(NEMA's eiXtra: October 24, 2011)
by Lighting Understanding for a More Efficient Nation (LUMEN)
Consumers Can Enjoy More Bulb Choices, More Energy Bill Savings
Energy-efficient lighting means more options and more savings. The more energy-efficient light bulbs U.S. consumers use in their homes, the greater the savings—$50 to more than $100 a year per household. Those are key messages that the diverse LUMEN coalition—Lighting Understanding for a More Efficient Nation—is conveying to consumers, beginning with today’s launch and website debut.
LUMEN’s primary goal is helping consumers understand the variety of lighting options available to meet their diverse lighting needs and save them money while saving energy.
LUMEN is spearheaded by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), Alliance to Save Energy (Alliance), and the American Lighting Association (ALA). To date, more than 40 nonprofit energy-efficiency advocacy groups, utilities, lighting manufacturers, and trade associations are participating in the effort. In addition, five government agencies are acting as advisors: the California Energy Commission, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), U.S. Department of Energy, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Lights Out For Traditional Bulbs
After serving as the primary source of artificial light for over a century, the energy-guzzling incandescent bulbs invented by Thomas Edison are being replaced globally by alternatives, such as compact fluorescent bulbs and light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
The phase-out in the European Union, started in 2009 with a ban on 100-watt bulbs, will now see the demise of the 60-watt bulbs from Sept. 1, followed by 40-watt and 25-watt bulbs in 2012. The change is aimed at helping the EU reach its targets on energy efficiency and climate protection.
Also benefitting is the LED industry, with global revenues from the LED market seen at almost €65 billion by 2020, half the total lighting market revenues at that time, according to McKinsey & Co.
Unlike 2009, when consumers went out bulk-buying traditional bulbs, they seem little bothered this time around. Both the slow phase-out and increasing environmental awareness seem to contribute to this attitude.
According to a survey by German research firm Forsa on behalf of lighting company Osram, a unit of Siemens, only about one in five Germans is aware the next step of the ban is about to go into effect. The survey also showed one in three Germans has already begun using new bulbs exclusively, encouraged by the gradual phase-out and after some retailers, such as IKEA, stopped selling the old-style bulbs altogether last year.
While consumer and social welfare organizations have criticized the new bulbs’ higher price, the quality of light and danger of mercury pollution, supporters say it’s the old bulbs that hurt the environment since they use more electricity. At ten times the lifespan, the new bulbs are also good for consumers’ pocketbooks.
“Both consumers and the environment will benefit from an increased usage of energy-saving light bulbs,” European Consumers’ Organization BEUC said, as the new bulbs use up to 80% less energy, saving about EUR166 on an average household’s yearly electricity bill.
The BEUC said the transition won’t be without challenges, as consumers have to learn, for example, which bulbs are suitable for which lamps, and how to dispose of bulbs that contain mercury.
Still, incandescent light remains close to some consumers’ hearts. Earlier this month the director of Europe’s Roncalli Circus, Bernhard Paul, told an Austrian magazine: “I bought all (old version) models I could get hold of in Germany because chains of lights are an essential part of a circus. We should not run out of them before I turn 100,” Paul said, adding that “the EU jumped the gun because the LED lamps are not as good as regular light bulbs. The new models lack the color spectrum red. What is supposed to be red looks grey with them – a horrible situation for a circus.”
(Wall Street Journal, by Neetha Mahadevan, 09/01/2011)
NEMA Podcasts Explain New Lightbulb Labels and Lumens
To more fully explain America's transition to energy-efficient lighting, NEMA is producing a six-part podcast series focused on the 5LS of Lighting: Location, Lumens, Lightbulbs, Label, and Law. As utilities, contractors, and consumers attempt to both understand and explain the new lighting world, they can quickly learn the basics. The most recent releases are included below.
