backtop


Print 116 comment(s) - last by linuxisbest.. on Mar 26 at 10:49 PM


n:vision 23W (100W equivalent) compact fluorescent
New bill would mandate that light bulbs produce 120 lumens per watt by 2020

It looks as though energy efficiency is still a big priority for municipalities and countries across the globe. We've already detailed energy-efficient LED lighting efforts put forth by Raleigh, NC. We've also discussed how Australia and the European Union (EU) plan to get rid of incandescent light bulbs by 2009. The United States is also moving towards ushering out inefficient lighting with H.R. 1547, which was published on March 15, 2007.

The bill (PDF), which was submitted by California representative Jane Harman, indicates that light bulbs which have an overall luminous efficacy of 60 lumens per watt (lm/W) will be prohibited by January 1, 2012. The energy requirements get progressively steeper every four years. On January 1, 2016, the requirement will grow to 90 lm/W and will reach 120 lm/W by 2020.

A traditional 100W tungsten incandescent light has an overall luminous efficacy of 17.5 lm/W. A 23W compact fluorescent (100W equivalent) has an overall luminous efficacy of 60 lm/W.

Exemptions could be made by the Secretary of Energy for certain applications where it wouldn't be feasible to use energy-efficient lighting. These include applications related to military, medical or matters of public safety.

If an exception is made by the Secretary of Energy, that still doesn't give entitle the recipient to a free pass to continue using outdated technology. The exemption will only be in effect for two years after which the current enacted requirement will have to be adhered to.

The bill also notes that consumers and businesses will be given incentives to encourage the use of energy efficient light bulbs.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: This is NOT necessary. Read below
By Puddleglum1 on 3/22/2007 1:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
BPB, what exactly is not necessary?
quote:
The United States is also moving towards ushering out inefficient lighting...
The bill has nothing to do with what style of light is being used, just that the light meet or beat a certain power efficiency.

However, the article you posted has this important detail:
quote:
The target for these bulbs at initial production is to be nearly twice as efficient, at 30 lumens-per-Watt...
That doesn't meet the minimum power efficiency required by the bill.

So, GE may be cutting their research into this based on the fact that incandescent has -- according to their research -- a maximum of 4 times the average incandescent (4 * 15 = 60), which will only get halfway to the requirement.

The magic which affords incandescent lighting is also it's inefficiency.


RE: This is NOT necessary. Read below
By ElFenix on 3/22/2007 4:15:07 PM , Rating: 2
this is just a bill, not a requirement. you can be sure that if it does pass, GE's new bulb will fit into it.


RE: This is NOT necessary. Read below
By dever on 3/23/2007 3:14:28 PM , Rating: 1
There's no guarantee that the new bulb will fit. If there current research only brings them to half the initial requirements, what is there incentive to do this very important work? This really is amazing technological gains and they could be wiped out by foolish dictators tolerated by utterly foolish subjects.


"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki