Office Building Lit By 100% LED Light

Does it require more heat in the winter, since the lights aren't providing as much heat? I never see this mentioned but if you're going to talk about the warm summer months, it's worth looking at the net benefit annually.

Whether or not this is an interesting development depends on exactly what lights they have replaced. If these LEDS replaced CFLs, this would be a fantastic figure. However, that sounds too good to be true.

Reading the headline I thought: a reduction of 48 % by replacing ordinary light bulbs is not that spectacular. But going to the cree website I saw they replaced CFLs with the LEDs.

So if their claim is correct the efficiency of their LED's is twice that of the already efficient CFLs. Not bad!

"The only method of lighting more energy efficient than LEDs is daylighting (e.g. through the use of sun tubes, for example)."

I highly doubt there is any way to top low-pressure sodium lamps. Also, common fluorescent lamps have higher efficiency than LEDs. Especially white LEDs are bad performers.

The question about heating in an office building is a non-issue. Commercial buildings, because of their high internal gains (lots of people, equipment, etc.) tend to have very little annual heating energy use - if at all, it's around the perimeter zones of the buildings. Reducing the lighting contribution to internal gains is absolutely a net positive for an office building.

I'm in favor for the LED lights especially, because of the heat in which I’ve endured near the tropical equator region and humidity before. Northern states may not have to worry about this as much as southern states in the United States based on diverse temperature degrees in each region. LED lights are a fantastic idea based on the fact that already these reduce heat absorption of objects around itself. them, Also, they don’t blind you with the tints of which it gives off, and moreover conserves electricity, heat, and power that is not needed right now in this time. Anything with conservation in the Global Warming situation of the environment is something that I'll support. Americans should consider these lighting bulb types to advance technologies usage and save the Earth from drowning with the massive destruction ratings that have already been set in addition of less reduction in cooling productivity. Reasoning for the Americans beginning this action is for the leadership our country exhibits and the example we set on the Earth. If we take a stand to this controversy like a few already have taken and implement matter’s like that of the LED bulb with confrontation to nation’s then together we can also try to make a difference in the depictions of how to bitterly equip the Earth’s climate zones and atmosphere by not wasting so much electric material that is more hazardous to the ozone with the occurrence of global warming happening in our lifetime right now. I compliment the inventors of this bulb and want to congratulate them on a great conservative way that the societies on Earth can use of the others available in the LED light bulb usage.

>Note: I discovered that most of the lights in the Cree offices were
>actually fluorescents, so in this case, the heat difference would be
>negligible

Not true. 48% less energy usage means 48% less heat output. Each watt you use translates to 1 watt of heat, which in the summer typically translates to 4 watts of cooling.

I've seen varying comparisons of efficiency between LEDs and CFLs, but there are more considerations than just lumens per Watt. LEDs are dimmable, unlike most CFLs, have much longer lifespans (50,000+ hours vs. 10,000), and don't require special disposal (no mercury, unlike CFLs). I think the only edge CFLs have at the moment is a better range of color temperatures. In the before and after shots of the Cree offices, I find the LEDs a tad bit harsh (close to daylight, but nowhere near the warmth of even the CFLs, let alone incandescents). That said, the cost savings (especially over the lifetime of the bulb) make LEDs look great, especially in a setting like this, with many, many lamps in operation for the entire workday.

LEDs are incredible; but the cost remains extremely high ($40 to $80 per bulb). We are just starting to convince people that $4 CFLs are worth it.

These are truly for treehuggers; electricity cost is very low and lights are the lowest offenders (specially when your whole house is already on CFLs - and your wife and children are trained that a light left on is a crime).

Breakthrough is needed in Air Conditioning technology.

The "Before" image appears a more attractive, cosy environment...

Not only are they more efficient (which makes the environmentalists happy), and (personal opinion here) put out a more pleasant light than CFL, but they also have a much longer life expectancy than CFL or FL tubes, which makes building managers happy. The cost of sending a janitor out to replace a bulb is significant, even if it may get lost in the general "building maintenance" budget.

half the commenters obviously didn't read the whole article. to the first poster: why do you think regular light bults are so inefficient? it's because they convert much of their energy into heat instead of light. so yes, if you replace incandescents with LEDs you won't be producing as much heat, but that's a GOOD thing. you can then use all that electricity you saved to run the heater, if you want.

to the second AND third posters, it says very clearly in the article that the company replaced mostly flourescent lights with LEDs, which led to the 48% efficiency improvement figure.

another very important thing to remember is that LEDs typically last on the order of 10 years running non-stop. so you pay more up front but you do get some ROI, plus you don't have to change light bulbs all the time.