Labels Podcast–New lightbulb packaging labels are starting to appear on store shelves. There will be varying types of information included on these new labels, and to help sort it out for consumers, we spoke with Hampton Newsome, attorney at the Federal Trade Commission. Information on the new labels will include:
Brightness (lumens)
Estimated energy cost savings and life of bulb
Watts (energy use)
Whether or not the bulb contains mercury
Color temperature
Click here to listen to the 5 L's of Lighting-Labels Podcast
Lumens Podcast–Many consumers are unaware of the differences between watts and lumens. To help our listeners understand what these lightbulb characteristics are, we spoke with Pam Horner, Director of Government & Industry Relations at OSRAM SYLVANIA. We learned that a lumen is a measure of useful light, "useful" referring to light that the human eye can see. A watt, on the other hand, does not measure light at all, but rather the amount of electric power used by a bulb. We also discussed the tactics consumers should use when purchasing replacement bulbs.
Click here to listen to the 5 L's of Lighting-Lumens Podcast
(NEMA Newsletter 8/22/2011, Feature Story)
Labels Podcast–New lightbulb packaging labels are starting to appear on store shelves. There will be varying types of information included on these new labels, and to help sort it out for consumers, we spoke with Hampton Newsome, attorney at the Federal Trade Commission. Information on the new labels will include:
Brightness (lumens)
Estimated energy cost savings and life of bulb
Watts (energy use)
Whether or not the bulb contains mercury
Color temperature
Click here to listen to the 5 L's of Lighting-Labels Podcast
Lumens Podcast–Many consumers are unaware of the differences between watts and lumens. To help our listeners understand what these lightbulb characteristics are, we spoke with Pam Horner, Director of Government & Industry Relations at OSRAM SYLVANIA. We learned that a lumen is a measure of useful light, "useful" referring to light that the human eye can see. A watt, on the other hand, does not measure light at all, but rather the amount of electric power used by a bulb. We also discussed the tactics consumers should use when purchasing replacement bulbs.
Click here to listen to the 5 L's of Lighting-Lumens Podcast
(NEMA Newsletter 8/22/2011, Feature Story)
Organic LED lighting: only a niche market by 2020?
Organic LED lighting: only a niche market by 2020?
27 Jul 2011
Analysts at Lux Research predict that organic LED lighting fixtures will remain far too expensive for mainstream use.
Osram's Orbeos OLED
The future market for lamps based on organic LEDs is set to be a very small one, according to a new market analyst report. Lux Research says that although the aesthetically pleasing technology will improve over the next decade, and become much cheaper than today, it will still be far too expensive for mainstream use.
As a result, says Lux, OLED lighting will command just a $58 million market by 2020, with the technology only making a significant penetration into high-end applications such as designer lighting, casinos and upmarket bars and restaurants. If correct, it will mean that the wider market for OLEDs will be almost totally dominated by display applications such as phone handsets and televisions.
“The problem is that OLED lighting is so much more expensive than incumbent and emerging alternatives,” said the report’s lead author, Jonathan Melnick. “It’s only the most cost-insensitive markets that would use it for aesthetic value for the foreseeable future.”
DOE targets
In its latest multi-year program plan (MYPP), updated in May 2011, the US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates the current cost of an OLED panel at around $2560 per kilolumen – although that figure is difficult to ascertain accurately because the technology is at such an early stage in its evolution. Lux suggests an even higher figure, $18 per lumen, for a full lighting product.
One kilolumen represents approximately the output produced by a conventional 60 W incandescent bulb – at a typical cost of less than a dollar. Standard compact fluorescent equivalents consuming 13 W cost only $2, while dimmable versions are more expensive at $10 and a similar lamp based on inorganic LEDs now costs around $40. But that price is falling fast as LED package and luminaire efficacies continue to improve.
To be competitive with those technologies, the DOE has set a target for OLED panels of reaching $10 per kilolumen by 2020. But Melnick predicts that the cost of lighting products will drop by far less than that targeted amount, to around $180 per kilolumen on flexible substrates by the end of the decade. Despite this marked improvement, the technology will still be clearly much more expensive than other types of illumination, he reckons.
