$60 Light Bulb Debuts On Earth Day 743
theodp writes "How much would you pay for an amazing light bulb? On Sunday — Earth Day — Philips' $60 LED light bulb goes on sale at Home Depot and other outlets. The bulb, which lasts 20 years, won a $10 million DOE contest that stipulated the winning bulb should cost consumers $22 in its first year on the market. Ed Crawford, the head of Philips' U.S. lighting division, said it was always part of the plan to have utility rebates bring the price down to the $22 range."
I have two of them in my garage. (Score:5, Informative)
Philips AmberLEDs i bought for $20 each from home depot. In some areas they are now $15. Awesome light color and brightness. When they first went on sale they were $50-$60 each. now they are $20. Wait for a year and the pricing of these will also drop to $15-$20 making them affordable.
Re:*SHOCK* (Score:5, Informative)
Previous Model (Score:2, Informative)
I've had a very similar looking bulb to this new one in use in my living room for some time now. Very pleased with the quality of light it puts out, and works properly in an lamp with a dimmer circuit in it (some LED bulbs flash in dimmer equipped outlets). It's the strangest looking bulb I've seen - it's dandelion yellow when off, but blazing white when turned on. I'd pay $60 for an improved version just to give it a try.
What sort of guarantee backs up the 20 year life? (Score:3, Informative)
In my experience CFLs last no longer than incandescents. Why should I believe that these claims about LEDs are not also lies?
Made in USA (Score:5, Informative)
This article doesn't mention it, but part of the increased cost is the fact that the parts are made in CA & they are assembled in WI. So you're going to pay more for them compared to the same thing from China. And these seem pretty advanced, so you may not be able to buy an equivalent yet. Certainly, if I see them subsidized, I'll pick up a few.
Re:*SHOCK* (Score:5, Informative)
And therefore most likely an anti-Philips submission, intended to shame them into dropping the price. The actual article says Philips is already doing this.
Netherlands-based Philips, is discounting it right away to $50 for consumers, and working on deals with electric utilities to discount it even further, by as much as $20 to $30.
This means the bulb will cost anywhere from $20 to $60, depending on where it's found.
And of course more clarification
Congress launched the L Prize contest in 2007, with the goal of creating a bulb to replace the standard, energy-wasting "incandescent" 60-watt bulb. The requirements were rigorous, and Philips was the only entrant. Its bulb was declared the winner last year, after a year and a half of testing. The contest stipulated that the winning bulb be sold for $22 in its first year on the market... In that context, the $60 price tag has raised some eyebrows.
The title of the PhysOrg article? "Rebates to cut price of $60 LED bulb". That's a positive, and theodp should be ashamed for trolling.
Re:money back if not delighted? (Score:5, Informative)
Don't buy your CFLs at Walmart, the grocery store, etc - the Sunbeam/Great Value/etc bulbs that you find at those kinds of stores are shit.
Buy professional CFL bulbs. Hit up the GE or Osram/Sylvania online product catalogs, write down some part numbers with the size/color temp/lifetime that you want, and call up a local industrial/lighting supplier - Harris & Roome is my go-to place here in Canada.
My house is full of GE "FLE10HT2/827" bulbs, 40W equivalents that pull 10W, have a warm color temperature (2700K) and have a 12000 hour lifetime. Which I can believe - I bought a case of these bulbs about 4-5 years ago when I swapped out every incandescent I could find, I still have plenty of them left, and I honestly can't remember the last time I changed a lightbulb in my house - it's been years.
Wrong company to win the prize? (Score:4, Informative)
How is the Phillips $60 light bulb different than this $15 bulb [feitbulbs.com]?
Oh, and there are already complaints on the home depot site that it causes radio interference.
Re:The light bulb conspiracy. (Score:5, Informative)
An incandescent light bulb will have a lifespan proportional to the thickness of the filament and a power efficiency inversely proportional to the thickness of the filament. You can have a long-life incandescent bulb, but it will drain even more power from an already inefficient design. The 1000-hour bulb was a reasonably optimal point on the power vs. replacement cost curve.
If this is anything like CFLs... (Score:4, Informative)
Then they can keep it.
I don't understand why everyone is/was so excited about CFLs. When they broke into the mainstream a few years ago, they were more expensive but were long lasting and energy efficient -- at least, that's what we were told. I have owned many, and ALL of them have died prematurely. Sometimes an entire package will be dead within a few weeks of purchase. Who in their right mind pays for such garbage? The carbon footprint of making and then throwing them away must be far larger than the savings in electricity. Also they are slower to light up than the good old fashioned bulbs. Why does nobody admit that?
So, do these new light bulbs come with a 20 year replacement warranty? If not, there's NO FRICKIN' WAY I would buy it. Also, I'm not convinced that these new bulbs actually make the same light. I'll wait until I've seen it in person.
