What's most interesting about this is that it sets an important milestone in efficiency. Most compact fluorescents are operating below 64 lumens/watt.

I'm willing to sacrifice on efficiency in order to have an organic product in my home.

Which light source do you think is "organic" by the way? Most fluorescents today are using heavy metals in the gas fill along with all kinds of fun chemicals in the manufacture. LEDs, like fluorescents, use exotic phosphors and further semiconductors. Organic LEDs use organic semiconductors that and more synthetic than any of the other items mentioned above. Don't let the word organic fool you... these are not chemicals grown on the farm.

Maybe I just don't get your comment? The only light sources that are made from relatively clean means are candles, gas lamps, or incadescent bulbs. However all three are incredible inefficient as a modern light source. I guess it's quite possible you were joking and I just missed it.

As for the post... the problems with organic EL devices today is lifespan. OLEDs are very sensitive to moisture and oxygen. While LEDs and even CFl's are relatively consistent across a broad spectrum of operating conditions, OLEDs vary greatly. We simply don't have the means to properly encapsulate them. All the plastics and glasses we have at our disposal bleed gasses or vapor into the cell. The clock on OLEDs start the day they are made. It really doesn't matter if they are "on" or not, so I think the 10,000 hours is misleading at best. Also, because of the nature of the phosphors, the color temperature is not consitent over time. Neither of these traits are acceptable as a light replacement yet.

Still... significantly better efficiency, the ability to manufacture through ink jet technology (much easier and cheaper), and the ability to use flexible substrates are all very encouraging. I hope they are able to work out the current problems soon.