High-end applications only
Melnick expects commercial flexible panels to emerge by 2015 and find suitably high-end applications in hotels and bars that can absorb the very high prices of the fixtures. “All told, the designer lighting market for OLEDs will reach $32 million in 2020,” predicts the analyst. That would represent a tiny proportion of not just the overall lighting market – expected by Philips to be worth at least $100 billion by then – but also that commanded by conventional LEDs, which may well feature in the majority of general lighting applications at that point.
Lux also sees a small market for OLED luminaires, predicting applications worth only $22 million by 2020 as OLED-based lamps remaining priced at thousands of dollars will prove prohibitive for most customers.
Last year Universal Display Corporation (UDC), one of the key developers of light-emitting organic materials, said that in collaboration with lighting company Armstrong World Industries it had developed an OLED ceiling lamp with a white-light panel efficacy of 58 lm/W. That compares well with early commercial OLED products such as Osram’s ORBEOS, although the DOE’s MYPP identifies a number of technology challenges with OLEDs that still need to be overcome – aside from the cost issue.
optics.org invited UDC, which raised $250 million in a stock offering earlier this year, to respond to the forecast numbers provided by Lux Research, but the company was unavailable for comment prior to publication.
Lux is similarly pessimistic about the potential for another organic technology - this time organic photovoltaics - as its research director Mike Holman told optics.org in April this year. Without a game-changing improvement to OPV conversion efficiencies, the analyst said that it will remain too expensive for widespread deployment and only find use in niche applications such as defense.
Optics.org 26 July 2011
27 Jul 2011
Analysts at Lux Research predict that organic LED lighting fixtures will remain far too expensive for mainstream use.
Osram's Orbeos OLED
The future market for lamps based on organic LEDs is set to be a very small one, according to a new market analyst report. Lux Research says that although the aesthetically pleasing technology will improve over the next decade, and become much cheaper than today, it will still be far too expensive for mainstream use.
As a result, says Lux, OLED lighting will command just a $58 million market by 2020, with the technology only making a significant penetration into high-end applications such as designer lighting, casinos and upmarket bars and restaurants. If correct, it will mean that the wider market for OLEDs will be almost totally dominated by display applications such as phone handsets and televisions.
“The problem is that OLED lighting is so much more expensive than incumbent and emerging alternatives,” said the report’s lead author, Jonathan Melnick. “It’s only the most cost-insensitive markets that would use it for aesthetic value for the foreseeable future.”
DOE targets
In its latest multi-year program plan (MYPP), updated in May 2011, the US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates the current cost of an OLED panel at around $2560 per kilolumen – although that figure is difficult to ascertain accurately because the technology is at such an early stage in its evolution. Lux suggests an even higher figure, $18 per lumen, for a full lighting product.
One kilolumen represents approximately the output produced by a conventional 60 W incandescent bulb – at a typical cost of less than a dollar. Standard compact fluorescent equivalents consuming 13 W cost only $2, while dimmable versions are more expensive at $10 and a similar lamp based on inorganic LEDs now costs around $40. But that price is falling fast as LED package and luminaire efficacies continue to improve.
To be competitive with those technologies, the DOE has set a target for OLED panels of reaching $10 per kilolumen by 2020. But Melnick predicts that the cost of lighting products will drop by far less than that targeted amount, to around $180 per kilolumen on flexible substrates by the end of the decade. Despite this marked improvement, the technology will still be clearly much more expensive than other types of illumination, he reckons.
High-end applications only
Melnick expects commercial flexible panels to emerge by 2015 and find suitably high-end applications in hotels and bars that can absorb the very high prices of the fixtures. “All told, the designer lighting market for OLEDs will reach $32 million in 2020,” predicts the analyst. That would represent a tiny proportion of not just the overall lighting market – expected by Philips to be worth at least $100 billion by then – but also that commanded by conventional LEDs, which may well feature in the majority of general lighting applications at that point.
