LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

The greenest watt is the one you don't have to create. Energy efficiency is the low hanging fruit of greening our homes. Ask your questions or post your energy efficiency tips in here!

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Smurf1976 » Fri Dec 28, 2012 6:35 pm

The first CFL's, which came out in the 1980's, were indeed quite reliable. They were physically large by today's standards and heavy too, but nonetheless reasonably durable.

Their main downsides were cost, which at close to $40 each (and that was quite a bit of money back in the 80's) didn't really stack up versus electricity at well under 10c per kWh. The other downside was warm up time, which was a few minutes when new but potentially half an hour or so to reach full brightness once they got old enough. That said, they found some use in commercial situations where the long lifespan and long operating hours made them worthwhile, primarily as a means of reducing maintenance costs rather than saving energy. The first ones had a rated life of 5000 hours, increased to 10,000 for the last of that type.

The first electronic ones came out a bit over 20 years ago and their quality wasn't bad. Sure, they were big and bulky by today's standards and still fairly expensive ($25 or so) but they did work. And they were smaller than the original's from the 80's, and longer lasting too (and warmed up quicker). Early versions commonly had rated lives around the 10,000 - 12,000 hour mark.

Then along came the mass production of cheap and nasty (but smaller) versions. The nominal lifespan has been cut to 6000 and now even just 4000 hours. But they're cheap and fit in easily.

LED's will likely be much the same. For industrial use it's no hassle to get ones rated for 80,000 hours but I see that the consumer grade ones are about a quarter of this. Wait a while and I'm sure we'll see the cost reduced and the lifespan cut too - probably to no more than 10,000 hours.

The main advantage I can see with LED over CFL is that LED doesn't mind being switched on and off a lot, and doesn't have a slow warm up time. So they're good for places that CFL's aren't. In terms of energy use, the two technologies are much the same it seems.

One thing I do note is that there is no obvious advantage of a CFL over LED in any situation I can think of. Once the LED technology is a bit more developed (when you can buy one that's equivalent to a 100W incandescent, for example) and the cost comes down then there's really no reason why anyone would want to buy CFL's.

Is see that Bunnings has some LED's equivalent to 25, 40 and 60W incandescent. They're somewhere around $15 each but they only had them in ES fitting. I didn't buy, since I don't need any lights right now, but no doubt there will be a BC version before too much longer.

Most of my lights are still incandescent. Maybe time for an upgrade soon....
Smurf1976
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:56 am

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Quokka2 » Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:10 pm

Tracker wrote:Thank Juliar for that, and Her industry destroying carbon tax

Hey I thought the capital "H" for a third person pronoun was reserved for God and maybe the Queen. Has Juliar been promoted to a position where she can do less damage? :lol:
Quokka2
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:39 am
Location: Darkest (but sunniest) rural SW Australia

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Geoff Bensley » Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:53 pm

Ask your electrician to install surface sockets on the cables that are possibly at the moment hard wired to the transformers.This will allow you to install the downlights yourself whether they be 240 volt GU10 LED style or LED with seperate Driver.Just ask the Supplier of the downlights to have plug top and lead installed on them already,some do and some don't.The reason for the surface socket is if you have a faulty downlight you just unplug it and take back to supplier for replacement under warranty without the need for an electrician.( I am an electrical contractor and hate having to go and Just Unplug a fitting).After installing approx 300 LEd downlights in different buildings I have found that a 10 watt LED with seperate driver is about the equivalent of a 50 watt halogen ,a 13 watt LED with seperate driver is much better than 50 watt halogen.
Geoff Bensley
Solar Supporter
Solar Supporter
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:43 pm

Phillips my vision standard shape E27 and bayonet led light

Postby offgridQLD » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:13 pm

I have always been happy with Phillips globes. Be it old tungsten filament style, halogen or compact fluorescent. They seem to have a level of quality that is reflected in there performance I have come to trust them as a good globe. I replaced the bulk of the 15w CF globes that came with our off grid house with 12w Phillips CFL warm white and made a vast improvement to the light quality slight improvement to warm up time and a slight power reduction due to being 12w globes.

I still don't like compact fluorescent in general. Some of the fittings in my house had a even smaller tiny CFL globes that replace a 50w down light. I replaced all of them with 12w led warm white globes and it was a vast improvement . No warm up time and a better light quality.

The plan is to make all lights in the off grid home with LED. Inside and out over time. Its not to save $ as the house is off grid. Its to slightly reduce consumption and predominantly to improve light quality, globe life and have no warm up lag on turn on. Along with maintaining the same light quality over time. Something that CFL isn't good for. Finally health as they don't spread toxic dust over your home if broken.

What I wanted was a 12-15w CFL replacement . A simple drop in replacement that sheds the same amount of light, has a good ambiance (true 2700k warm white) And a key point is it had to be a one globe hole room light. As in good light spread Like the good old days of a single globe in the center of the room. For bedrooms, toilet, passage way and so on. Our off grid house has cieling fans in all the bedrooms with a single light fixture built into the center of the fan. We have rubbish Osram brand 15w compact fluorescent in them now that came with the house.

