The future of light bulbs is in silicon, startup says

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Soon, “Silicon Valley” may not evoke an image of server stacks, but light bulbs. Solid-state lighting startup Bridgelux announced on Tuesday that it achieved a “major breakthrough” by demonstrating a 135 lumens-per-watt LED bulb using gallium nitride-on-silicon as a substrate.

Conventional LED wafers use sapphire or silicon carbide substrates, which are more costly and more difficult to manufacture than GaN-on-silicon. Bridgelux says that combination has made it difficult for LED lighting to be widely adopted in homes and commercial buildings.

Its new silicon-based LED, on the other hand, offers a 75 percent reduction in cost — not just important for the average consumer, but the corporate facilities manager buying thousands of them for installation across a multinational footprint.

For the lighting geeks out there, some quick stats:

• A single 1.5mm LED operated at 350mA producing 135 lumens per watt at a CCT of 4730K.
• Epitaxy process on eight-inch silicon wafers is compatible with existing automated semiconductor lines.
• Operating voltages: 2.90V at 350mA and less than 3.25V at 1 Amp.

Bridgelux predicts delivery of the first products within two to three years.

In an exclusive interview with SmartPlanet in June, Bridgelux CEO Bill Watkins predicted that nimble cleantech startups would overthrow the major players. This appears to be the latest salvo in that war.

The big takeaway here? Lights are rapidly going high tech while prices fall precipitously — and the company that makes your next bulbs may be the same one that made the brain to your next smartphone.

http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/smart-takes/the-future-of-light-bulbs-is-in-silicon-startup-says/14769/

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Sweet. I just installed a new hood (low noise) over the stove and installed dimmable PAR20 bulbs. I'm very happy.

http://www.amazon.com/Dimmable-LED-Replacement-Incandescent-Lighting/dp/B002SP787S/ref=sr_1_2?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1299738426&sr=1-2

LEDs are the future..... for a while at least.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

wow. no one cares......sad

[one...two...tree 2,762]

wow. no one cares......sad

This stuff is moving forward whether it gets people excited or not. This will revolutionize the way we light our homes and offices. Hopefully, fluorescent lighting will soon be a thing of the past, along with incandescent bulbs.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

This stuff is moving forward whether it gets people excited or not. This will revolutionize the way we light our homes and offices. Hopefully, fluorescent lighting will soon be a thing of the past, along with incandescent bulbs.

Why?

There's nothing wrong with either one.

Of course ones like yourself would rather outlaw them than let the market decide which product is best.

A product that cannot sell itself, is not a product worth having. It's the same reason why the government has to offer big rebates for people to buy the stupid Volt. If the product was worth a damn, people would be all over it and wouldn't need a price break....

[Dakine10 5,452]

Why?

There's nothing wrong with either one.

Of course ones like yourself would rather outlaw them than let the market decide which product is best.

A product that cannot sell itself, is not a product worth having. It's the same reason why the government has to offer big rebates for people to buy the stupid Volt. If the product was worth a damn, people would be all over it and wouldn't need a price break....

Well there is one thing wrong with incandescent bulbs - they produce roughly 20% light and 80% heat. People have used them really because that's all there was, but they actually make better heaters than light bulbs.

Hard to say how long they would last if we let the market decide, but they are not good products efficiency wise.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Why?

There's nothing wrong with either one.

Of course ones like yourself would rather outlaw them than let the market decide which product is best.

A product that cannot sell itself, is not a product worth having. It's the same reason why the government has to offer big rebates for people to buy the stupid Volt. If the product was worth a damn, people would be all over it and wouldn't need a price break....

Paul. Sometimes you need to give it a rest. Lighting and illumination have been a big part of my career and while I do not like government mandates, incandescent bulbs are 19th century technology and are better heaters than light sources. Flourescent lamps, while more efficient contain mercury and give off horrible light and do not work well in the cold, among other things.

There is better technology available and will be available. Lighting has been evolving since its inception and improvements that are worthwhile do not need government subsidies and we do not need to "ban" anything. Few people have a problem with saving money and when the options available are improved, people will use them.

Your position sounds silly Paul. No one is going to bring back steam train engines, propeller airplanes for commercial air travel, horses are not going to replace automobiles, and incandescent light bulbs are going to bite the dust along with tube TVs, 8 track players and video tapes. Deal with it.

