won't affect the overall environmental situation.
instead, the burden should be placed back on the industry to create cheaper and more efficient lighting sources. for example, the CFL bulbs are still as expensive as all getout. that's the reason people are still using the incandescents. if the darned things were cheaper, the ban wouldn't even need to happen, and as it is the new ban is reducing the burden the industry has to make the lighting cheaper. now, since people don't have a choice, the industry can charge whatever the hell they want.
if the government were to take action, the action should've been taken in the sense of providing incentives— for example if a business creates and markets a lighting source that gets so many lumens per watt, they should get a knockoff on their taxes. same as the consumer side, if a consumer buys a lighting source that gets so many lumens per watt, they should be able to get some kind of coupon for it.
note this is different than what our government does now— instead of picking light sources by efficiency standards, they pick favourites. for example, look at the US department of energy website, it looks like an ad for LED manufacturers. look on there and see if you see any mention of induction lighting.
-
This is just downright pathetic! :8) You'd think that those morons in their suits in their big swivel chairs in DC would be smart enough to realize the true fact: it all comes down to lumens per watt, not just a reduction in wattage. And those so called "consumer reviews" and things like that about how they love LED would surely change if they knew how much more they costed. :P
Banning something is never the way to go. Think about it: mercury vapor street lighting replaced incandescent street lighting without a ban and HPS replaced a good portion of mercury vapor street lights. Of course there are still incandescent street lights and mercury vapor streetlights out there. But like bryantm3 said, those few survivors aren't going to largely affect energy costs.
And why the hell does the government care about OUR energy costs? We pay for it all in our taxes and out of our paychecks. And just for the record, the Rhode Island state House has a golden chandelier in the lobby as you walk in that burns brightly with around a hundred 100W incandescent lamps. Talk about ironic. Here NGrid has lots of radio ads for engergy assesments, home evaluations, home energy plans, paperless billing, and programs to recyle old refriderators as well as coutless others. They target lighting very little if at all, though they did a thing at the post office where you can get $100 worth of energy-efficient lighting (12 14W A19 CFLs; two GU24 base desk lamps, two LED dusk-to-dawn nightlights; and a NGrid window decal.
I guess to sum it all up, I agree that it should never be necessary to ban something as unimportant to the government as lighting. They need to focus more on bigger issue like this portal to hell we call our economy.
-
This is downright bull. The government/lighting companies/greenies should NOT be forcing the use of CFLs, LEDs, etc. as is isn't their buisness. One should be at liberty to use whatever light they wish to, not being controlled.
The following is a quote from a blog by Jerry Agar, a anti-environmentalist talk show host;
An article in the Wall Street journal contains the following damning paragraphs, when it comes to the "evidence" we have been subjected to regarding global warming.
"When predictions fail, we say the theory is "falsified" and we should look for the reasons for the failure."
"The computer-model predictions of alarming global warming have seriously exaggerated the warming by CO2 and have underestimated other causes. Since CO2 is not a pollutant but a substantial benefit to agriculture, and since its warming potential has been greatly exaggerated, it is time for the world to rethink its frenzied pursuit of decarbonization at any cost."
-
I'm sick and tired of those communist groups trying to force new lighting technology on us. It should be our choice to use whatever we want.
-
Yeah, I'm tiring of them forcing this stuff too, personally I prefer them let the buyer decide which light source is suitable. And anyways aren't most HID sources at par or even more efficient than LED. :/
-
You're right Joe. I believe HPS gets more lumens per watt than LED. I'm not sure about other light sources though. LED is probably in the same range as MH or PSMH when it coems to LPW. MH keeps getting more and more acceptable though in terms of efficiency and life. Hopefully it won't stop advanceing because of LED or another "E-source". :(
-
Another problem I have with LED is that most of the drivers and LED modules aren't standardized so if the LEDs die you're probably going to have to replace the fixture or order proprietary parts for it. HID parts on the other hand are pretty standardized.
-
In the late 70's there was a force to use LPS and it was stopped back when GE was still a good company. Now you have companies like Phillips Lighting who are trying to force LED's on us, I hope more people out there wake up and put a stop to this act of communism.
It's bad enough that mercury vapor fixtures are banned, we don't need to lose any more lighting choices.
