Energy Central EnergyPulse Home
Home Subscribe Login Contribute to Energy Pulse Advertise on Energy Pulse About Energy Pulse Feedback to Energy Pulse
Search Articles:   
  You are here: Home > Energy Efficiency > Article Display


Free Newsletter
Sign up today for your free subscription to the EnergyPulse Weekly Update - delivered directly to your e-mail box.
e-mail:


 

Communicating Smart Meter Value

Sep 9 2010 - 2010-01-01 12:00:00 - Your City

If you are involved in Management or Customer Service and are responsible for communicating the value of smart meters to your utility customers, you don’t want to miss this online discussion - Communicating Smart Meter Value.  more...

Social Media: The new frontier in recruiting, communications and marketing

Sep 13 2010 - 2010-01-01 12:00:00 - Your City

Join social media mavens Matthew Burks and Amanda Shewmake as they provide an insider's perspective on how HR, communications and marketing professionals in energy companies can harness the power of social media to be more effective and productive. more...

Eliminating Obstacles and Delivering the Benefits of the Smart Grid - IBM's Optimized Energy Value Chain (OEVC)

Sep 14 2010 - 2010-01-01 12:00:00 - Your City

The convergence of power and information technologies in the smart grid has created opportunities for finer grained and broader controls of energy flows. These opportunities can improve electric service in multiple dimensions: lower cost, greater reliability, greater customer satisfaction, and more...

Achieving Operational Excellence - What to Consider Before Implementing or Upgrading Your Distribution Management Solutions

Sep 16 2010 - 2010-01-01 12:00:00 - Your City

Significant cost over runs. Changing business requirements. A well thought out plan is essential. Attend this free webcast discussion to hear inside hear three experts in utility operations discuss what utilities need to evaluate when they are considering upgrading or more...

Outsmarting the Smart Grid: IT, Security and Communication Infrastructure  Challenges & Opportunities for Utilities

Sep 21 2010 - 2010-01-01 12:00:00 - Your City

The smart grid is shifting the playing field for utilities. And when the game changes, it pays to be prepared. A nimble solutions partner can help you design the solutions that keep operations on track, even as new challenges come more...

1st CSP Today Concentrated Solar Thermal Power Summit India

Sep 7 2010 - Sep 8 2010 - New Delhi India

Deliver a profitable, productive and commercially successful large scale CSP business in India. Building on the success of past events in USA, Europe & MENA, CSP Today brings to New Delhi the most relevant international experience for the concentrated solar more...

Offshore Wind Energy in North America's Great Lakes Conference

Sep 9 2010 - Sep 10 2010 - Toronto

Two day conference that tackles the most important challenges. A blend of European knowledge from the companies who have been installing offshore wind turbines for the last decade alongside local state governing bodies and leading project developers. Permitting, securing long more...

Autovation 2010

Sep 12 2010 - Sep 15 2010 - Austin, TX - USA

Autovation 2010 is a not-to-miss educational forum that will attract utility executives from around the world looking for new ways to optimize their operations through automation technologies. more...

Global Sustainable Bioenergy North American Convention

Sep 14 2010 - Sep 16 2010 - Minneapolis, MN - USA

The North American convention provides a remarkable opportunity to play a part in guiding renewable energy policy for the 21st century. Attendees will create a resolution that, along with similar resolutions already drafted on four other continents, will help set more...

GridWise Global Forum

Sep 21 2010 - Sep 23 2010 - Washington, DC - USA

Hosted by the GridWise(R) Alliance and the U.S. Department of Energy, the GridWise Global Forum will convene thought leaders from the highest levels of government, business, NGOS, and academia from around the world to discuss the ultimate enabling potential of more...

1. Intro to Nat Gas Trading & Hedging 2. Option Applications in Energy

Sep 20 2010 - Sep 23 2010 - Houston, TX - USA

Introduction to Natural Gas Trading & Hedging - This program provides a comprehensive understanding of the structures that underlie Natural Gas trading. Beyond Essentials: Option Applications in Energy - This course provides a solid practical and conceptual (non-quantitative) understanding of more...

Electric Business Understanding Seminar

Sep 20 2010 - Sep 21 2010 - Houston, TX - USA

Electric Business Understanding provides a comprehensive overview of the electric industry. Position yourself for career advancement by gaining a solid understanding of how the electric business works including key physical, market, and regulatory aspects and how market participants navigate this more...

Electric Market Dynamics Seminar

Sep 22 2010 - Sep 23 2010 - Houston, TX - USA

Electric Market Dynamics offers participants an in-depth understanding of North American electric markets and how they function. Enhance your career by furthering your knowledge of market structures, pricing mechanisms, services offered in markets, and how various participants use the markets more...

