Are Metal Halides history?

[DeathWish302]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

That line tells me all I need to know. Prices on LED's are falling 50% every 3 years.

Um... No, from 3 years ago, the CREE XRE line has stayed the same $8.50 for LED on star with optics. Price has not fallen 50% from the time I did my DIY in the winter of 2008.

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

At the same time they are getting brighter and more efficient. Early adoption of ANY technology is expensive. However LED's are very different from traditional lighting and different rules apply. It is easier to think of LED's as CPU computer chips in terms of constant improvement, than it is to think of them as "light bulbs".

Check out some LED industry magazines or articles at the Department of Energy. The "death" of incandescent, halogen, fluorescent, halide, and compact fluorescent lighting is there to see. All of these lighting technologies will become obsolete in the order that I have listed them.

While I'm not disagreeing they have improved, I still have not seen leaps and bounds like the computer industry. I recently bought some LED's to modify a PAR 38 bulb I was toying with. Still very close outptu to previous XR-E style units from a few years ago. Tried several of the HD LED Par38 bulbs also in my lagoon and I do agree they spank the CFL they replaced. Until I see at least a 25% cost difference in operation and intial capital investment with LED's, my thinking is stick with what is working. Besides, I replaced all the other bulbsin the house with LED and CFL so I can run the halides.

Some are PRO LED, other's as myself do not see the cost advantage at the present moment. I care about the environment, but I'm not going to be a $30-35k guinea pig for an electric car that can't even go on a road trip. I agree that change will come, but I agree that industry drives the change. I see it everyday at work with the penny pinching and revisiting VAVE items from the past year(s) to revisit if it is now more feasible.

This is just my flavor on this topic though...

[cubsare1]

The problem with led's is most people already have t5's or halide's so there is zero start up cost compared to $600 per fixture that covers a 24"x24" area if your lucky. I'm starting a 300g d.d. tank and it will take 3 250w halides to cover that I already have from previous tanks, A.I's led I would need to buy 6 sol's at $630 a piece = $3780. Also I live where I run an a.c. for 2-3 weeks a year if I'm lucky and a heater for 6 months so for me to switch would take alot. But if I was just starting out in the hobby I would definitely start with led's

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by DeathWish302

Um... No, from 3 years ago, the CREE XRE line has stayed the same $8.50 for LED on star with optics. Price has not fallen 50% from the time I did my DIY in the winter of 2008.

Um yes. I am talking about broad industry trends - and the OP's original question about whether LED's will replace metal halides. They will.

LED's are used for MANY products other than reef lighting. In fact, reef lighting is a tiny itty bitty fraction of the LED market. As LED technology is being adopted, the various markets follow a similar adoption curve:
(1) Early market - prices too high for most buyers
(2) Technical improvement - prices start falling dramatically
(3) Mass adoption - demand spikes, holding prices steady
(4) Market maturity - after initial adoption, market stabilizes and increased efficiencies, competition, and technical advances lead to further cost declines.

But hey - don't take my word for it, look it up at any of the numerous LED industry sites. Or for that matter, the US Department of Energy.

I don't doubt that in a tiny niche market LED price declines follow a step function instead of a nice smooth curve. CREE's highest end chips do not have significant competition - why would they drop prices for the fun of it? And yet there IS competition and prices ARE coming down. Check out Bridgelux - another US LED startup that is coming close to CREE efficiency and is pricing their LED's for less than half of what CREE does. If you look at Reef lighting, from some manufacturers you can get the SAME fixture with Bridgelux 3w LED's (versus CREE 3w LED's) and pay less than half the price.

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by DeathWish302

Um... No, from 3 years ago, the CREE XRE line has stayed the same $8.50 for LED on star with optics. Price has not fallen 50% from the time I did my DIY in the winter of 2008.

By the way, I'm sure that you understand that even IF prices on CREE XRE LED's have not fallen, brightness and efficiency have increased?

In the Winter of 2008 CREE was shipping bins M2 - Q5 of its cool white XRE's, with a guaranteed minimum lumens per watt of 39.8 - 107.

Today they are shipping bins P4 - R2 of the same chip, with a guaranteed minimum lumens per watt of 80.6 - 114.

Do you recall what bin # you are pricing from 2008? That way we can compare it to the same bin number today and make sure we are comparing apples to apples. Perhaps it is the same? Perhaps not. CREE doesn't even SELL its lower bin #s any more.

[BeanAnimal]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

Um yes. I am talking about broad industry trends - and the OP's original question about whether LED's will replace metal halides. They will.

