New Incandescent Bulbs More Efficient than LEDs?
- Thread starter kalibex
- Start date
beetlemaniac
The Living Force
I've been quite wary of CFLs and the newer LEDs. I'm planning to revamp the lighting system in my house, but all I find these days are LED systems. As the article says, LED produces light that is too white presumably because of the high energy amplitude on the blue frequencies. Fortunately, in my country, the traditional incandescent bulbs have not yet been banned. However the installations that I've seen locally in Malaysia have been CFL and LED, most people have abandoned use of incandescent lighting. I think it is still more prevalent in first world countries, maybe because people have been acclimatised to the type of light it produces.
Additionally, with LED lighting, there is a switching device in the driver that powers the LED itself. This addition can create "dirty electricity" within the building and grid due to the high-frequency transients or spikes in the current. This is shown to be a cause of ill health in human beings exposed to it. More information on "dirty electricity" can be gleaned from the excellent series by Larry Bowers on sott: http://www.sott.net/article/295865-EMF-pollution-What-is-EMF
Anyway, I hope devices based on this crystal technology or something similar do get produced, I'm sure there is a demand for it now that we know what these new-fangled energy efficient technologies do to our minds and bodies.
Additionally, with LED lighting, there is a switching device in the driver that powers the LED itself. This addition can create "dirty electricity" within the building and grid due to the high-frequency transients or spikes in the current. This is shown to be a cause of ill health in human beings exposed to it. More information on "dirty electricity" can be gleaned from the excellent series by Larry Bowers on sott: http://www.sott.net/article/295865-EMF-pollution-What-is-EMF
Anyway, I hope devices based on this crystal technology or something similar do get produced, I'm sure there is a demand for it now that we know what these new-fangled energy efficient technologies do to our minds and bodies.
Yeah, the LED's do introduce the additional problem of more EMF pollution, besides tending to have more blue light exposure. It would be great to have very efficient incandescent bulbs.
I replaced most of the bulbs here in the house with LED variants. The power (and therefore cost) savings is HUGE. This is especially useful if one has a backup generator for "stormy situations".
The issue of flicker is pretty much nil. Incandescent bulbs also flicker, but we just can't see it.
As for EMF issues, the only thing I'm not sure about is capacitive coupling (see EMF thread talking about Greenwave filters and all that). That's kinda hard to measure. But in terms of your typical EM emissions, I did some tests with my fancy Putin-approved, Russian-made EMF meter. ;D
The LED bulbs we have here (France) have WAY lower EM emissions than your typical CFL bulb. The LED bulbs were barely more than an incandescent bulb.
I think part of the reason for this is that in the EU anyway, LED bulbs can have power factors of 0.5 at higher wattages. A PF of 0.5 basically means they just stuck some diodes in and rectified the AC, giving pulsed DC to power the LEDs (which is sometimes smoothed with a capacitor, but sometimes not it seems). If you take one of these 0.5 PF LED bulbs apart, it's pretty basic inside.
I'm not entirely sure, but it seems that in the USA anyway, the power factors must be higher even at lower wattages, which means fancier electronics inside, which means more noise/EM emissions! More or less.
Plus, the LED bulbs contain no mercury. IOW, if one shatters, you don't have to break out the HazMat suits.
And finally, Philips makes a lovely line of 2700K bulbs here that are so close to incandescent bulbs, nobody here even noticed when I replaced the bulbs. We do have some El Cheapo direct-from-China LED spots purchased a few years ago, and the light from those is rather poor. But with each generation, even those get better and cheaper.
Still, I'd be happier to have something like these new-fangled crystal incandescent bulbs... But for now, you can't beat a good LED bulb - at least for our purposes here.
I'm still waiting for somebody to invent UFO lighting, where there is light, but no discernible light source!
The issue of flicker is pretty much nil. Incandescent bulbs also flicker, but we just can't see it.
As for EMF issues, the only thing I'm not sure about is capacitive coupling (see EMF thread talking about Greenwave filters and all that). That's kinda hard to measure. But in terms of your typical EM emissions, I did some tests with my fancy Putin-approved, Russian-made EMF meter. ;D
The LED bulbs we have here (France) have WAY lower EM emissions than your typical CFL bulb. The LED bulbs were barely more than an incandescent bulb.
I think part of the reason for this is that in the EU anyway, LED bulbs can have power factors of 0.5 at higher wattages. A PF of 0.5 basically means they just stuck some diodes in and rectified the AC, giving pulsed DC to power the LEDs (which is sometimes smoothed with a capacitor, but sometimes not it seems). If you take one of these 0.5 PF LED bulbs apart, it's pretty basic inside.
I'm not entirely sure, but it seems that in the USA anyway, the power factors must be higher even at lower wattages, which means fancier electronics inside, which means more noise/EM emissions! More or less.
Plus, the LED bulbs contain no mercury. IOW, if one shatters, you don't have to break out the HazMat suits.
And finally, Philips makes a lovely line of 2700K bulbs here that are so close to incandescent bulbs, nobody here even noticed when I replaced the bulbs. We do have some El Cheapo direct-from-China LED spots purchased a few years ago, and the light from those is rather poor. But with each generation, even those get better and cheaper.
Still, I'd be happier to have something like these new-fangled crystal incandescent bulbs... But for now, you can't beat a good LED bulb - at least for our purposes here.
I'm still waiting for somebody to invent UFO lighting, where there is light, but no discernible light source!
Scottie said:I replaced most of the bulbs here in the house with LED variants. The power (and therefore cost) savings is HUGE. This is especially useful if one has a backup generator for "stormy situations".
The issue of flicker is pretty much nil. Incandescent bulbs also flicker, but we just can't see it.
As for EMF issues, the only thing I'm not sure about is capacitive coupling (see EMF thread talking about Greenwave filters and all that). That's kinda hard to measure. But in terms of your typical EM emissions, I did some tests with my fancy Putin-approved, Russian-made EMF meter. ;D
The LED bulbs we have here (France) have WAY lower EM emissions than your typical CFL bulb. The LED bulbs were barely more than an incandescent bulb.
I think part of the reason for this is that in the EU anyway, LED bulbs can have power factors of 0.5 at higher wattages. A PF of 0.5 basically means they just stuck some diodes in and rectified the AC, giving pulsed DC to power the LEDs (which is sometimes smoothed with a capacitor, but sometimes not it seems). If you take one of these 0.5 PF LED bulbs apart, it's pretty basic inside.
I'm not entirely sure, but it seems that in the USA anyway, the power factors must be higher even at lower wattages, which means fancier electronics inside, which means more noise/EM emissions! More or less.
Plus, the LED bulbs contain no mercury. IOW, if one shatters, you don't have to break out the HazMat suits.
And finally, Philips makes a lovely line of 2700K bulbs here that are so close to incandescent bulbs, nobody here even noticed when I replaced the bulbs. We do have some El Cheapo direct-from-China LED spots purchased a few years ago, and the light from those is rather poor. But with each generation, even those get better and cheaper.
Still, I'd be happier to have something like these new-fangled crystal incandescent bulbs... But for now, you can't beat a good LED bulb - at least for our purposes here.
I'm still waiting for somebody to invent UFO lighting, where there is light, but no discernible light source!
That's interesting and thank you for sharing since I'm always thinking of LED-lamps as cool shining lamps, do you have a link to a product?
Gawan said:
GU10 spots (equivalent to 50W halogen):
http://www.amazon.de/Philips-ersetzt-warmweiß-Doppelpack-8718696528334/dp/B011UU36RC/
E27 60W equivalent:
http://www.amazon.de/Philips%C2%A0-%C2%A0GLÜHBIRNE-E27%C2%A0-%C2%A0Lot-2%C2%A0Leuchtmittel%C2%A0-%C2%A07%C2%A0W-Verbraucht%C2%A0-%C2%A0Gleichwertigkeit-Glühlampe/dp/B00VQ63HLQ/
E14 "candle flame" bulbs 40W:
http://www.amazon.de/Philips-ersetzt-warmweiß-Kelvin-8718696454770/dp/B01129WQXQ/
Scottie said:
Incandescent lamps don't flicker much because the filament's thermal mass keeps the light output relatively constant. That said, I have actually seen them flickering during periods of meditative relaxation. In certain conditions even incandescent lamps can be seen flickering.
We have some Cree LED bulbs and they do a good job, but if you wave your hand and pay attention you will notice the strobing effect. It's about 2-3 times as fast as a CRT screen in my estimation. A few days ago I was sitting down and noticed I felt uneasy, the same kind of feeling I tended to get from CFLs. That's when I noticed the LED bulbs do strobe, just faster so it's less noticeable. I think the strobing also has a subtle effect on the color, which even if technically accurate, takes on a different feel because of the strobing.
CFL bulbs need a high voltage pulse to overcome the insulting behavior of the gas. High voltage combined with high frequency means a powerful E-field, which means lots of energy radiated capacitively.
beetlemaniac
The Living Force
Thanks for that testimony Scottie! Looks like I'll be opting for LED now after reading your experience with it. Though I think they will never approach the "warmth" of an incandescent, not just in terms of color temperature. I have noticed strobing effects when looking at LEDs from the corner of my eye -- but this was an LED traffic light.