Gas and Electric Business Understanding Seminar

Oct 5 2010 - Oct 6 2010 - Los Angeles, CA - USA

Gas and Electric Business Understanding provides a comprehensive overview of the natural gas and electric industries. Position yourself for career success by gaining a solid understanding of how each business works, including key physical, market and regulatory aspects, as well more...

Energy Central
Power Network




Energy Efficiency


We know you have something to say!
There is an immediate need for articles on the hot topics in the Power Industry! EnergyPulse, like no other publication, also provides a means for our readers to immediately interact with experts like you.
 
Contribute Today!
Please view our Author Guidelines and send submissions to the editor.

Click For More Articles on Energy Efficiency
 
CFLs and Mercury: What Are Utilities Doing to Facilitate CFL Recycling?
1.8.08   Alexandra Behringer, Research Manager, E SOURCE

Article Viewed 6898 Times
28 Comments
E-mail Article Printer Friendly
 
  • Email This Author
  • Comment On Article
  • About The Author
  • More Articles By This Author

    As national and global attention focuses on ways to reduce greenhouse emissions and save energy, many utilities are launching or expanding compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) programs for residential customers. Utilities in the U.S. often work with manufacturers and retailers to promote CFLs in conjunction with the national Energy Star “Change a Light, Change the World” campaign, which takes place each October through December. Such efficient-lighting initiatives are helping to increase consumer acceptance and sales of CFLs. The big-three lighting manufacturers—GE Lighting, Philips, and Osram Sylvania—report that sales of CFLs soared 65 percent in 2006. And 2007 should be a banner year for CFL sales, considering Wal-Mart’s announcement in early October that it surpassed its goal to sell 100 million CFLs by the end of the year.

    With the surge in CFL sales has come increasing public awareness about the mercury content in CFLs and concerns about proper disposal. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin, but the amount in CFLs is very small—typically about 5 milligrams (mg). In comparison, mercury-based fever thermometers contain 0.5 to 3 grams of mercury, 100 to 600 times more mercury than a typical CFL. And CFLs are not a major source of mercury emissions—the the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates they provide less than 0.01 percent of total U.S. emissions, while coal-burning power plants represent 40 percent. Given that a CFL uses about one-third as much energy as an incandescent bulb that provides the same light output, using CFLs instead of incandescent bulbs actually results in a net decrease in mercury emissions.

    Although CFLs contain relatively small amounts of mercury, proper disposal practices are still necessary when the bulbs burn out. CFLs can be recycled, yet challenges remain: Lamp recycling and disposal regulations vary by state and locality, and a wide-ranging recycling infrastructure does not yet exist. Nonetheless, a few utilities and related entities are working around these challenges to offer programs that provide education—and sometimes incentives—to encourage CFL recycling.

    Online Information

    The most common action taken by utilities with CFL programs is to post information on their web sites on how to dispose of used or broken bulbs. While some web sites refer consumers directly to local solid waste or household hazardous waste–collection facilities, others provide links to lamprecycle.org, earth911.org, or epa.gov/bulbrecycling. (Lamprecycle.org lists state recycling regulations, contacts, and lamp recyclers in the U.S. and Canada. Earth911.org provides recycling center information for fluorescent bulbs when a consumer enters their ZIP code. Epa.gov/bulbrecycling lists lamp recycling programs by state and region.) In addition, some utilities direct consumers to epa.gov/mercury/spills or to
    energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/ Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf for the proper way to clean up a broken CFL.

    Utility and Related State-Level Efficiency Programs

    Some utilities have gone beyond providing information on their web sites to developing programs that actively enable consumers to recycle or dispose of CFLs responsibly. For example, Wisconsin’s Focus on Energy program coordinates CFL recycling for Cedarburg Light & Water Utility customers, who can drop off their unbroken CFLs for free at a local True Value Hardware store. Another Wisconsin utility, River Falls Municipal Utility, offers CFL recycling at its utility office. Stoughton Utilities in Wisconsin offers a unique CFL bulb exchange incentive: Customers can bring up to 10 CFLs for recycling to two hardware stores and receive $1.00 off for each new CFL purchased as a replacement for recycled bulbs. Stoughton Utilities then collects the old bulbs for recycling.

    Jo-Carroll Energy Cooperative in northwestern Illinois recently launched a CFL recycling program. The recycling service is free; consumers can drop off used CFLs at utility offices as well as at several businesses. And in October 2007, ComEd announced its partnership with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) and Ace Hardware to launch a pilot CFL recycling program. About 150 participating local Ace Hardware stores in northern Illinois accepted used CFLs from ComEd customers through December 31 and disposed of them in IEPA-approved recycling facilities.