Lux also sees a small market for OLED luminaires, predicting applications worth only $22 million by 2020 as OLED-based lamps remaining priced at thousands of dollars will prove prohibitive for most customers.
Last year Universal Display Corporation (UDC), one of the key developers of light-emitting organic materials, said that in collaboration with lighting company Armstrong World Industries it had developed an OLED ceiling lamp with a white-light panel efficacy of 58 lm/W. That compares well with early commercial OLED products such as Osram’s ORBEOS, although the DOE’s MYPP identifies a number of technology challenges with OLEDs that still need to be overcome – aside from the cost issue.
optics.org invited UDC, which raised $250 million in a stock offering earlier this year, to respond to the forecast numbers provided by Lux Research, but the company was unavailable for comment prior to publication.
Lux is similarly pessimistic about the potential for another organic technology - this time organic photovoltaics - as its research director Mike Holman told optics.org in April this year. Without a game-changing improvement to OPV conversion efficiencies, the analyst said that it will remain too expensive for widespread deployment and only find use in niche applications such as defense.
Optics.org 26 July 2011
US House Votes Down Incandescent Bulb-Ban Bill
The US House of Representatives failed to pass the “Better use of light bulbs act,” which aimed to repeal the 2007 legislation that will mandate more-efficient replacements for 100W lamps, such as LED-based lamps, beginning next year.
On Tuesday (July 12), the US House of Representatives voted on the H.R. 2417 “Better use of light bulbs act” that was proffered by the Republican party, members of which believe the government has no place legislating what type of light bulbs citizens buy. The bill failed to achieve the two thirds vote required to repeal the 2007 legislation that mandates more-efficient light bulbs starting next year, and the failure is generally good news for proponents of LED-based solid-state lighting (SSL).
The House voted 233 to 193 in favor of the act. The vote was largely along party lines, although 10 Republicans voted against the legislation while 5 Democrats voted for the repeal.
The new bill ran contrary to the escalating green movement. Lighting is responsible for more than 20% of the energy used in the US. And most see lighting as one of the easiest places to save energy. But the savings come with higher upfront cost of SSL products that must be recovered through savings over long lifetimes.
Republicans created the EISA
Ironically, it was Republican President George W. Bush who signed the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) requiring more-efficient light bulbs into law back in 2007. The legislation requires that 100W lamps, or more specifically lamps with a light output of around 1700 lm, operate 30% more efficiently.
In successive years the efficiency requirements will be applied sequentially to 75W, 60W, and 40W lamps. And an even more stringent set of efficiency requirements will kick in later in the decade. The EISA doesn’t ban incandescent lamps but realistically only technologies such as SSL and compact -fluorescent lamps (CFLs) will meet the requirements.
Despite the fact that more-efficient lighting will save significant energy, Republicans, urged on by conservative celebrities including Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, sought to allow citizens to make their own lighting choices. An editorial in the BostonHerald.com joined the protest and called for passage of the new incandescent bulb bill.
In actuality many people who oppose the lighting aspects of the EISA don’t fully understand the details of the legislation. A recent New York Times article described how people are stocking up on incandescent lamps, although in many cases the new bill would not even impact the type of lamps discussed. Indeed the EISA accepts many lamp types including 3-way bulbs, and many decorative-lamp styles.
EISA supporters
The EISA also has strong supporters and there was intense lobbying leading up to Tuesday’s vote that may have been responsible for the defeat. Lighting Science Group CEO Jim Haworth said, “Lighting is the low-hanging fruit in reducing energy consumption: it accounts for 19% of the world’s energy use – and in the United States, 22%; public and commercial buildings represent 60% of the power used for lighting; up to 80% of offices are lit by outdated and inefficient systems; and lighting accounts for 15% of household electricity use. There are 4.4 billion traditional light sockets in the United States alone offering a rapid and practical path for billions of dollars in energy savings through the installation of more efficient lighting.”
