MIT’s new warm incandescent light bulb is nearly 3x more efficient than LEDs

waves said:

MIT’s new warm incandescent light bulb is nearly 3x more efficient than LEDs

Click to expand...

Awesome!

Cool....still can't get an internal combustion engine to make efficiencies of the same magnitude eh?
LED lights are pretty good MIT. Let's go for something that needs some SIGNIFICANT improvements.

rambot said:

Cool....still can't get an internal combustion engine to make efficiencies of the same magnitude eh?
LED lights are pretty good MIT. Let's go for something that needs some SIGNIFICANT improvements.

Click to expand...

Do a bit more digging than that very brief article, and MIT has created a 6.6% efficient bulb that theoretically could get as high as 40%. Current bulbs are 5-20% efficient. The typical gasoline engine has a thermodynamic efficiency of around 20% and can be built up to around 40% efficient. So... you were saying?

Maynard Keenan said:

Do a bit more digging than that very brief article, and MIT has created a 6.6% efficient bulb that theoretically could get as high as 40%. Current bulbs are 5-20% efficient. The typical gasoline engine has a thermodynamic efficiency of around 20% and can be built up to around 40% efficient. So... you were saying?

Click to expand...

I'm confused. This data seems to suggest a much higher efficiency for LEDs. Lil help?
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/11/05/led-lighting-efficiency-jumps-roughly-50-since-2012/


Also, I'd wager the net energy benefits of working on more fuel efficient transport would outweighs benefits of more efficient lighting (not to sound TOOO dismissive of this).

rambot said:

I'm confused. This data seems to suggest a much higher efficiency for LEDs. Lil help?
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/11/05/led-lighting-efficiency-jumps-roughly-50-since-2012/


Also, I'd wager the net energy benefits of working on more fuel efficient transport would outweighs benefits of more efficient lighting (not to sound TOOO dismissive of this).

Click to expand...

The link you posted lists efficiency in lumens per watt. I was listing percentage of electricity converted into visible light. Good LEDs convert about 20% of their electricity used into visible light while a classical incandescent light bulb converts around 2% of their electricity usage to light.

Transportation does account for a significantly larger amount of energy usage than lighting (which uses about 12% of residential and 25% of commercial electricity usage), but if any single sector can reduce its energy usage by 90%, it's going to make a huge impact. And we are making transportation more efficient. The biggest contributor is materials science and an increasing preference for more expensive but lighter weight materials that cost less fuel to move around. But car manufacturers are also using turbochargers more frequently to get the same power with smaller displacement engines and less fuel usage, implementing systems that shut down some cylinders at cruising speed and activate them when power is needed for acceleration or towing, etc. Regardless, I was just responding to the implication that the thermodynamic efficiency of internal combustion engines was less than that of lighting.

waves said:

MIT’s new warm incandescent light bulb is nearly 3x more efficient than LEDs

Click to expand...

MIT seems to be inflating their results relative to the better modern LEDs. Regardless, both lifetime and fragility are going to remain issues for incandescent bulbs.

It's sad.

I've already converted nearly all my household lights to LEDs. With LED bulbs between $1.00 and $2.00 each, the payback is less than a year for any which are used regularly. After a mere century and a half, the ubiquitous incandescent light bulb is destined to go the way of vacuum tubes. Even CRTs eventually succumbed to solid-state usurpers.

Edison is rolling in his grave.