"industry trends": That is the entire point. Products related to this hobby are made available and priced based upon industrail adoption and market saturation. With those factors in mind (as explained twice above) the extinction of MH (or for that matter T5) is not going to be any time soon.

Respectfully, you analysis and conclusions are based on trade and marketing buzz, not the reality of how products move from conception to adoption in the industrial arena. You have in effect been blinded by the light (pun). You speak of "demand" and "mass adoption" and "market maturity", but I don't think you see the timeline as it relates to HOW industry and commercial entities adopt lighting technology. If they do it on their own, then it is going to take a decade or more for LEDs to become commonplace enough to make MH and T5 products become scarce. So the answer to MH going away: NOT ANY TIME SOON.

Again, If regulation FORCES adoption and FORCES MH to go away, the net result my be the end of MH, but the broken market model allows for the technology that was not adopted on its own (because of poor cost to benefit ratio) to remain at a higher price than the product it replaced. In other words, ALL users are forced into the undesirable cost/benefit ratio due to the lack of choice.

This is something (again) that is lost on most people when they discuss "alternative energy sources" or anything else that is not adopted on its own due to cost/benefit problems.

The facts remain the same: LEDs and their associated fixtures are EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE for industry to adopt. There will be millions (tens of millions) of higghbay, troffer and pole fixtures installed this year. A fraction of a percent of them will be LED.

...unless somebody passes a very silly law, MH are not going anywhere anytime soon.

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by BeanAnimal

With those factors in mind (as explained twice above) the extinction of MH (or for that matter T5) is not going to be any time soon.

Tell it to the CRT television manufacturers.

I agree in principal to everything you say. However just as you suggest I am blinded by my optimism - do not be caught up in your loyalty to old tech.

Consider additionally the other side of the equation. Not only are LEDs becoming cheaper, old technology (MH's) is becoming more expensive - as the industrial market shrinks. This will in turn accelerate the move away from the technology. Additionally, utility rates will continue to go up, up, up - as they have for the last 40 years.

Do not think of LED's as they are today - think of them as they will be in 5 years - when electricity costs twice as much (based on long term trend lines of electricity increasing 14% per year over the last 20 years), MH costs 20% more, and LED's cost half as much. It will be a done deal.

[orangekush4]

They have to pass a law for me to stop using MH. They have yet to come out with a light that looks like a MH. IMO T5 looks flat and LEDs look like a disco light on my tank. They have to take my MH bulbs from my cold dead hand

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by orangekush4

They have to pass a law for me to stop using MH.

You mean like this one?

By the way, I don't think this will happen in the U.S.

[BeanAnimal]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

Tell it to the CRT television manufacturers.

Using logic like that is part of what is leading you to the wrong conclsions. You are comparing products that do not share anything in common with regard to the way they are adopted and become commonplace.

However just as you suggest I am blinded by my optimism - do not be caught up in your loyalty to old tech.

I have no loyalty to old tech. I am merely pointing out the reality with regard to the lifecycle of lighting products (and as a footnote, how it relates to the cost of the products and what is available to our hobby).

Consider additionally the other side of the equation. Not only are LEDs becoming cheaper, old technology (MH's) is becoming more expensive - as the industrial market shrinks. This will in turn accelerate the move away from the technology.

You are missing the basic point.

OLD TECHNOLOGY happens (2) ways:

A) When adopting NEW TECHNOLOGY provides a better real world, and significant cost/benefit ratio. In the case of LIGHTING, the decision of COST/BENEFIT is complex and driven by INDUSTRY, not "early adopters" or "eager marketing", government, or "environmental types".

B) When NEW TECHNOLOGY is FORCED to be adopted by those who define COST/BENEFIT differently than those writing the check. When this happens the PRICE is not naturally driven down, and instead is artificially raised, thus worsening the already undesirable COST/BENFIT ratio.

Additionally, utility rates will continue to go up, up, up - as they have for the last 40 years.

No... Utility rates used to rise at a rate that reflected natural supply and demand. Utility rates are now rising based on the same logic that is being used to BAN some products in favor of others that have a LESS DESIRABLE cost/benefit ratio in the eyes of the one writing the check (the consumer). As a citizen of the state of CA, your do realize WHY you pay so much for power, don't you?

Do not think of LED's as they are today - think of them as they will be in 5 years - when electricity costs twice as much (based on long term trend lines of electricity increasing 14% per year over the last 20 years), MH costs 20% more, and LED's cost half as much. It will be a done deal.

