Lighting Person of the Year

Edison Report is interesting in a way. I often find things there that you wouldn't get elsewhere; now, you have to care about Cooper and Acuity quarterly profit, and since I sold my stock 5+ years ago. But you get an interesting article here and there. Worth a check every other week.

Well, I went to check in my afternoon avoidance of work ... um ... er ... break and I find that Jim Broderick of DOE is their Person of the Year. I then read the comment below the post on that, and I'm not clear if he gets the title because of doing good or bad.

I have big qualms because (as has been blogged roughly 846357 times), you can do better than the best LED luminaire efficacy today with the most generic lensed troffer (and let's not pretend that LED luminaires are in general giving us all kinds of great shielding or anything close to aesthetics) 2GT8 2 32 MVOLT GEB10IS ... becasue what nobody seems to want to factor in is that you have a 0.63 LLF for the LED and a 0.77 for a T8. Crummy F32T8/7800 is 2800 lumens. 80% fixture efficiency. 0.88 BF. All that comes out to 3548 lumens at 59W or 60 lumens per Watt ... right where the LED people get all excited that they have achieved a miraculous new benchmark in greatness.

And oh yeah, that 60 lpW costs you not more than $100. How much was that LED thingy again?

Again, blogged on it before, won't be the last time, if you spend roughly $10 on that $100 troffer, you cna get a High Performnace T8 system with a QHE ballast ISL-SC (0.78BF, 42W) and operate a FO28/835/XP/SS/ECO (2725 lumens) lamp and get 3231 lumens at 42W or 77 lpW.

Anyone know where i can get 77 lpW out of a LED luminaire that gets me nominally 3000 lumens ... for $110? Sorry, I can't hear you over those chirping crickets. Now, if you'd like to pay $200 for that "fancy new efficacious beauty", we can work a deal.

Why does the guy pushing expensive and non-efficacious technology get anything but a poke in the ribs? Kinda sad. If the DOE truly cared about energy savings, they would be pouring Super Big Gulps of HPT8 Kool-Aid.

Macy's to Retrofit 86 Stores to LED PAR38 Lamps

From TreeHugger:

Macy's stores around the country are about to get a lighting makeover that will curb the company's energy consumption by a huge amount. Retrofitting over 117,000 43-watt halogen-based bulbs used for accent lighting in 86 department stores with 17-watt LED bulbs from Philips -- custom designed for the stores, of course -- will help Macy's trim their electricity use by a whopping 73%.

According to Environmental Leader, the custom-designed Philips EnduraLED PAR38 SP15 lamps (say that three times fast) are rated for a 45,000 hour lifespan. That means they'll last practically forever and their energy efficiency will show Macy's a return on investment before the end of the first year. That is definitely impressive.

Also impressive is the fact that Macy's switch in light bulb preference will make it the first department store to use LEDs on a wide scale. But of course it isn't the first major chain of retailers to do so. Starbucks has earned green props through its initiative to switch 8,000 of its shops to LED lighting to help curb its carbon footprint. As manufacturers get better at crafting a warm tone for LED bulbs, its likely most businesses will find the long-lasting, energy sipping bulbs a perfect alternative.

How Much Fuel Does it Take to Power a Lightbulb for a Year

I found this via TreeHugger, but it comes from GOOD. Both of them are interesting sites on the whole. I suppose somebody would say you need to have a liberal bent, but I didn't say "drink the Kool Aid" I just think it is an interesting read.

Well, "good" isn't what I'd call this graphic. Who runs anything all day every day in 2010? If they are, let's get the pitchforks. Or, let's legislate tiered energy ( or colloquially "power") bills instead of stuffing the CFL down the throat of the populace who doesn't want it. Smart or not, if the consumer won't take it, then move on ... next idea. We have conglomerate energy companies that have data. We can figure "subsistence energy use pretty easy". From there, why isn't the first tier all but free (because we are pretty much a bunch of socialists as it is) and the second tier takes you to $500 per month?

Seriously. Precious little gets the consumer to adopt intelligent technology (beyond the cool factor of smartphones and iPads ... and over-priced gadgety cars) more than hitting the ol' pocketbook. If you want to put a 100W incandescent "bulb" in every screw shell, knock yourself out. Leave them on all day and night ... but your energy bill will be $1000 you big fat jerk.

The second thought is why we don't legislate controls in residential construction. a wall-mount occupancy sensor is what, $25? How is it not clear to policy makers that focusing on the lamp is not the solution to our energy issues? But, look how long it took for commercial energy codes to force controls.

Then, we have the Lafayette, CO inspector who flat out says he doesn't have time even look at energy code or lighting because he is too busy worrying about life safety ... because we have massive fires that kills hundreds every day? That is another post.