Linked by weildish on Wed 4th Feb 2009 04:54 UTC
In the News Yes, actually. The old-school, inefficient, heat-generating incandescent bulbs are all but history, CFL (compact florescent) bulbs taking the pedestal what with how relatively inexpensive and efficient they are when it comes to both electricity consumption and overhead cost. However, even these may have a short-lived supremacy as British scientists developed a new way of "growing" the material needed for LEDs on silicon instead of sapphire wafers, which was the original and somewhat expensive way of doing it. Because of this, household-grade lights of LED nature can be produced for under $5.00 and last up to sixty years. LEDs are three times more efficient than CFLs, last substantially longer, and contain no mercury, so they're even more environmentally friendly. These wonder-bulbs are supposed to be available to consumers within two years. It is estimated that if these new bulbs were to be installed in every home and office, it would cut electricity used on lighting by 75%. I'll take twenty of those, please.
Permalink for comment 347300
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Machster
Member since:
2007-05-15

Actually is isn't so easiy. If the peaks in waveform, are filtered, as you suggest, that would also take away from the perceived brightess. This in turn would require more LED's and more power. In addition filters can not fix the dips in the waveform, therefore, the quality will continue to be subpar to non-LED. Diffusers can not completely solve the inherent problems and they can also decrease the brightness.

Reply Parent Score: 1