It doesn't matter. You are not seeing the adoption for what it is and what drives the lighting market

More efficient technology is welcome and will be adopted in new construction and retrofits once a favorable cost/benefit can be seen. A that point it could easily take a decade or more to phase out the existing technology based on installed footprint and capitol cost (investment). The key here is that we are not even to the point of acceptance yet due to price.

So back to the begining... MH is not going anywhere anytime soon

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

You mean like this one?

By the way, I don't think this will happen in the U.S.

It already is law in the US. The law goes into effect Jan 1st of 2012 in the us and will be implemented in several phases. Prices for incadescent bulbs have already skyrocketed and most bigbox stores have reduced their stock to only a few choices. Soon you will have no choice but to purchase LED, Halogen or CFL type residential bulbs. I will leave the cost benefit analysis to your own private thoughts, as this is not the place

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by BeanAnimal

No... Utility rates used to rise at a rate that reflected natural supply and demand. Utility rates are now rising based on the same logic that is being used to BAN some products in favor of others that have a LESS DESIRABLE cost/benefit ratio in the eyes of the one writing the check (the consumer). As a citizen of the state of CA, your do realize WHY you pay so much for power, don't you?

Absolutely. Without getting into some muddy history, let's just say I have connections to the industry. That is why I can tell you without doubt that rates are going up (at least in California)... because they have already been approved to go up. Everything about electrical utilities in this state is regulated. Supply is regulated, demand is regulated, distribution is regulated - and it is all regulated poorly. Whenever rates go up, one branch tries to blame the other for the increase in costs. I think it is all a load of #$@^%$. And that is why I have solar power - and by the way I WOULDN'T have solar power if not for other government programs that make it affordable.

Now if I lived in Kentucky... or Tennessee... or Washington... or Idaho... things would be different

Regardless this will be a fun topic to revisit in three or four years and see who was right Will MH be around in three years? Absolutely! Will it clearly be on the way out? I say "yes".

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by BeanAnimal

It already is law in the US. The law goes into effect Jan 1st of 2012 in the us and will be implemented in several phases. Prices for incadescent bulbs have already skyrocketed and most bigbox stores have reduced their stock to only a few choices. Soon you will have no choice but to purchase LED, Halogen or CFL type residential bulbs.

It is interesting... I never read the full copy of the law. I thought it was a general efficiency improvement law and not an outright ban. You are correct - the incandescent bulb (as we know it for general lighting) is a goner.

[Darkstar22]

My 2 cents. I have tried MH's, PC's, and T5's. Can't speak on LED's. I Love MH, and will never use anything else. By the way, I started with MH, then jumped on PC craze, back to MH, and then fell for T5's. Current setup...105G reef with 2x250w MH!

[doctorgori]

... of course LED's will replace MH, or how else can I justify to wife I'm spending $1500 on a fish tank light
....anyway we can thank the Roswell crash for LED technology in the 1st place...

BTW does anyone know when Vortechs will replace Maxijets?

[BeanAnimal]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

It is interesting... I never read the full copy of the law. I thought it was a general efficiency improvement law and not an outright ban. You are correct - the incandescent bulb (as we know it for general lighting) is a goner.

People have learned to use WORDING to mean one thing but convey another. In this case, the internet and media are full of people repeating "they didn't ban anything, they just updated the efficiency requirements".

Lets say the world has RED flubberdoozles and BLUE flubberdoozles.

FACT:
RED flubberdoozles weigh 10 pounds.
BLUE flubberdoozles weigh 100 pounds.

FACT:
Every person on the planet happily owns at least one RED flubberdoozle. A VERY IMPORTANT fact about RED flubberdoozle is that due to the rigid laws of the universe (PHYSICS) they MUST weigh 10 pounds. An ounce more or less and they are NOT RED flubberdoozles.

Becuase some folks think a 10 pound flubberdoozle looks to thin, a law is passed that mandates ALL flubberdoozles MUST weigh MORE than 10 pounds. Selling, buying or trading a flubberdoozle that is LESS than 10 pounds is a criminal act.

FACT:
RED flubberdoozles have been BANNED even though that WORD is not used in the law. Rembmer, RED flubberdoozles CAN ONLY weigh 10 pounds and are therefore ILLEGAL.

With a straight face, those who passed the law will say that they didn't BAN anything and that in fact one can still own RED flubberdoozles as long as they weigh more than 10 pounds...