Also, I'm also unsure of whether the transients are a big issue ... according to Sam Milham in his book Dirty Electricity, there is some indication that actually trumps the effects of cell tower radiation in terms of severity. This was evidenced through a study conducted at a school (Vista Del Monte Elementary in Palm Springs) which had a cell tower installed in the compound, near the classes. It was shown that the rates of cancer correlated with the distance from the cell tower. The students also exhibited symptoms of hyperactivity and once the filters were installed an immediate improvement was seen in their behavior. The teacher could actually modulate their behavior by plugging or unplugging the filters. Crazy stuff! Then again, the transients were probably caused by the DC power being fed in to the cell tower in the first place. I hate our EM technology
Also, I'm also unsure of whether the transients are a big issue ... according to Sam Milham in his book Dirty Electricity, there is some indication that actually trumps the effects of cell tower radiation in terms of severity. This was evidenced through a study conducted at a school (Vista Del Monte Elementary in Palm Springs) which had a cell tower installed in the compound, near the classes. It was shown that the rates of cancer correlated with the distance from the cell tower. The students also exhibited symptoms of hyperactivity and once the filters were installed an immediate improvement was seen in their behavior. The teacher could actually modulate their behavior by plugging or unplugging the filters. Crazy stuff! Then again, the transients were probably caused by the DC power being fed in to the cell tower in the first place. I hate our EM technology
monotonic said:
Yeah, an incandescent filament and an LED "turn on and off" differently, so definitely LEDs wouldn't flicker the same way. As for the rate of flickering, that also depends on the type of LED bulb. In the basic variety that's popular here, it's 50Hz because there... Well, wait... I guess if it's fully rectified AC, then it would be 2 pulses per cycle, so technically 100Hz? Well, in any case, the LED bulbs with the high power factor that have the added electronics also pulse at a different rate - I think. At least, they can...
In any case, I personally have never noticed the flicker. But for whatever reason, I think some people are just more sensitive to the flickering than others. So, perhaps experiments are in order!
beetlemaniac
The Living Force
Scottie said:
Since your LEDs are diodes the current only flows one way, thus the waveform would not have frequency, it would be DC (direct current). I was thinking along the lines of a half-rectified wave when you mentioned the PF 0.5 bulbs. This would mean that the AC wave was rectified (through a rectifier bridge or some arrangement of diodes) so that the DC resultant power would be the positive upper part of the AC sine wave.
There is some stuff written online about dirty electricity from LEDs, such as this one: _http://healthybuildingscience.com/2013/09/10/emi-and-leds-not-all-leds-are-the-same/
They measure the dirty electricity (high frequency transients) from CFLs and LEDs -- the Philips LEDs measure the highest!
The ideal EMF situation would be just a rectifier and a smoothing cap with some way to reduce the mains voltage. That would be much less EMF than most appliances.
That link actually shows that most LED bulbs are not much worse than incandescent bulbs, which confirms what I was just thinking. The Phillips bulbs probably use some kind of Joule Thief type sorcery.
Most of the EMF given off by these LED bulbs is stuff that is already on the line, and is coming from something else. Unless you have Phillips LED bulbs, I would not worry about them.
As for flickering, depending on the design it may be possible to add a DC smoothing capacitor to an LED bulb to fix that. I would need to see the internal design though.
That link actually shows that most LED bulbs are not much worse than incandescent bulbs, which confirms what I was just thinking. The Phillips bulbs probably use some kind of Joule Thief type sorcery.
Most of the EMF given off by these LED bulbs is stuff that is already on the line, and is coming from something else. Unless you have Phillips LED bulbs, I would not worry about them.
As for flickering, depending on the design it may be possible to add a DC smoothing capacitor to an LED bulb to fix that. I would need to see the internal design though.
beetlemaniac said:
Good point! Duh... That would contribute to 50Hz flicker since they'd be off for half a cycle.
beetlemaniac said:
I wonder if this is true for PF 0.5 bulbs? I imagine not, but you never know. I'm not sure exactly what's available in the USA these days (which is what they tested). From a quick check, the line of Philips bulbs in the USA (Amazon) is very different from the line available here in the EU. They don't even look the same, and they don't appear to sell the type of "candle flame" bulbs we have here (which is what we have the most of).
Also, there are higher wattage equivalents available in the USA that are not available here. From reading some reviews, it appears that a Philips LED bulb in the USA that has a PF of 0.88 is considered "a low power factor" bulb.
That means the USA variants are different bulbs with all the fancy electronic jazz inside instead of a simple rectifier and 0.5 PF like what we get here.This would make sense, since I did read a few months ago that the USA regulations for energy-efficient bulbs are much more restrictive than in the EU. This is actually kind of dumb, I think, because if a 7W LED = 60W incandescent, you're already saving TONS of electricity. With a simple rectifier and 0.5 PF, the bulbs are simpler, cheaper, and shouldn't generate all the added noise and stuff (that's my current theoretical understanding anyway).
Normally, a 0.5 PF would mean a severe disbalance in the grid (say, if we're talking about an inductive or capacitive load). But an LED bulb at 0.5 PF is simply not using half the AC cycle, but otherwise it's prolly pretty close to a resistive load when it's conducting (i.e. lit up). If it's basically "off" or "mostly resistive", then is that really 0.5PF in the traditional sense? Which is why I don't understand the push for higher PF bulbs in the USA...
Well, who knows, all this PF stuff isn't exactly my forte, so maybe I'm missing something.
Trending content
-
-
Thread 'Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?'
- wanderingthomas
Replies: 30K -
Thread 'Mass Shooting at Bondi Beach, Sydney, targets Jews celebrating Hanukkah'- Rhythmik
Replies: 146 -