Of course many proponents have a vested interest. Lighting Science Group hopes to be a major player the LED-based replacement lamp market. The National Electrical Manufacturers Association, among others, also lobbied to leave the EISA standing.
If you would like more details on the reaction from House members and other interested parties after the vote, the New York Times ran an excellent article with reaction from Texas Republican Joe Barton who proposed the repeal. Many others are quoted in the article.
California and Texas
It’s unclear whether this is the end of the story with the EISA federally, but states within the union are also active in legislation – and headed in vastly different directions. California had passed legislation that accelerated the EISA guidelines starting the transition this year.
Texas, conversely, has acted explicitly to allow manufacture and sale of incandescent lamps in the state going forward. In July, the state passed a measure that essentially makes lamps stamped with “Made in Texas” exempt from the EISA.
About the Author
Maury Wright is a Senior Technical Editor with LEDs Magazine.
LEDs Magazine, 13 July 2011
On Tuesday (July 12), the US House of Representatives voted on the H.R. 2417 “Better use of light bulbs act” that was proffered by the Republican party, members of which believe the government has no place legislating what type of light bulbs citizens buy. The bill failed to achieve the two thirds vote required to repeal the 2007 legislation that mandates more-efficient light bulbs starting next year, and the failure is generally good news for proponents of LED-based solid-state lighting (SSL).
The House voted 233 to 193 in favor of the act. The vote was largely along party lines, although 10 Republicans voted against the legislation while 5 Democrats voted for the repeal.
The new bill ran contrary to the escalating green movement. Lighting is responsible for more than 20% of the energy used in the US. And most see lighting as one of the easiest places to save energy. But the savings come with higher upfront cost of SSL products that must be recovered through savings over long lifetimes.
Republicans created the EISA
Ironically, it was Republican President George W. Bush who signed the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) requiring more-efficient light bulbs into law back in 2007. The legislation requires that 100W lamps, or more specifically lamps with a light output of around 1700 lm, operate 30% more efficiently.
In successive years the efficiency requirements will be applied sequentially to 75W, 60W, and 40W lamps. And an even more stringent set of efficiency requirements will kick in later in the decade. The EISA doesn’t ban incandescent lamps but realistically only technologies such as SSL and compact -fluorescent lamps (CFLs) will meet the requirements.
Despite the fact that more-efficient lighting will save significant energy, Republicans, urged on by conservative celebrities including Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, sought to allow citizens to make their own lighting choices. An editorial in the BostonHerald.com joined the protest and called for passage of the new incandescent bulb bill.
In actuality many people who oppose the lighting aspects of the EISA don’t fully understand the details of the legislation. A recent New York Times article described how people are stocking up on incandescent lamps, although in many cases the new bill would not even impact the type of lamps discussed. Indeed the EISA accepts many lamp types including 3-way bulbs, and many decorative-lamp styles.
EISA supporters
The EISA also has strong supporters and there was intense lobbying leading up to Tuesday’s vote that may have been responsible for the defeat. Lighting Science Group CEO Jim Haworth said, “Lighting is the low-hanging fruit in reducing energy consumption: it accounts for 19% of the world’s energy use – and in the United States, 22%; public and commercial buildings represent 60% of the power used for lighting; up to 80% of offices are lit by outdated and inefficient systems; and lighting accounts for 15% of household electricity use. There are 4.4 billion traditional light sockets in the United States alone offering a rapid and practical path for billions of dollars in energy savings through the installation of more efficient lighting.”
Of course many proponents have a vested interest. Lighting Science Group hopes to be a major player the LED-based replacement lamp market. The National Electrical Manufacturers Association, among others, also lobbied to leave the EISA standing.
If you would like more details on the reaction from House members and other interested parties after the vote, the New York Times ran an excellent article with reaction from Texas Republican Joe Barton who proposed the repeal. Many others are quoted in the article.
California and Texas
It’s unclear whether this is the end of the story with the EISA federally, but states within the union are also active in legislation – and headed in vastly different directions. California had passed legislation that accelerated the EISA guidelines starting the transition this year.
Texas, conversely, has acted explicitly to allow manufacture and sale of incandescent lamps in the state going forward. In July, the state passed a measure that essentially makes lamps stamped with “Made in Texas” exempt from the EISA.
About the Author
Maury Wright is a Senior Technical Editor with LEDs Magazine.
LEDs Magazine, 13 July 2011
AzkoNobel to Build Production Plants for MO cursors
AkzoNobel is greatly expanding its production capability of trimethyl gallium and trimethyl indium metal-organic precursors for LED manufacturing.
The high purity metal-organic (HPMO) business of AkzoNobel, part of its Functional Chemicals Business Unit, will build two new production plants for trimethyl gallium (TMG) and trimethyl indium (TMI) at its existing production facility in LaPorte, Texas.
AkzoNobel claims that it is currently the largest producer of TMG. With this expansion, the company’s total capacity for gallium-based metal-organic (MO) materials will exceed 100 tons per year from two independent production lines.
MO chemicals or precursors are used in the epitaxial growth of LED semiconductor materials to provide metals such as gallium (Ga), indium (In) and aluminum (Al) to the growing layers. A number of major suppliers have announced plans to increase their production capacity for MO materials.
AkzoNobel’s TMG project is already well advanced; construction of the plant began in 2011 with planned completion in 2012.
The TMI expansion, which will enable a 400% increase of capacity, is also underway and will be completed by December 2011.
“These continued investments in the HPMO business show AkzoNobel’s commitment to support the LED industry in the coming years. Our capacity additions will enable our customers to maintain their growth pace, which will be increasingly driven by general lighting applications,” says Jan Svärd, Managing Director of Functional Chemicals. “This business also supports our efforts in sustainability, by focusing on applications that drive energy efficiency and lower energy usage, like LEDs and solar cells.”
The LaPorte manufacturing site serves the global plastics, pharmaceutical and electronic industries with large scale, fully-integrated bulk MO production plants.
The company will also enhance its global distribution network by establishing regional transfilling capabilities in Asia.
(28 June 2011, LEDs Magazine, Laura Peters)
The high purity metal-organic (HPMO) business of AkzoNobel, part of its Functional Chemicals Business Unit, will build two new production plants for trimethyl gallium (TMG) and trimethyl indium (TMI) at its existing production facility in LaPorte, Texas.
AkzoNobel claims that it is currently the largest producer of TMG. With this expansion, the company’s total capacity for gallium-based metal-organic (MO) materials will exceed 100 tons per year from two independent production lines.
MO chemicals or precursors are used in the epitaxial growth of LED semiconductor materials to provide metals such as gallium (Ga), indium (In) and aluminum (Al) to the growing layers. A number of major suppliers have announced plans to increase their production capacity for MO materials.
AkzoNobel’s TMG project is already well advanced; construction of the plant began in 2011 with planned completion in 2012.
The TMI expansion, which will enable a 400% increase of capacity, is also underway and will be completed by December 2011.
“These continued investments in the HPMO business show AkzoNobel’s commitment to support the LED industry in the coming years. Our capacity additions will enable our customers to maintain their growth pace, which will be increasingly driven by general lighting applications,” says Jan Svärd, Managing Director of Functional Chemicals. “This business also supports our efforts in sustainability, by focusing on applications that drive energy efficiency and lower energy usage, like LEDs and solar cells.”
The LaPorte manufacturing site serves the global plastics, pharmaceutical and electronic industries with large scale, fully-integrated bulk MO production plants.
The company will also enhance its global distribution network by establishing regional transfilling capabilities in Asia.
(28 June 2011, LEDs Magazine, Laura Peters)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