Back to light bulbs:
Incandescent bulbs have a fixed efficiency. That is, they are what they are and can not be improved upon due to the limitations of physics. The law sets the standard above what ANY incandescent light bulb can ever achieve, therefore BANNING them. You mentioned "for general lighting". The problem is that GENERAL LIGHTING is what is driving the price point via supply and demand. When that market is made illegal, then the specialty bulbs in the same class will skyrocket in price becuase there are no CFL or LED replacements. A standard "rough service" bulb has gone from about $1.50 to $8.00 in the last 18 months. The same with "oven and appliance bulbs", Indicator bulbs, cold weather bulbs, etc.

Enjoy

[DeathWish302]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

By the way, I'm sure that you understand that even IF prices on CREE XRE LED's have not fallen, brightness and efficiency have increased?

In the Winter of 2008 CREE was shipping bins M2 - Q5 of its cool white XRE's, with a guaranteed minimum lumens per watt of 39.8 - 107.

Today they are shipping bins P4 - R2 of the same chip, with a guaranteed minimum lumens per watt of 80.6 - 114.

Do you recall what bin # you are pricing from 2008? That way we can compare it to the same bin number today and make sure we are comparing apples to apples. Perhaps it is the same? Perhaps not. CREE doesn't even SELL its lower bin #s any more.

I understand the brightness has increased, or at least what they will 'guarantee'.

I bought Q5 back in 2008 for 6500K and I truly have no idea what the Royal blues were.

[Chris27]

Bean....

Are RED flubberdoozles and BLUE flubberdoozles manufactured in Fantasy land like Widgets?

$1 goes to you if you name the movie in the next 5 min!

Folks, let's completely forget our hobby, forget the whole CREE mafia thing that seems to flood the DIY forum, and realize that life does exist outside of the reefing world....

Now that we've done that, let go show a few examples:

Remodel recessed lighting fixtures are cheap, like $15 each. So you put one in, install a Compact Flouresent bulb that cost $8, and you forget about it. The CF will last years before going. I've had some of them running in my house for over 3 years. The initial investment is small, and the yearly upkeep cost is pennies. Energy draw is about 20W.

A remodel LED recessed fixture will run you close to $100, draw 10W, and last longer then you own the house....

To compare the two, sure the LED draws half the power, but 10W for 5 hours a day amounts to only a few dollars a year to run.....just the same....the 20W CF costs a few dollars a year to run. So what do you gain in installing the LED fixture?

Now to high bays...

A standard MH high bay fixture costs about $200, and draws 400W...

An LED high bay fixture costs $1000 and draws 100-200W....

For the LED - 8 hours a day at 100W is about 300KW if run everyday of the year....at $0.10 a KW hour, that's $30 a year.

For the MH - 8 hours a day at 400W is about $115 per year....

So it would take about 10 years for the LED lights to start saving money...

Which one seems like the best idea? Remember heat isn't a concern in a warehouse like it is over a fish tank, and replacement MH bulbs used in those fixtures are much much cheaper then their aquarium counterparts.

The customer would look at the two quotes....

$20K for LED high bays that take 10 years to pay for themselves

or

$4K for MH lights.

I know which one I would choose.

[110galreef]

Originally Posted by Chris27

Bean....

Are RED flubberdoozles and BLUE flubberdoozles manufactured in Fantasy land like Widgets?

$1 goes to you if you name the movie in the next 5 min!

Willy Wonka's Chocalate Factory!

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by Chris27

The CF will last years before going.

Average lifespan for a CFL bulb is about 10,000 hours, or about 6 years if you run lights five hours per day. That's 1/5th that of LED with the same lumen decay. So multiply your cost of bulbs by 5. If you turn your lights on and off frequently, your CFL bulbs will burn out much more quickly - you need to leave them on at least 15 minutes at a time or you will shorten their lifespan.

Originally Posted by Chris27

at $0.10 a KW hour, that's $30 a year

...and at $.30 per kWh (like in California) that's $90 per year for LED versus $345 per year for the MH - without including the cost of MH replacement bulbs and the labor to replace them - which is hundreds of dollars over the time period a single LED would last.

In more expensive electricity markets, LEDs pay back in 2 years or less.

And of course the MAIN assumptions you are missing - electricity costs will continue to increase, and LED costs will continue to fall for the foreseeable future.

I agree with everything you say about what decision I would make if I lived in Washington state with a cheap source of hydro power and $.10 per kWh rates. However in Southern California (or New York or Vermont or god forbid Hawaii) you will reach a very different conclusion.