    As part of its Change a Light campaign, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) announced it will be providing information on where and how the public can recycle used CFLs. In addition, PG&E planned to recycle CFLs collected at the public kick-off events in Berkeley and San Francisco as well as expand the Take It Back recycling program it started in March 2007 in Tehama County, California.

    Xcel Energy: Bulb Recycling Program

    In Minnesota, the legislature has enacted statutes prohibiting the disposal of mercury-containing lamps in solid waste, and directing public utilities that provide electric service to 200,000 or more customers to establish a system to collect and recycle lamps. One of the longest running utility-sponsored lamp recycling programs in the U.S. is the Bulb Recycling program offered by Xcel Energy in Minnesota, which was launched in 1993. This program covers the cost for residential and small business customers to recycle up to 10 bulbs per year (including CFLs, fluorescent tubes, and high-intensity discharge lamps) at county recycling centers, or at one of a number of local hardware stores.

    Currently 21 counties or cities that are within or near Xcel Energy’s service territory participate. Xcel Energy finds that the majority of bulbs (about 90 percent) are recycled at the county recycling centers, where the service is free to consumers. The utility reimburses county recycling centers for their recycling, administrative, labor, and storage costs, which average between $0.50 and $0.55 per bulb.

    Retailers charge consumers a recycling fee of $0.50 to $2.00, depending on the size of the bulb, and Xcel Energy provides a $0.50 coupon to offset this fee. Coupons are available to customers on the utility web site; in addition, a coupon is sent to customers once a year in a bill insert. Retailers can also order coupons and offer them to customers at the store. Mercury Technologies of Minnesota, which administers the retailer aspect of the program, recruited the participating retailers, provides the stores with bins for recycling, picks up the bins, and recycles the bulbs. Mercury Technologies also collects the coupons and reimburses the retailers. Xcel Energy then reimburses Mercury Technologies $0.50 per bulb.

    The program is marketed to customers on the utility web site (xcelenergy.com/bulbrecycling) and in bill inserts. In addition, retailers can hang up signs in their stores that say “Recycling Provided by Xcel Energy.” Xcel Energy’s 2007 budgets for the residential and small business aspects of the program are $162,000 and $30,000, respectively. The goals for the program in 2007 are to recycle 155,000 units from residential customers and 27,000 units from small business customers, and the utility expects to meet or slightly exceed these goals.

    Kim Sherman, product portfolio manager with Xcel Energy notes, “It’s been great to have the county recycling centers on board because they are able to bring in a lot of bulbs. The key with them is getting them to invoice us on a regular basis, in order to avoid getting one large invoice near the end of the year. Mercury Technologies does a great job in recruiting the small hardware stores, which really present some viable options for people who don’t have county recycling centers near them. So if a utility has a service territory that’s really spread out, getting retailers on board is a great way to try to access those areas.”

    Several other utilities in the state also work with Mercury Technologies and provide coupons toward CFL recycling at area hardware retailers, including Connexus Energy, Dakota Electric Association, East Central Energy, Glencoe Power and Light Commission, Grand Marais Public Utilities Commission, McLeod Cooperative Power, Mille Lacs Energy Cooperative, Minnesota Power, North Itasca Electric Cooperative, and Stearns Electric Association.

    EWEB: Lane County Lamp Recycling Coalition

    Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) began to heavily promote CFLs in the wake of the West Coast energy crisis of 2000 and 2001. Bob Lorenzen, Demand-Side Management Programs Manager at EWEB, notes, “We heard from our customers that they wanted the utility to take some responsibility for end-of-life issues with these lamps. We decided that convenience was a priority concern that we had for customers. Of all the avenues we looked at, we felt that the retail-based option was the most convenient because customers would be going in to retailers anyway to replace a burned-out lamp.”

    EWEB was instrumental in developing a pilot residential fluorescent lamp recycling program, which ran from October 2004 to October 2005 in Eugene and Springfield. The pilot involved a coalition of area utilities (Blachly-Lane Cooperative, Emerald Public Utility District, Lane Electric Cooperative, Springfield Utility Board, and EWEB); Lane County Public Works, Waste Management Division; Oregon Department of Environmental Quality; the Energy Outlet; and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. Eleven retailers participated in the pilot recycling program, which was free to residential customers. During the pilot, CFL recycling increased from about 1 percent to almost 6.7 percent, while linear tube recycling increased from about 4.3 percent to 16.3 percent.

    Because of the success of the pilot, the coalition and retailers decided to continue the recycling program. Currently, Lane County Public Works, Waste Management Division acts as the program manager, while the five utilities contribute marketing funds based on the percentage of customers they serve in the Eugene-Springfield area. Thirteen locally-owned hardware and lighting retailers now participate, with no fee to the consumer (Lane County pays for the recycling costs). One of the participating retailers, Jerry’s Home Improvement Center, collects the majority of lamps in the program (about 60 percent in 2007) at their two locations, and delivers the lamps to the Lane County Waste Facility on a monthly basis with their other hazardous waste recycling. Lane County picks up lamps from the other retailers on a quarterly basis.