FWIW the compact flourescents have been improved a lot over the last 10 years and have come down tremendously in price to where they are competitive with incandescent bulbs. Even at $5 each (which you can usually get them cheaper) compact flourescents are a much better deal. Incandescents are not a good deal, even if they were free. If you have to PAY someone to change light bulbs, like a commercial business for example, you are a fool to use incandescents for anything.

[Teacher Mark 53]

What a bright idea! Their friends said they were dim wits, but when this takes off they''ll have it made in the shade.

[Zero Sum 305]

wow. no one cares......sad

Very sad. I think its cool.

Well there is one thing wrong with incandescent bulbs - they produce roughly 20% light and 80% heat. People have used them really because that's all there was, but they actually make better heaters than light bulbs.

Hard to say how long they would last if we let the market decide, but they are not good products efficiency wise.

Given enough education, particularly consumer education, we'll have less unsubstantiated claims that inefficiency is 'acceptable.'

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Well there is one thing wrong with incandescent bulbs - they produce roughly 20% light and 80% heat. People have used them really because that's all there was, but they actually make better heaters than light bulbs.

Yep. Incandescent light bulbs are highly inefficient in terms of energy use.

Paul. Sometimes you need to give it a rest. Lighting and illumination have been a big part of my career and while I do not like government mandates, incandescent bulbs are 19th century technology and are better heaters than light sources. Flourescent lamps, while more efficient contain mercury and give off horrible light and do not work well in the cold, among other things.

There is better technology available and will be available. Lighting has been evolving since its inception and improvements that are worthwhile do not need government subsidies and we do not need to "ban" anything. Few people have a problem with saving money and when the options available are improved, people will use them.

Your position sounds silly Paul. No one is going to bring back steam train engines, propeller airplanes for commercial air travel, horses are not going to replace automobiles, and incandescent light bulbs are going to bite the dust along with tube TVs, 8 track players and video tapes. Deal with it.

FWIW the compact flourescents have been improved a lot over the last 10 years and have come down tremendously in price to where they are competitive with incandescent bulbs. Even at $5 each (which you can usually get them cheaper) compact flourescents are a much better deal. Incandescents are not a good deal, even if they were free. If you have to PAY someone to change light bulbs, like a commercial business for example, you are a fool to use incandescents for anything.

Spot on, Gary. Well said.

[Zero Sum 305]

I mean, seriously. How many cafeterias keep their food warm with energy-efficient bulbs?

Given they are now available all over the planet, this would be a great start to the travel forum. A challenge to post pics of cafeterias heating their food with energy-efficient bulbs.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Wow, Gary and Steven agree on something.

I wonder how Hell freezing over is going to affect global warming?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul. Sometimes you need to give it a rest. Lighting and illumination have been a big part of my career and while I do not like government mandates, incandescent bulbs are 19th century technology and are better heaters than light sources. Flourescent lamps, while more efficient contain mercury and give off horrible light and do not work well in the cold, among other things.

There is better technology available and will be available. Lighting has been evolving since its inception and improvements that are worthwhile do not need government subsidies and we do not need to "ban" anything. Few people have a problem with saving money and when the options available are improved, people will use them.

Your position sounds silly Paul. No one is going to bring back steam train engines, propeller airplanes for commercial air travel, horses are not going to replace automobiles, and incandescent light bulbs are going to bite the dust along with tube TVs, 8 track players and video tapes. Deal with it.

FWIW the compact flourescents have been improved a lot over the last 10 years and have come down tremendously in price to where they are competitive with incandescent bulbs. Even at $5 each (which you can usually get them cheaper) compact flourescents are a much better deal. Incandescents are not a good deal, even if they were free. If you have to PAY someone to change light bulbs, like a commercial business for example, you are a fool to use incandescents for anything.

That's not my point on this at all.

My problem isn't the newer technology. My problem is it being shoved down people's throats by the government and banning older technologies or subsidising the hell out of new ones. If a product truly is great, it will sell itself.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

My problem is it being shoved down people's throats...

There's that phrase again that so many Right Wingers love to use.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

There's that phrase again that so many Right Wingers love to use.

When you are being restricted/forced on your options for something new like this, that's exactly what it is...