[James77]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

Average lifespan for a CFL bulb is about 10,000 hours, or about 6 years if you run lights five hours per day. That's 1/5th that of LED with the same lumen decay. So multiply your cost of bulbs by 5. If you turn your lights on and off frequently, your CFL bulbs will burn out much more quickly - you need to leave them on at least 15 minutes at a time or you will shorten their lifespan.
.

Yeah, but right now I can get CFL at a couple bucks a piece, and they work extremely well at lighting all sorts of areas. The LEDs are $25-$60+ for a "bulb" that will fit in a standard socket, at least at Lowes.

A 65 watt equivalent LED bulb is $30 from Lowes, 60 watt equivalent CFL are less than $1.50. The LED is 20 times as expensive, for 5 times the life. The LED bulb uses 11 wattss, the CFL use 13 watts. LEDs have a long ways to come down in cost beofre they compete with CFL. Even if the prices were more comparable, the light spread is poor with the designs they have now.

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

...and at $.30 per kWh (like in California) that's $90 per year for LED versus $345 per year for the MH - without including the cost of MH replacement bulbs and the labor to replace them - which is hundreds of dollars over the time period a single LED would last
In more expensive electricity markets, LEDs pay back in 2 years or less.
And of course the MAIN assumptions you are missing - electricity costs will continue to increase, and LED costs will continue to fall for the foreseeable future.
I agree with everything you say about what decision I would make if I lived in Washington state with a cheap source of hydro power and $.10 per kWh rates. However in Southern California (or New York or Vermont or god forbid Hawaii) you will reach a very different conclusion.

Which is why LEDs make sense for some people that live in high rate states, but most of the country is nowhere near Calis electric rates. Most states are around.07- .12 per kwh. The problem is some people here take the payback quote of a couple years for someone in California, and apply it broadly to everyone.

[Drae]

Great debate! I think threads like this are awesome. Solid points from intelligent individuals. Just saying. *DRAE* why no stickies on threads like this? Very informative.

[Paul B]

My reef started with regular tungston light bulbs and went to regular flourescents, to VHO to CF to a combination of those to MH and now to LED. The tank prospered with all of them but each one was an improvement. I did not change systems in a few months or even years. Each system was installed for quite a while and some for a decade before I changed. I was an electrician in Manhattan for 40 years and installed every type of lamp you can imagine. Things change because it is cheaper to buy, maintain and run. Now the world is changing and we can add to that safer to dispose of.
Here in the US we don't build CFL bulbs. We know how but they contain mercury and phosphorous. With our envirnmental laws it is very tough to use mercury in anything and we don't have any real way to dispose of it. In China where almost all CFL lamps are built I really don't know what they do with mercury but I have an idea.
I feel that LEDs will replace all lamps in the US in 20 years or so.
They are practically free in the long run and they are starting to replace lights in many applications. Here in NY all of our traffic lights are LEDs and we have millions of them. There is just no maintenance. If we don't have to pay an electrician $60.00 an hour every year to change a bulb in millions of fixtures, it is a no brainer.
All of our city busses use LEDs for tail lights as do many car and truck companies.
LEDs are here to stay and they can be disposed of in the trash. MH, Sodium, CFLs, cold cathode, neon and even regular flourescents contain mercury and are "supposed" to be recycled, which means put in a toxic land fill.
I think MH and sodium lights will be around much longer for parking lots, sports stadiums etc because they can light a large area while using relatively little power, LEDs have yet been able to do that, but for regular lighting of supermarkets, homes, streets, tunnels and inside refrigerators, LEDs are what you are going to gradually see to replace everything else.
They will also become much cheaper. Now they are not made in large factories in great quantities. Light bulbs also used to be expensive but now you can get a 100 watt light bulb for less than a buck. I am sure LEDs will be manufactured for pennies soon.
Just my opinion.
I even broke all the bulbs on my boat and built LED lamps to replace them to save electricity in the batteries

[BonsaiNut]

Originally Posted by James77

A 65 watt equivalent LED bulb is $30 from Lowes, 60 watt equivalent CFL are less than $1.50. The LED is 20 times as expensive, for 5 times the life. The LED bulb uses 11 wattss, the CFL use 13 watts. LEDs have a long ways to come down in cost beofre they compete with CFL.

Another way to say the same thing is you need to buy 5 CFL bulbs (at $1.50) to last as long as your single LED. So you are really talking about $7.50 CFL bulb costs versus $30 LED.