-d
Re:money back if not delighted? (Score:5, Informative)
This is very true. Cheap low end multi-LED lights are garbage. The worst ones use extremely poor 5mm LEDs with no heat sinking which typically degrade to half brightness within SINGLE DIGIT to double digit hours of use, and suffer significant complete burnout of individual LEDs within the same period. The LEDs used in the Philips bulb are cutting edge high power LEDs with very sophisticated heat sinking and remote phosphor. They are also designed to have an extremely high CRI (color rendering index) almost as good as incandescent, and far superior to common CFLs and less-elite LED "bulbs". I have seen a tear-down of the Philips, and the evident quality in every respect is astonishing.
Re:money back if not delighted? (Score:5, Informative)
It's not the wiring per se but power quality. Voltage fluctuations where the mains voltage goes out of spec (brownouts and overvoltage) are a major cause of problems. Electronic power supplies are often heavily stressed by under-voltage conditions, because they increase their current consumption to compensate, resulting in increased heat production in the power supply. Overvoltage can result in internal components being overstressed.
The other problem is high-voltage "spikes" - ultra-short duration (a few microseconds) increases in supply voltage (to 1-2 kV), due to large electric motors (e.g. HVAC compressors) being switched on or off, nearby lightning strikes, etc. These voltage surges won't affect incandescent light bulbs, but will destroy electronic power supplies instantly. Things like PC PSUs are fitted with surge protectors internally, to protect them from this type of spike. Good quality CFLs and electronic lighting ballasts also contain decent surge protection. However, garbage grade CFLs, often leave out these components to save $.10.
The other problem with CFLs is that they are intolerant to heat. This means that care is needed over the type of fitting. CFLs are not suitable for use in enclosed fittings - they must be open to the air, otherwise you don't get any air circulation and the lamps overheat. While incandescent lamps are frequently-used "base-up", CFLs risk overheating the electronics in the base, when used in this orientation. CFLs are best used "base-down".
If you genuinely think there is an electrical problem at your home - then you want a power quality check. This would normally involve installing a data-logger in your house for a week, to see if there are any significant problems with voltages, spikes, waveforms, etc.
Simple Rules for Buying Lightbulbs (Score:5, Informative)
With the various types of lightbulbs on the market these days, I put together some simple rules for buying them:
1. Lights that are left on for long periods of time -- CFLs. CFLs last a long time if they are not constantly switched on and off, and they offer the best brightness and cost effectiveness. Nightlights, and my living room and kitchen lights, are all CFLs. They have lasted for years. The nightlight in my kitchen is on 24 hours a day, and I just changed it after 5 years of constant use. The trick to making CFLs last is to never turn them off.
2. Lights that need to be turned on and off frequently -- LEDs. The lifetime of CFLs is limited by how often you switch them on and off. If you need to switch a light often but don't care if it's a little dim, put an LED there. (LEDs are dimmer than other types of lights.) My bedroom and basement/laundry lights are LEDs.
3. Lights that need to be bright and/or that need to light up right away -- Incandescents. Yes, I still have incandescents in my bathroom and on my porch. Both locations need light that is brighter than LEDs can put out, and the light needs to come on immediately which CFLs are poor at doing. If I used either LEDs or CFLs in those spots there would be times when I would be stumbling around in dim light in a dangerous area.
Re:This is a trojan attack on your wallets (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Eh... (Score:5, Informative)
The cheap ones are complete garbage. The Philips are different. I've had several of the previous generation Philips 819933 12.5w 800 lumen "bulbs" running for almost a year, one 24x7 and others piling up a lot of hours. Not the slightest problem from any of them. The quality of the light is just as good as incandescent.
You may not have looked at the price dispassionately and analytically. One of these uses $37.50 in electricity over its 25,000 hr rated life, at 12.5 cents/kWh. You would have to buy twenty-five 60 watt incandescents (total cost $12.50-$25.00?) and run them one at a time to burnout to make the same amount of light for the same period, and these would use $180.00 in electricity.
So total cost is $40 (retail) + $37.50 = $87.50 for the LED, versus $12.50 + $180.00 = $192.50 for the incandescents. That's a saving of $105.00. Actually my electricity rates are closer to 18 cents per kWh, so I save a lot more than that. Not to mention saving yourself 24 bulb changes. Oh, and this previous generation Philips is available for under $20 locally where I live.
Re:money back if not delighted? (Score:2, Informative)
The other problem with CFLs is that they are intolerant to heat... CFLs are not suitable for use in enclosed fittings - they must be open to the air, otherwise you don't get any air circulation and the lamps overheat. While incandescent lamps are frequently-used "base-up", CFLs risk overheating the electronics in the base, when used in this orientation. CFLs are best used "base-down". Been saying that for years but most CFL fanboys just tell me I'm wrong. There are too many places (cold outdoor lamp, hot stove) and fixtures (enclosed, upsidedown) where only an incandescent will work because they have no electronics to die.