    Marketing efforts include radio ads three times a year, newspaper ads for the fall home show in early October and a green home show in January, a brochure that can be used as a handout or bill insert, and 11x17 posters on stiff cardstock for the retailers to post at their businesses. Including CFLs and linear tubes, the program recycled about 17,500 lamps in 2005, 22,000 lamps in 2006, and 22,000 lamps in 2007. Linear tubes are the bulk of the collected lamps at 78 percent in 2007, compared to 72 percent in 2005 and 74 percent in 2006. In 2005, CFLs were 13.4 percent of lamps collected, compared to 14 percent in 2006 and 11 percent in 2007.

    In the final evaluation report of the pilot program, total cost estimates (including recycling, marketing, and program administration costs) averaged $3.74 per bulb and $0.46 per mg of mercury, with costs for an ongoing program estimated to fall to $1.06 per lamp and $0.14 per mg of mercury.

    Since the pilot ended and the ongoing program began, a downward trend in costs has occurred. “When we started the pilot, the recycling costs were slightly above $0.50 a lamp for CFLs and about $0.10 to $0.15 a foot for linear lamps,” says Lorenzen. “Now, recycling costs are down to around $0.30 a lamp for CFLs and about $0.05 a foot for linear lamps. In addition, our pilot budget for marketing was around $15,000. Now, we spend less than $3,000 on promotions per year, including radio and print ads.” Lane County is also spending less time on the collection process. Ultimately, Lorenzen says, “we have likely beat the decreased cost targets identified in the evaluation report because we’re not having to invest as much time, money, and effort to continue the recycling program.”

    Efficiency Maine: The First Statewide Program

    Efficiency Maine (the energy division of the Maine Public Utilities Commission) offers electrical efficiency programs throughout the state, funded through a systems benefit charge levied on electric ratepayers. As part of its residential programs, Efficiency Maine promotes Energy Star–labeled CFLs and fixtures. Between 2005 and 2007, Efficiency Maine moved over 1 million CFLs.

    In the first quarter of 2007, the mercury issue came to a head when a Prospect, Maine resident broke a CFL in her home. She contacted the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), who told her one option was to contact a commercial hazardous materials cleanup contractor. According to news stories, the contractor told her the cleanup would cost $2,000. This story received a significant amount of negative press attention, and the numbers of CFLs sold during this period declined. Shortly after that, the state passed a legislative order instructing the Maine Public Utilities Commission and the DEP to develop a program to support CFL recycling.

    Richard Bacon, Efficiency Maine program manager, says, “Because the mercury issue was beginning to affect the number of CFLs moved, we had to address it very quickly and very vigorously.” As a result, Efficiency Maine in conjunction with the DEP developed and launched the first statewide CFL recycling program in June 2007. Over 214 retailers in the state currently participate, including hardware stores, lumberyards, grocery stores, convenience stores, gas stations, and even one car dealership. “Every week, we have a few more retailers signing on,” reports Bacon.

    Efficiency Maine uses field implementation contractors, who recruit retailers and provide field services to all the participating stores in the state. The DEP offered training to Efficiency Maine and its field reps in proper handling of the bulbs. Graybar Electric, a national electrical wholesaler, provides the buckets for recycling (each of which hold 50 to 90 CFLs). The field reps place buckets in participating stores, and train sales associates on the program. FedEX provides pick-up and shipping of full buckets to Veolia Environmental Services, Technical Solutions for recycling.

    Marketing efforts include newspaper ads, point-of-purchase materials (including 6x6 and 8.5x11 cards) that serve as counter displays, a mouse pad on each service desk where employees can place a CFL that says “recycle,” and decals for placement in store windows. In addition, the Efficiency Maine web site lists contact information for stores that offer lamp recycling across the state.

    The CFL Recycling program is free to both consumers and retailers; Efficiency Maine covers all program costs. Currently the recycling cost per CFL averages about $1.00, but Bacon expects this price to go down over time. “Because CFLs are so cost-effective, I just look at this program as part of our marketing costs—because it completes the cycle. It takes away that barrier: Any question in the back of a consumer’s mind of ‘How am I going to get rid of this thing?’ is answered. And if you remove a barrier, your sales numbers will go up.” In fact, Bacon reports that Efficiency Maine’s 2007 CFL sales are ahead of those of 2006.