-
Philips has communism in their blood! Gerard Philips, the founder of Philips in Holland, was related to Karl Marx, inventor of communism, through a marriage! :o
http://www.nndb.com/people/105/000205487/
-
ah let's stop the conspiracy theories— i think LEDs at this point are kind of a fad, a trendy thing rather than actually being more environmentally friendly. they're coming out with LED TVs, LED flashlights, etc. and while i think some of these will stick like the TVs, i seriously doubt LEDs are going to be the major source of lighting in the future, simply because they're not all that practical— the fixtures are "throwaway" fixtures which are bad for the environment especially because they contain arsenic, the light is glarey and unpleasant.
however, the use of LEDs for other technologies represents a step forward, such as for TVs because of their energy efficiency and the fact that they are relatively long lasting, as compared to other TV technologies such as CRTs and LCD screens. the problem is they're trying to take LEDs success in those markets and translate it into a win for the street lighting market, when those things just don't compare— sure if we were using CRTs for lighting, LEDs would be a welcome replacement, but seeing as how we've got HID lights and induction which are simpler, replaceable and generally have a similar or better level of efficiency, LEDs are a good solution put to the wrong use.
-
ah let's stop the conspiracy theories— i think LEDs at this point are kind of a fad, a trendy thing rather than actually being more environmentally friendly. they're coming out with LED TVs, LED flashlights, etc. and while i think some of these will stick like the TVs, i seriously doubt LEDs are going to be the major source of lighting in the future, simply because they're not all that practical— the fixtures are "throwaway" fixtures which are bad for the environment especially because they contain arsenic, the light is glarey and unpleasant.
bryantm3: Because LED lanterns are throwaway lanterns, I defines the request of Philips, as returning to the days of gas and kerosene lanterns, because like them, LED lanterns are a light sources by themselves, and aren't uses lamps\light bulbs at all (LEDs aren't considered light bulb\lamps at all, but rather electronic semiconductor diodes).
they're coming out with LED TVs, LED flashlights, etc.
There are no LED TVs (TVs with LED displays) in the market. There are LCD TVs either with fluorescent or LED backlighting and Plasma TVs. LED backlit LCD TVs aren't LED TVs.
-
There are no LED TVs (TVs with LED displays) in the market. There are LCD TVs either with fluorescent or LED backlighting and Plasma TVs. LED backlit LCD TVs aren't LED TVs.
I think most of us already know, you really don't have to correct someone every single time you see it mentioned...
Anyways LEDs do have some places where they are useful like in indicators, backlights, and signaling but I really don't think they are quite cut out for streetlighting yet.
-
I agree. I like LED flashlights much better than incandescent ones becuase they're smaller, lighter, brighter, and the batteries last much, much longer with LED flashlights. I like LED traffic signals, indicators, exit signs, store name signs, and sometimes indoor lighting, but for outdoor and commercial indoor lighting, LED simply isn't the way to go.
This could be in the same catagory as the increase use of fluorescent highbays over HID. HID is more efficient, but fluorescent ones don't give off as much heat, they're quieter, they cost less initially, and they have instand restrike (so they can be used with motion detectors at a reasonable price). Of course I prefer HID high and low bays, but fluorescent ones offer more advantages over HID. You just can't say that about LED street lighting instead of HID.
-
streetlight98: There is still problem with fluorescent lamps and motion detectors: The lamp life may be shorten, because of frequently starting.
-
There are no LED TVs (TVs with LED displays) in the market. There are LCD TVs either with fluorescent or LED backlighting and Plasma TVs. LED backlit LCD TVs aren't LED TVs.
I think most of us already know, you really don't have to correct someone every single time you see it mentioned...
i know most folks don't like to admit when they're wrong but i actually did not know this. i couldn't figure out how they got the LEDs to be so small, i see now they didn't!
-
Hey Dave. Turns out the ban is legit but it looks like a false alarm (for us anyways) as it only affects European lamps according to this GE document. (http://www.gelighting.com/LightingWeb/emea/images/ErP_Legislation_for_HID_Lamps_Brochure_EN_tcm181-12709.pdf) Or is there a different ban that's being proposed?
-
What a waste :(
-
Well, that's good to know for us NA guys but I guess it's only time before they ban HID lamps here too.
-
I'm sick and tired of all those communist groups out there trying to shove LED lighting down our throats, I guess a lot of those nitwits must all think alike, they have no life.
-
yeah I agree guys, not good! Because if the UK is doing it, you know NA will be one pace behind them. :8) :(
-
This is probably the only time I'm glad all government stuff gets delayed here lol. The incandescent ban got delayed here so I guess it might be the same for the HID ban.
-
I hope HID street lights don't get banned. I will never use LED lights, period.
-
me neither. If i had to, I'd use induction, but only the induction cobraheads, not the cobrahead knock-offs like those green jersy shore fixture or whatever they're called. :8)