And CFL's are bad for the environment, and CFL's don't run in the cold, and CFL's need long cycle times, and many/most CFL's are not dimmable, and CFL's are fragile, and CFL's require time to warm up to reach their full luminosity, and...

...and LED's are constantly increasing in brightness and efficiency. And their costs are dropping 50% every three years. And electricity continues to get more expensive...

I think we are having two different discussions - one for today and one for tomorrow. Today it doesn't make sense to replace general lighting CFL's with LED's - even in California. But the time is coming... I think we all remember three or four years ago when CFL's came out and they were so darn expensive. And then the utilities ran huge rebate programs that cut the cost in half - or lower. I wonder how LED's would sell if they had similar rebates?

[ErikS]

Originally Posted by BeanAnimal

............The lighting that is available to our hobby is largely dependent on what INDUSTRY is willing to adopt.

While I agree it will take quite some time it's already begun. Haven't seen a non-LED new traffic light since, well, can't remember. We have new construction @ work, non-stop since early 2000's and will continue until at least 2025. ALL, not some, all outdoor lighting is LED. Old outdoor is being converted to LED. Parking lots, walkways, building area lights - all LED. I'd say indoor lighting, of most types will be the last to be replaced - haven't seen any good reflectors. LED spots are good, but too pricey at the moment.

Along with the electrical cost benefit there's also the labor - I'd wager quite a bit depending on the size of the operation. The less often you have pay Chucklehead McNumbnuts to go & change bulbs the more you save.

Originally Posted by Chris27

..........Folks, let's completely forget our hobby, forget the whole CREE mafia thing that seems to flood the DIY forum, and realize that life does exist outside of the reefing world.....

I'll take the CREE mafia over those who pontificate ad nausea, post CAD drawings & have never been shown to actually to a damn thing.

MH will go away, though without regulation I'd say "not in my lifetime".

[James77]

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

Another way to say the same thing is you need to buy 5 CFL bulbs (at $1.50) to last as long as your single LED. So you are really talking about $7.50 CFL bulb costs versus $30 LED.

And CFL's are bad for the environment, and CFL's don't run in the cold, and CFL's need long cycle times, and many/most CFL's are not dimmable, and CFL's are fragile, and CFL's require time to warm up to reach their full luminosity, and...

Yeah still 4 times as much, but as you say below, that is just today. They just make no sense anywhere. If they can get LEDs to compete as far as making them like regular CFL or icandescents in their coverage, that will kill the CFL pretty qucikly once price comes down. The warm upm time for a CFL is not always a bad thing....at 6 am when you flick the bath light on. Worth it to save my puips from slamming shut

One thing I have always said on LED life span is I'll believe it when I see it. Same thing with CFLs....when they first came out the stupid ones I bought lasted nowhere near the advertised time....maybe it was cheap crap China ones, but worth noting. The ones as of late seem to be holding for a real long time, I don't exactly check off a calendar though....

Originally Posted by BonsaiNut

I think we are having two different discussions - one for today and one for tomorrow. Today it doesn't make sense to replace general lighting CFL's with LED's - even in California. But the time is coming... I think we all remember three or four years ago when CFL's came out and they were so darn expensive. And then the utilities ran huge rebate programs that cut the cost in half - or lower. I wonder how LED's would sell if they had similar rebates?

Yes, their time will come, I think it is 5-10 years out. Rebates will help of course. Unforunately there will be no real money savings electric wise as our energy costs skyrocket...we always seem to just try and stay status quo with our bills

[BonsaiNut]

Check it out. Peru's National Football (Soccer) Stadium lit with LED's. The exterior lighting pulsates and generates waves based on the noise level within the stadium



Here it is doing the "wave".



LED's lighting Gunagzhou TV Tower in China:



LED's lighting an airport in Ohio. Reduced energy consumption by 60% relative to the previous MH lights. They were looking for a lighting system that could operate 24 hours a day with "virtually no maintenance."



LED's lighting a pool in Boise. Energy savings $20,000 / year. Maintenance cost savings $5,000 per year:



GNC stores replacing display lighting with LED's. "Based on a 50,000 hour lamp life, reduced maintenance cost and lower cooling costs relative to the halogen bulbs, GNC estimates that the lighting upgrade will pay for itself in one to two years."



Nevada steps up pace to retrofit outdoor municipal lighting with LED's:



CREE releases proof-of-concept LED retrofit light that delivers 152 lumens / watt efficiency:



...and these news articles are all from the last 30 days.