    Lessons Learned: Simplicity, Ease of Use, and Partnerships

    Whether utilities and related efficiency organizations have offered CFL recycling for many years, like Xcel Energy, or for only a few months, like Efficiency Maine, they offer useful insights for other entities seeking to offer similar services. Carla Hahn, associate product portfolio manager with Xcel Energy, encourages utilities to work with county recycling centers as well as mom-and-pop hardware stores that are accessible to customers throughout their service territories. Although no big-box stores are currently participating in Xcel Energy’s Bulb Recycling program, Hahn believes that, “eventually the big box stores might get involved as well, due to the increasing interest in recycling.”

    Bob Lorenzen of EWEB notes that it is critical to involve retailers in the design of the program: “What made it so successful for us is seeking their input, because they’re the ones who are going to be dealing with the lamps and the customers. So you have to make it easy for them and make it retailer-friendly.” He notes that none of the national big-box retailers currently participate in EWEB’s recycling program. In fact, “the mom-and-pop retailers viewed participating as a competitive edge they would have over the big-box retailers they were competing against. Customers who want to recycle their lamps are going to take their lamps to those mom-and-pop retailers, and while they’re in the store, they’re likely to buy something.” Lorenzen also emphasizes the importance of partnering with the local solid waste agency. “They have a strong interest in not seeing those lamps go into the landfill.”

    Richard Bacon of Efficiency Maine agrees that partnerships with retailers and local agencies are crucial. “Absolutely two things have to happen. You have to build a good working relationship with the state Department of Environmental Protection. They were great to work with, they offered us training, we have a common purpose, and we get things done by cooperating. Also, get your participating stores into the program early, listen to them, and make this as easy as possible for them to participate. The more barriers you put up, the lower response you’re going to have.” He adds, “Let’s face it: We’re asking stores to accept a toxic substance into their building. If you really look at it, that’s pretty serious. But timing, credibility, and relationships make it work.”

    Awareness of the potential health hazards of mercury in fluorescent lamps will continue to increase as growing numbers of consumers adopt efficient lighting. We advise utilities to proactively address the proper disposal and recycling of CFLs they promote.

    For information on purchasing reprints of this article, contact Tim Tobeck ttobeck@energycentral.com.
    Copyright 2010 CyberTech, Inc.
     
    Contact The Author
    Email the author
    Phone: 303-345-9153
    E-mail Article Printer Friendly
     
  • Click Here For More Articles on Energy Efficiency


  • Click Here For More Articles By Alexandra Behringer
  • Do you agree or disagree with this article? Send in your own article.

     

    Readers Comments

    Date Comment
    Len Gould
    1.8.08
    Your story about the $2,000 "cleanup offer" for a broken CFL and subsequent drop in sales of CFL's certainly highlights the public's foolishness on such issues. I hesitate to speculate what this citizen might have done (probably died of fear alone) in the event of the much more common breakage of a standard 40" rapidstart flourescent tube which have been very common in homes for years (I have 8 of them in my garage).

    Len Gould
    1.8.08
    "Let’s face it: We’re asking stores to accept a toxic substance into their building. " Is Richard Bacon serious here? Has he ever looked up to the cieling in any of these large stores?

    Jim Beyer
    1.9.08
    How much mercury is really in a CFL? Compared with the amount that is freely spewed from the stacks of coal-fired plants? I'm a bit leery of the CFL hype for other reasons, but hyping concerns about their mercury content seems unproductive.

    According to EnergyStar, a CFL contains about 5 milligrams of mercury. Compared with 500 milligrams found in older thermometers.

    Hard to figure out how much mercury is emitted from how much coal burned. Grrr. Well, the EPA has deposition rates in some of the worst areas of the U.S at about 10 micrograms per square meter per year. So a 10x10 meter square of land will receive about 1 milligram of mercury per year from deposition (from coal plants).

    So you break a CFL in your house. Let's assume you clean up 80% of the mercury. That leave 1 milligram that escaped. Equal to what gets dumped on 100 square meters of your lawn and roof each year. (And probably tracked in your house with mud, etc.) So, don't worry about it! Clean it up as best you can and try not to break one every day.

    www.snopes.com has information on these Maine indicidents (kind of an urban legend debunker site). I mean no disrespect to the Author of this article, because I think she has raised a valid concern that needs to be teased out some more.

    Coal plants dump 50 tons of mercury every year in the U.S. To match that, we'd have to smash 10 Billion CFLs every year (if my math is correct). I think we can be a little less clumsy than that.

    Bob Amorosi
    1.9.08
    The concern about bringing a toxic chemical into stores is just hilarious. The stores not only have these same kinds of lights on their ceilings as Len points out, they have been selling the tube variety of these lamps to consumers for decades already. And consider all the myriad of other toxic substances already found in the vast array of household cleaners and garden products that many of these same stores sell.