Re:money back if not delighted? (Score:4, Informative)
I think CFLs seem happiest when they have a lot of ventilation.
Like you, I've found wildly varying longevity. Store-brand yellow "bug" CFLs have run for years in our outdoor fixtures, and light reliably even in below-zero F temperatures. I'm pretty sure I still have one of the very old late 90s CFLs in the cupboard that I haven't thrown out because it still works (but the shape doesn't really fit any fixture).
The problems have always come with fixtures that enclose or partially enclose the CFL -- with fixtures like that, I've seen as little as a week out of a light run a few hours per week. PAR-60 recessed CFLs are a waste of money -- I've had none last longer than six months, one fixture ate 3 in six months and the incandescent replacement has being going strong for at least 2 years.
Re:There is a bigger question here. (Score:4, Informative)
Here's one that's been going 110 years and counting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centennial_Light [wikipedia.org]
Re:ANOTHER FREE MARKET TRIUMPH! (Score:2, Informative)
That's pretty impressive for a nation that's only 236 years old. In reality, however, the income tax was first levied in 1861 [wikipedia.org] in order to pay for the Civil War, so we actually made it income tax free for just 85 years. Of course, the changing sources of funding says more about the size of the federal government than anything.
Now, you are saying "zero market regulations", but the person you are replying to said "a free market." It's important for you to understand that some regulation is implied in any market since property in the US is defined in legal terms and property rights in the US are enforced by government agencies. So there is a difference between a free market, where private actors are free to make economic decisions, and an wholly unregulated market, where no government regulation exists of any kind. A free market is the alternative to a command economy (where a governing body makes all the economic decisions), but an unregulated market is a contradiction in itself.
Re:There is a bigger question here. (Score:5, Informative)
What?
At $60/pop....I kinda doubt any renters are going to be leaving any of their bulbs behind when they move!!!
Like many places where when you rent, you have to provide your own appliances (used to be very prevalent in New Orleans)...you will likely have to start providing your own $60 lightbulbs too!!
I bought three for my living room today. Here was my reasoning:
They are amazing for LEDs. I have other LED bulbs but the problem has always been that because of the directional nature of LEDs they all act like miniature spot lights. They don't diffuse light like the global shaped incandescent source. These Phillips LEDs do. And they are 17 watts (1100) lumens 75 watt equivalent) but they are so bright it hurts to look directly at them. I replaced three 65 watt bulbs in my living room with them and it is much brighter, less load on my air conditioner (I'm in Phoenix and that's important to me) and only 51 watts total. For me it's a plus, plus and plus. Oh, and with my military discount at Home Depot they cost me $36.00 each.
That's 3 incandescent bulbs x 65 watts per bulb = (195 watts for 8 hours per day/ 1000) * .1114 per kwh = $.17 per day for the incandescents. .1114 per kwh = $.045 per day for the LEDs.
That's 3 LED bulbs x 17 watts per bulb = (51 watts for 8 hours per day/ 1000) *
Incandescents cost me $.17 x 30 days = $5.10 a month x 12 months = $61.20 a year.
LEDs cost me $.045 x 30 days = $1.30 a month x 12 months = $15.60.
The savings on my electric bill is $45.60 a year, not counting the savings by not generating heat that fights the A/C.
Total cost for the three bulbs was $108.00. $108. / $45.60 = 2.3 years to pay for themselves. Their life at 8 hours / day is expected to be 8.5 years. The lifetime savings should be $282.00. And I am not a tree hugger and I don't work for Phillips.
Re:To be banned in 2020 (Score:5, Informative)
http://nationalatlas.gov/articles/water/a_wateruse.html [nationalatlas.gov]
According to this website public water supply domestic water use (85% of domestic water use) is about 11% of american water consumption
http://www.epa.gov/WaterSense/pubs/indoor.html [epa.gov]
According to this website, the toilet uses about 25% of water in the home.
Thus, by mandating a change to high pressure low flow toilets, if we assume that most people are still using the old toilets (3.5-7 gallon flush) and extrapolating from those figures, toilet water use is roughly 2.5% of american water use. By changing to efficient toilets (80% less water), this could maybe be brought down to 0.5%-1% of american water use.
In contrast, according to above mentioned first website, thermo-electric power generation comprised 52% of water use. So theoretically if America cut power consumption by 4%, it would equal the water savings of more efficient toilets. Since residential counts for about 35% of electrical use, if you saved 12% power in your home, you could save enough (and consequently the water required to generate it) to run a large volume flush toilet. There are also more ways to reduce the water consumption of electrical generation, like wind power, solar power, and hydro power.
Re:To be banned in 2020 (Score:4, Informative)
BTW, a typical incandescent bulb is 50 percent efficient.
No it isn't. High efficiency ones max out at 5.1% [wikipedia.org]