Considering the Phillips 12w CFL are reasonably expensive and my general dislike of CFL I purchased two Phillips my vision 9.5w E27 LED globes. At $19 they are a little over double the price of the CFL. First thing I noticed out of the box was the weight they are heavy 2 times heavier than the CFL. They are the same size and shape as a typical old style standard tungsten 25 - 100w globe. The over all finish is very good.

Image

Image

Image

Image



I tested the globe the toilet of our city house that has clam shell light fittings in each room with 15w Osram CFL's (crap ones taken out of the off grid house) :lol: It was nice screwing in the solid led without having to worry about it smashing in my hand and covering me with toxic dust. On flicking the switch it was soon apparent we had made a big improvement (the stated 60w halogen replacement on the packaging) wasn't a exaggeration. I then took the 2nd globe and replaced the one in the master bedroom.The light output in was more than enough for a master bedroom that was actually slighly under lit with the old 15w CFL. It wasn't harsh or focused . Just like a had drooped in 75w tungsten globe in there or perhaps more. I let it run for 1hr to test for heat and it was reasonably hot to the touch (I could only hold my hand on it and count to 3 or so before things got toasty)

Overall I am happy. I now have 4 of them and will replace the globes in the cieling fans for the 3 bedrooms and office in our off grid home.

Kurt
offgridQLD
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:50 am
Location: South Australia, Fleurieu Peninsula

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Thermoelectric » Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:37 pm

It'll be interesting to see how LED lights last in closed fixtures like that, with the lack of heatsinking. Hopefully the electronics have progressed past the cheap capacitors that fail due to heat, or other components.
Thermoelectric
Solar Supporter
Solar Supporter
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:30 pm
Location: Cairns. --- Provider: Ergon

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby offgridQLD » Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:53 pm

I think the weight was a indication there is a lump of something inside doing some kind of heat sinking. I can hold my hand for as long as i like on the glass but the tail end of the lamp gets hot to my hand anyhow. I agree keeping things cool is what its all about for longevity.

I will trial one in a enclosed down light fitting that takes standard CFL's that don't last long due to heat and see how I go. but its true only time will tell if it can last the 15,000hrs that is printed on the package. At least bigger brand names have some kind of reputation to uphold .

Kurt
offgridQLD
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:50 am
Location: South Australia, Fleurieu Peninsula

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Bthree » Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:51 pm

Hey Kurt,

How are the Phillips my vision 9.5w E27 LED globes going, looking at the 6w B22 version ?

Do you know of any cheap outlets to purchase these Philips my vision ?
Network = Powercor .. Retailer = Origin .. Installed Christmas 2008
Latronics PV-1200 feed by 8xTrina TSM DC-01 .. 170watt = 1360watts DC in .. 1096watts AC out .. 5+years later 990watts ac out
Bthree
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: NorthWest Victoria

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby offgridQLD » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:39 pm

Early days but they are fine. I can only vouch for the 9.5w warm white. Unless you particularly don't want the extra brightness I would go for the 9.5w.

Funny enough after hunting around online the big green shed that has the best price I could find. I have now replaced all the lights 8 in total for bedroom and ensuite bathroom.

kurt
offgridQLD
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 2117
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2012 11:50 am
Location: South Australia, Fleurieu Peninsula

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby Tracker » Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:51 am

AnyWare LED.jpg
AnyWare LED.jpg (9.71 KiB) Viewed 3916 times


This is seriously, the ONLY bulb that has impressed me..

This could be a bulb that might, and I repeat - MIGHT - last, and it is because of the obvious heatsink...

I have seen the philips ones and have wondered about how thermally efficient their heat sink is.. ie - no air holes.. Good NAME, but how does that heat dissipation really work..?
..
.
Tracker
Solar Crusader
Solar Crusader
 
Posts: 5111
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:54 am
Location: SYDNEY --- EA - Network, Retailer - EA

Re: LED Lights, Marketing vs reality. Mk II

Postby LEDMAD » Fri May 03, 2013 10:31 am

Quokka2 wrote:My minimal experience with LED lights was with a batch of 20 GU10's I bought on eBay.
As recorded in another post, one failed after 20 minutes or so,....Curious to hear if anyone else has experienced this problem.


We have been purchasing a bunch of bulbs for a LED comparison web site.

Out of the 80 globes purchased so far, we have had 3 failures within the first 2 days of use. So I fear the claims of 20 year lifetimes for LED globes are greatly exaggerated. Nonetheless it is in line with the similarly exaggerated claims being made for wattage, light output and beam angles by many vendors.
LEDMAD
Solar Fanatic
Solar Fanatic
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 8:17 am

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Efficiency

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

new solar power specials