    The only issue with CFLs is their proper handling by consumers (don't be breaking them too often in the house as Jim says) and their proper disposal. Many municipalities already have toxic waste recycling programs in place for other sources of mercury, like old thermometers and old style thermostats with mercury tilt switches in them, and for hazardous substances in discarded consumer electronics. It just takes initiative by politicians of local governments to add CFLs to these programs, but admittedly maybe I expect too much of local government politicians.

    David Bush
    1.9.08
    Interesting fact: One CFL will reduce the mercury in the environment by 9.6 milligrams as compared to a traditional light bulb. You will also spend less time changing light bulbs and generate less solid waste. Traditional Incandescent = 17.6 milligrams total Mercury within Bulb + Power Plant Emissions CFL = 8 milligrams total Mercury within Bulb + Power Plant Emissions

    Reduction in Mercury by Using a CFL 9.6 milligrams

    Source: E Source Tech News 2007

    Terry Ward
    1.13.08
    Legislate: 3/6/12 volt lighting system for all. LED technology will go through the roof (pun intended) It is already directional, cooler to run and longer lasting.

    Domestic: Side effect - lower bills ;-)

    Industrial: Side effect - much less pollution.

    Street lighting (all public use): Side effect - less light pollution.

    Net results for all: Less costs to the taxpayer. Less demand on the grid.

    Objections....?

    Bob Amorosi
    1.13.08
    Terry, in the electronics industry many developers are working intensely to adapt LED lightiing technologies to any voltage system including our 120VAC home electricity. There are many electronic components available now that are highly efficient at controlling LED devices from higher voltage AC or DC systems, making it more cost effective to compete with incandescent or florescent lighting.

    We are already seeing Christmas decorative LED lighting displacing conventional incandescent lighting on a wide scale, at least here in Canada. Some early products are also appearing to replace indoor room lighting, although they are still more expensive than CFLs or incandescents.

    LED technology is poised to compete vigorously with CFLs, and it has already made huge impacts over the last 10 years in automotive and traffic lights, and commercial entertainment lighting by displacing incandescents.

    Terry Ward
    1.14.08
    Bob, gotta love good news :-)

    Personally, and I have done near zero due diligence for this, I wouldn't mind paying 10x the price for every fixture if it were LCD. The immediate savings on my electricity bill would please. The long term would make me very happy. The longevity of the bulb, coupled with their efficiency, render CFLs redundant. Expensive to produce and run and dispose of *and* polluting. Utterly counter-intuitive. LCDs would not be the first technology to fail because, or in spite, of being superior.

    I agree with your comment about store pollutants also. I stopped laughing at people complaining about their "allergies", without wondering if their perfumes, "plug-in" air "fresheners", fabric "conditioners", lacquers(nail varnish, shampoo, deodorants, lipstick, hairspray, bath-oil, cleansers, anti-aging cream, etc), biological washing powders, household "cleaning" products and such like were in any way to blame, when I discovered admixture. Even if the individual products are "tested" the infinite combinations are not. People who are happily "cleaning themselves to death" are not in the habit of thinking rationally about most issues I would hazard. Granted, it may be the exposure to the above that puts them in that category in the first instance in which case the production of these chemicals is a crime against humanity.

    Len Gould
    1.14.08
    Though present technology LED lighting is only about half as energy-to-light efficient as flourescent, I've little doubt that will be fixed quite soon. Pretty safe to bet on future breakthrough's in physics if no law of physical bars it and there's a big market for the product.

    david austin
    1.15.08
    I agree with Len. LED is a niche market. Energy-to-light is only one small piece of the puzzle. The real challenge is lumens/dollar. I don't think LED's will ever catch up to flourescent with regard to cost. Then there's the manufacturing impact. Coming from semiconductor manufacturing I'm quite sure that if you actually consider all the harmful chemicals involved in making 1000 LED bulbs compared to 1000 flourescent bulbs of equal light output you'll find the flourescents to be much easier on the environment.

    Not to say they don't have their place, but it isn't the same place where CFLs are currently going.

    Mike Vande Voort
    1.15.08
    CFLs are another example of the enviromental lemmings jumping off the cliff. I have used these lamps for years in commercial environments to save energy in situations where the lamp is on 24 hours per day, but their lifetime is hardly any better than incandescent, since most of them are cheap Chinese imports. Costs savings are a bit nebulous because of the higher price of the lamp. LEDS are now just reaching the efficiencies of fluorescent (50+ year old) technology and will making major inroads into all kinds of automotive, architectural and home lighting. More efficient products are being released on a monthly basis. In the meantime, the huge uptick in CFL use ( 100's of milllions world wide) due to all kinds of promotions and mandates will raise the mercury load in the environment as most of them will go straight to the landfill. There is no Hg in an incandescent lamp, just tungsten, copper, a little inert gas, and the aluminum base, all of which are edible :-)

    david austin
    1.15.08
    Wait ... I guess I misread Len. Sorry, I guess we disagree. I have nothing against LED, and I think it would be great if it beat CFL for space lighting, but the cost (manufacturing) issues are just too great. Len mentions physics breakthroughs - but as I understand it the challenge is really manufacturing, not physics, and being on the inside of that industry I don't see it improving any time soon. It sounds a lot easier than it really is. I think it will get close to CFL, but close ain't good enough. People will choose lighting based on lumens/dollar and the dollars are driven down by R&D which is funded by sales - and who's going to generating all the sales in the next 20 years? CFL. They'll get the R&D cash, they'll be the ones to drive costs down even much further.

    david austin
    1.15.08
    Mike-

    The new CFLs are vastly superior. Also, be careful about which brand you buy, because there are quite a few CFLs today with poor lifetimes. Buy a bunch of different brands ... you see what I mean. Incandescents are the same way - some brands last 3X longer than others.

    Ronald Promboin
    1.15.08
    Are consumers really supposed to burn imported oil and generate automobile exhaust emissions to recycle CFLs and avoid what is evidently a tiny proportion of mercury emissions?

    Chris DeLise
    1.15.08
    I view CFLs as transitional technology, and LEDs as the end goal. I have about 15 CFLs deployed in our home. In two years' time, two bulbs have died, both inexpensive 7W lamps made in Asia. These two were used as nightlights and accumulated over 4000 hours each before failing. I'm disappointed to see them fail, but net savings over incandescents is still considerable, even adding the $0.30/bulb recycling cost.

    That said, the electronics needed to power an array of LEDs isn't fundamentally more complex or expensive than the electronic ballast for a CFL. The LEDs themselves will follow the semiconductor price curves as the volume increases. No question, the price will come down.

    I don't view in-store returns as a viable disposal mechanism. Do you take your food waste (clearly toxic) back to the grocery? I agree that your state EPA is a wonderful resource and suggest we need local action - recycling at the local dump or transfer station - with state incentives and education. Let's try to use the existing waste stream instead of making a new one.

    Bob Amorosi
    1.15.08
    David, I spent some time in semiconductor manufacturing 20 years ago when LEDs weren't on anyone's radar screens except for simple electronics indicators. They have advanced immensely since then in terms of lumens-per-watt efficiencies, variety of colours, sizes, and just as importantly packaging, especially the abiity to package multichip hybrids on one substrate that are approaching the lumen output of CFLs and incandescents for space lighting.

    As you say LEDs for space lighting do not quite meet the lumens-per-watt you get from CFLs just yet, but semi manufacturers are working hard on it, especially in Japan. Also, with the wide variation of efficiencies in marketed CFLs and incandescents anyway, most uneducated consumers place more importance on cost instead of buying the most lumens per watt.

    Realistically you are right though about the marketing wars - CFLs have a huge lead and they will get the most sales at first and ultimately the most investment back into R&D.

    Bob Amorosi, Resident of Ontario Canada

    Bob Amorosi
    1.15.08
    "abiity" should read "ability" in my last posting.

    Furthermore David, just look at the huge inroads LEDs have already made in displacing incandescents for traffic ligthts and automotive vehicle head and tail lights. Here in Ontario virtually all new traffic lights and replacement of old burnt out incandescents use LED elements now. What is great about LEDs are their huge service lifetimes, and sometimes service lifetime is viewed as most important even for some consumers. I have used some LED night lights that have run continuously now for 6 years and are still going strong. Gotta like the lack of maintenance costs, many consumers love stuff they can buy, install, and then practically never have to touch or worry about again.

    Jim Hoerner
    1.15.08
    > Xcel Energy finds that the majority of bulbs (about 90 percent) are recycled at the county > recycling centers, where the service is free to consumers. The utility reimburses county > recycling centers for their recycling, administrative, labor, and storage costs, which > average between $0.50 and $0.55 per bulb.

    Utter nonsense: "Free to consumers" ? "Utility reimburses"

    Regards, Jim Hoerner (but my house is full of CFLs)

    Jim Hoerner
    1.15.08
    Utter nonsense: "Free to consumers" [is not equal to] "Utility reimburses"

    david austin
    1.15.08
    Chris-

    No LED's will not follow the same price drops seen with silicon computer chips and here's why: Bulk semiconductors are actually getting more expensive rather than cheaper because of huge demand. The chip prices continue to fall because they get smaller according to moore's law. LED's on the otherhand will not be getting any smaller to provide the same level or higher level of performance. It's quite the opposite dynamic in fact.

    This is the same reason solar cells haven't gotten any cheaper in the last 10 years. You will see the same dynamic with LED lights.

    But don't you worry - CFLs are still new, and not all CFL's have short lifetimes. They will only get better and cheaper with time, though I don't expect then to get cheaper until well after incandescents are out of the way.

    david austin
    1.15.08
    Bob -

    Those LED traffic lights are the perfect example of what I was saying: an incredibly expensive niche market, but totally worth it for the reasons you expressed. I think we are going to see LEDs implemented in many more major ways in the next couple years - already they are being used in new cars for all lights except the front beams. I expect that in another couple years you won't be able to buy a car with anything but LED's and Halogens. Boy won't that be nice - I'm forever replacing automobile lights.

    Those markets alone will be enough to keep LED producers in the money for some time, but don't expect me to buy CREE stock. I just don't think they'll be financially competitive for most space lighting applications for at least a couple dozen years when compared to CFLs.

    Len Gould
    1.16.08
    I'm gonna hold my breath and wait for the "Fusion Reactor in a Bulb" technology, though I'm unclear on how they're switched off and my neighbor tells me he's heard they're a mess when they break...

    Bob Croteau
    1.16.08
    This is a poke at the consumers who insist on the cheapest purchase price and the CFL manufacturers who oblige them . CFLs today don't last anywhere as long as the early versions. I still have CFLs from the mid 80s that are still working. Some new ones have lasted only a few months even though they were not in heat trapping enclosed fixtures. If it takes four new lamps to equal the life of the original models you have gennerated four times the waste mercury and four times the energy it took to make the lamps which also spews out mercury. For a few dollars more you can still buy higher quality lamps that are rated at 10,000 or 12,000 hours and you will be way ahead on life cycle costing and environmental issues,

    Bob Amorosi
    1.16.08
    David,

    I agree LEDs are still more expensive for space lighting or high output indicators like traffice lights, whether they be large chips or hybrids of multi-chips on one substrate.

    The cost inflation caused by huge demand is a direct indication of the growth in applications, and if demand continues to grow, more foundry capacity will sooner or later be built to safisfy it. The economies of scale you mention are certainly true for ICs from Moore's law, but the cost of the die is only one part of an LED lighting device - there's also supoorting circuitry in it too just like CFLs to run it on high voltages. And this supporting circuitry is getting better all the time, with more integrated parts coming out every year.

    Bob Amorosi
    1.16.08
    "safify" should read "satisfy" in last comment.

    Also David, since bare LED chips are inherently low-voltage DC operated devices, they are ideal for solar energy powering, as seen now in many garden lighting products. If solar energy ever becomes big for general power systems in our homes, you could theoretically run all LED space lighting almost directly from the solar panels, with no need for the expensive inverters to convert to 120VAC, and without much if any supporting circuitry in the LED elements.

    Chris DeLise
    1.16.08
    David -

    I agree with you - bulk semis are being driven up by demand for solar arrays - I recall just a few months ago hearing the raw silicon demand for PV had exceeded the rest of the entire semiconductor industry. Wow. But new Si foundries are coming online soon and that will help a lot.

    What always amazed me was the heat dissipation of the bright LEDs. It would seem to me their main issue is heat, not light. Metal substrates, advanced processing, PWM and other means of dimmer control, and custom chips from companies like Maxim and TI suggest to me there's very rapid evolution going on.

    Still, the basic lumens/watt winner seems to be the CFL. I'm hopeful for both technologies. LEDs have long lifetimes and work better at low temps - cars, outside, marine - than CFLs. Both deserve a piece of the market.

    Bob Amorosi
    1.16.08
    Chris, both are indeed getting a piece of the market now and will continue to in the future.

    You'r also correct about heat dissipation of large LED elecments. I designed an array of them for some commercial lighting panels a couple of years ago, and heat dissipation was THE main design problem. Each LED element, as a hybrid multi-chip cluster on a ceramic substrate, had to dissipate several watts in a small area. Result is lots of temperature rise.

    Lumens per watt is still behind CFLs. But in many applications the planar layout of LED devices on a circuit board is more attractive than the bulb shapes we are familiar with for space room lights. Think of your ceiling plastered with planar LED arrays. We see similar things with arrays of halogen pot lights now in residential construction.

    babitha ambali
    12.22.09
    Hi friends.. it is clear that CFL lamp contains mercury.as a chemist we have to create a grreener area .it means that there will not be any dreadful waste(even in milligrams) atleast from our home.Thus the arguments and suggestions should be to replace the Mercury.

    Add your comments:
    Please log in to leave a comment!

    Top

        Home | Register | Subscribe | Contribute | Advertise | About Us | Feedback
       Copyright © 2002-2010, CyberTech, Inc. - All rights reserved. Read our Terms of Service.