An article in today's New York Times underscores what many of us are finding with the new LED Lighting products: they aren't quite there yet.
I agree with the analysis, but have issue with the conclusion (or lack thereof). Traditional news stories are not supposed to offer suggestions or opinion, but this is an analysis piece, so I had hoped the author would end with "so what you should think about is..."
For example, there are a number of new LED lighting products that are fantastic for specific uses. I wrote about the new WAC Undercabinet Lighting recently as well as other alternatives to inefficient incandescents lamps that work wonderfully for the right setting.
Voltaire's oft-used phrase, "the Perfect is the enemy of the Good" (or "Il meglio รจ l'inimico del bene", for our Italian friends) is well applied to this discussion.
To wit: If I can reduce my energy consumption, electricity costs and waste with the appropriate use of quality Compact Fluorescent and LED bulbs, I should do it! We should not wait for the holy grail of lighting products to start making the switch, as that will likely never occur. Today, we can reduce our electrical usage by 30-50% just by using smarter bulbs.
There are a ton of good options for homeowners, even if the NY Times sums it up with "Simply put, many of the LED products now available are not worth buying."
Reference: article from the NY Times Bits section: "LEDs to the Rescue? Not So Fast".
[where: 10032][where: Harlem][where: Sugar Hill]
Feb 2, 2009
LED Lighting Panned in New York Times
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I've saved a bundle switching to CFLs BUT all CFL bulbs are not created equal. The generic ones from Home Depot don't last but the GE energy smart (Target sells them) are worth the extra and they come in dimmable spots!
As for LEDs, I bought tree lights and they gave out an odd blue light that I didn't like indoors, but I was able to repurpose them outside to great effect. As you say, look at the specific setting when choosing lighting.
I think the article reaches a valid conclusion (which it alludes to midway through, too):
Simply put, many of the LED products now available are not worth buying.
Conclusion:
Meanwhile, experts recommend that customers approach LED replacement products with caution.
CFLs have mostly gotten past this awkward phase, but as modernmama points out, not entirely. It's a question of finding the right light for the job, and there are a lot of wrong choices for LEDs at this point, so caution is warranted.
Thx. Agreed with both your comments: caveat emptor.
I fear the takeaway for folks who don't spend their days researching these products will be "efficient lighting doesn't work".
Not so! It just takes some research.
If Amazon, Walmart or Home Depot would include the color and temperature of the lights they sell, consumers could make better choices. Judge not a bulb by wattage alone...
Did you see the Bits life cycle analysis that says that quality LEDs do save energy, at least.
Hope the lighting industry will come out with standards and information for the poor confused consumer.
Post a Comment