Alex,

they started with the parking lot and the LED lights look much better than the HPS bulbs. plenty of light :)

I disagree. The heating component is very important. As an architecture student, I have learned that in lighting design, heat is the major issue for energy consumption--not light. On a typical budget, heating and cooling for a building is much more expensive than lighting a building. LED lights are amazing because they decrease the heat load on the building.
When designing lighting systems, heating contribution has to be taken into account in order to keep the efficiency level of the whole building from decreasing. It's important to note that everything that goes on inside a building can affect something else. And if there is low heat contribution for the winter months, that can affect heat lighting for windows, office spaces, you name it. I'm not sure how much the drop would be, but I'm sure that they took that into account.

-Paul

Incandescent lights produce something like 5% light and 95% heat, therefore they are about 5% efficient for lighting. Flourescent lights are around 25% efficient and LED lights are close to 50% efficient. It's true that incandescent lights help heat the building when it's cold outside, but in most parts of the country it is cheaper to heat with gas or oil instead of electricity. And, of course, it's putting a huge load on air conditioners when you would rather be cooling.

that is particularly neat!!

I love that new "post an intelligent and civil comment"

I hope my counts. : )

it says it's in north carolina. i doubt it gets very cold there in the winter.

This may be true Lumen to Lumen (IE effeciency of LED) but there is MORE to it than just Lumen to Lumen

You forget EFFECTIVE Lumens. Something not mentioned very often. Say a Bulb puts out 600 lumens. HOW MANY of those lumens actually goes into producing usable light. a CFL has the same issue as a Incandescent. In fact worse (but its compensated massively with power savings)

MOST of the light never goes into being USEFUL. at least half the light is blasted to the SIDES and to the TOP (or bottom) of the light fixture.

In a Spiral CFL its even worse. ONLY the top spiral is DIRECTLY emitting light usefully ALL the rest of the spiral is either splaying its lumens inside a lamp fixture OR against the other portions of its own spiral. REDUCING the effective lumens emitted. Try this. Ever see those "clamp" lights with the big metal wok like dish? get a CFL

Put one in that without the metal dish. Put a "can" around it like a ceiling or track lighting fixture. Shine it into yor room.

NOW take off the can and put the dish on Shine it again.

See the massive difference in light produced from the same bulb? your DIRECTING more of its lumens into being USEFUL lumens to illuminate what you want it to. Except in LED's there are no non productive lumens. they are only produced in one direction. No reflector and its losses needed. SO in a strictly speaking lumen to watt comparison they may be equals or slight losers but in USEFUL lumens they are kings by a huge margin.

LED's are massively efficient in this regard (and its also a factor that can make them hard to use) The light is VERY directional. ie you have to "spread them around" like you see CREE doing. you can not use them as POINT sources for as you stated not enough lumens.

Take the 30' CONE of emitted light from an LED. Apply this SAME cone to a CFL how many lumens now if yo ignore whats outside this cone? See what I mean.

WIth Incandescents and CFL's you get a lot of WASTED light illuminating what does not need to be illuminated.

THIS is what makes LED's so efficient above and beyond there lumens per watt rating. Because of this efficiency I can illuminate my entire bedroom with 1600 led's consuming less than 30 watts of electricity. Can you light your room with 2 15watt CFL's ? (I have a pretty big bedroom too) I use 9 watts to light the downstairs bathroom (and thats LOSING efficiency by hiding the 260 led inside the existing above sink fixture) I could use 1/3 less LED's or increase brightness if I bolted them in the open to the ceiling :-)

They also last longer. From a business perspective this is a massive savings from employee pay to cost of bulbs and the gasoline to go get them. In fact THIS savings alone exceeds the cost of the bulbs over there lifetimes making the E savings free.

The problem with Cree is there damned bulbs are expensive. :-(

LED's are absolutely the future. They just have to get quality control down (cree should not have this problem hence why they cost so much :-)

all my life i have not liked florescent lights. it seems like saying they are like florescent lights is not a good idea.

also the lights seems so blindingly white. could they turn it down and mellow it out. i am all for saving energy but it reminds me of being in a warehouse or schoolroom. too hard on the eyes.

leds are great in flashlights. one of the great inventions of all time. make them more mellow and its a total win.

What I want to know is what is the watts/lumen for a 60-100W Incandescent spiral base bulb replacement (and how it compares to a CFL)

I'm shocked at how fluorescent lighting is now seen as an "innefficient" lighting source. It's been just 5 years since we switched from our old fashoned bulbs.

How times have changed...

Alright, I want to buy 2 for my house. How?

"I highly doubt there is any way to top low-pressure sodium lamps. Also, common fluorescent lamps have higher efficiency than LEDs. Especially white LEDs are bad performers."

Um... no. Newer LED technologies are providing more lumens per watt than fluorescents.

Turns out LED are directional and CFL blow light in all directions so there are reflective losses with CFL

This companys high output LED lights hold the world record for the most efficent and bright LED lights in the world. im am soon purchasing a special comercial light that is made with these leds that only draws 100 watts yet performs like a 400 watt hps.

I don't buy the increase of 48% if you are replacing fluorescent
T5 bulbs which output about 80 lumens/watt. I realize Cree has made big strides in increasing the efficacy of the LED but it is hard to believe that the LED lighting fixture will increase the efficacy by enough to make it 48% more efficient then a T5 fixture. No where
is the price of this solution mentioned which is something else that
should be stated.

cool ! I like it!

my blog: www.gowers.cn

better lighting + energy efficient = win. Plus, conventional lighting requires replacement after several years.

LED lighting is wonderful and it's getting better and better all the time.

The only true problem with LED lighting is current pricing. If a consumer wants to convert now, they will get ripped off bigtime due to the hype and novelty value of these products.

Yes, the selling companies will argue that throughout the lifetime of the LEDs you will be saving money, but that's hardly a compelling argument to the regular folk.

Normal people, RIGHT NOW, can't just go and convert their houses to LED lighting because they just can't afford them, even if they will save money in the long term (long term being well over 5 years).

So come on, start the AFFORDABLE LED movement, demand sane pricing.

Save the planet.

What is the point of using energy saving lights if you put twice as more LEDs as in the picture shown above??
It's as stupid as an an hybrid SUV...

^They might put twice as many in but it doesn't matter.

I actually work for Cree. Trust me, they measure the amount of lumens in the room and the amount of electricity being consumed. If you are getting the same amount of light for a fraction of the electricity then the amount of LEDs being used is a non-issue.

We're getting alot of competitors now too, so the costs of LEDs are falling pretty fast. While this is bad for my stock options, its very good news for planet Earth.

Anyone look into the manufacturing process of the diffent types of bulbs?

Using 4 - 5x the LEDS while being smaller might take its hit on the envornment in the manufacturing process.

We like the LED lights that we are using in our lamps, and will be converting the rest from CFLs to LEDs soon.

"This companys high output LED lights hold the world record for the most efficent and bright LED lights in the world. im am soon purchasing a special comercial light that is made with these leds that only draws 100 watts yet performs like a 400 watt hps."

Scott, where are you getting these bulbs - I want some as well. Thanks.

"Not true. 48% less energy usage means 48% less heat output. Each watt you use translates to 1 watt of heat, which in the summer typically translates to 4 watts of cooling. " - peter-

"Twenty-two percent of electricity in the U.S. is used for lighting. Ninety percent of the power used for a light bulb produces heat rather than light. LEDs are over four times more efficient than traditional incandescent light bulbs. "
http://www.ledcity.org/about-the-program/

Buceri says:

The "Before" image appears a more attractive, cosy environment...

thats because the lights arnt that bright, they could make some things stand out, if the LEDs were seperated apart or some just no turned on then it would look like the before, kinda

I think Chris Taylor made some very good comments and I would like to say that I believe that we will be using more LEDs in the future especially if as many people pointed out, the color temperature can be made lower so that it is closer to incandescent.
O.K. now for some of the issues. Lowering the color temperature will probably lower the efficiency. Getting the maximum power from a LED usually also lowers the efficiency, i.e. you need to run
them at less then rated light output for maximum efficency. LEDs still generate a lot of heat because of the size to watt ratio which means that they will die early if they are not well cooled. I also have one question. Is the quoted efficiency, with the required voltage converter included, or are we measuring just the LED. I realize that the converter is another issue although no more so then a fluorescent ballast?

I think Chris Taylor made some very good comments and I would like to say that I believe that we will be using more LEDs in the future especially if as many people pointed out, the color temperature can be made lower so that it is closer to incandescent.
O.K. now for some of the issues. Lowering the color temperature will probably lower the efficiency. Getting the maximum power from a LED usually also lowers the efficiency, i.e. you need to run
them at less then rated light output for maximum efficency. LEDs still generate a lot of heat because of the size to watt ratio which means that they will die early if they are not well cooled. I also have one question. Is the quoted efficiency, with the required voltage converter included, or are we measuring just the LED. I realize that the converter is another issue although no more so then a fluorescent ballast?

I don't like them L.E.D. lights. They bright, but don't light things up if that make sense. If they being shined at you, they seem real bright, but if they're lighting up something, you more than an inch or two away and you can hardly see that mess aside from the very center of the beam. They give me a headache too! I had asked my people at church if they had the same problem and they did. My eyesight ain't what it used to be, but I sure do know I can still see with my good'ol halogen light bulb, I'll pay the extra 50 cent on that electric bill if it make readin the bible easier

Can't wait to be able to buy these LED lamps. Where do you get them? If the bulbs do last 50,000 hours then their cost is negligible compared to the cost of electricity over that same 50,000 hours.

heres my research/thoughts on LEDs:

LEDs are extremely efficient.
"Old" incandescent wastes >90% of its energy in generating heat.
CFLs have a conversion process as they drive electricity through the small amount of mercury to create UV light, then the phosphors coating converts glows, creating light.... this conversion process thus reducing the efficiency.... not to mention the enviromental hazards of mercury

HOWever.... LEDs right now are more of a spotlight variety... its hard to find an LED with a viewing angle of more than 100 deg....this is alright if you have multiple LEDs (eg an LED strip) or you angle many LEDs to get a good spread of light comparable to a CFL... therefore, its not good for reading/TV, but alright for lighting up the porch/garage/yard

in the long run, LEDs beat out CFLs in terms of cost(initial bulb cost, electricity bill)... its just that the light output per LED is not the best right now.

you probably can get a $10 Cree 1-Watt LED bulb(they make really efficient LEDs as seen by this article) on eBay.. it only outputs 160 lumens (a 23Watt-$3 CFL outputs 1600 lumens, but only lasts 1/6 as long as an LED bulb)... i'm beginning to play around with LEDs, hopefully by the next few years we can get a 2-Watt LED-equivalent of a 23W-CFL

Also, to the people who ask whether reducing the heat output of light bulbs mean spending more $ in heating: light bulbs are usually on the ceiling : hot air rises, kinda useless?.... and the energy spent can be used on heaters.... you gain $ by spending less on air-conditioners during the summer

how many time to have this tecnologies in our (not rich) houses in your opinion? Mark

Cree seems to be the leader in developing Brighter and Better LED chips, these show up in commercially available bulbs usually 6 to 12 months after development. Seem like we can develop the technology in the USA, but it all gets produced overseas. For some information on LED light bulbs, you can visit www.DonsGreenStore.com .

The energy source is becoming more and more difficult problem that govenments have to face.
As a member of the human being, we have the reponsbily to care this issue. The LEDs are great products: save energy, no UV, long lifetime etc.
The LED lights will change our daily life greatly.
Our company try to produce more products to fit the increasing market.

For all the doubters out there. Check out the Myth Busters. They did side by side bulb testing... The LEDs they used KICKED BUTT. ALL other bulbs failed after the torture test except the LED. It was also the winner in power consumption. Yes they are more expensive, but the price will come down...
Every bulb in my place except the fridge, the oven and the microwave are CFL's, I only wish I could switch to LED. My current electric bil is $15 a month.

Led are the lighting is one of the brightest ideas for the future and it's here right now. The energy consumption is so much less then anything out there with out the hazards. My company sells bulbs for 50. per bulb on larger orders. They last 60,000 hours, have 277 led's per tube and give out more light then a 40 watt T series fluorescent. Our tubes are 15 watts and run on line voltage 120-277 volts Require no ballast and operate 60% less energy then the typical fluorescent tube. We have clients that are benifiting by the 100's of 1000's of dollars per year. Yes they are expensive but their cost is far less then the amt of dollars they save during their life span. This is a home run for any school or office building. Sorry if this seems like an advertisement but we need this in the world. We need it bad. All the schools in Nj have big cuts in the budget and this is a real lifesaver for many that see the light and do the changeover to LEDs. If you want the name of my company see it in my profile. My website has a calculator. Play with the number and you will see how much money larger energy/lighting users will save let along saving our natural resources.

While the use of energy is interesting, all I see is shift in color temperature. 'The before,' is somewhere in the 4200 degrees Kelvin, while the after is closer to daylight 5600 degrees Kelvin. I wish that lighting manufactures paid more attention to Kelvin and how humans instinctively respond to it. The campfire was warm, the sky was cool.

And the number one reason to choose LED lights over CFL... they're MERCURY FREE!

No need to evacuate the office building hire an environmental cleanup firm for a broken light bulb. Put that into your CFI ROI calculations.

Phil

I just purchased two LED bulbs for my home.
They were under $6.00 EA. from a local chain dept. store (Wal..something). The lights consume 1.5W for eq. to 40W Incandescent. A CFL consumes approx. 9W for 40W equivalent. The package says 30,000 hour life. They do put out the bright blue-white light but that works fine for my porch light and my office.
Manufactured by Lights of America but they don't have them listed on the website yet. I'm going to be replacing more CFLs every payday. Even after running all night I can touch the bulb and it is at room temperature. Other thoughts, laundry room, entry way, have to try it in the refrigerator.

In regards to the comment above that electricity is cheap, is that only in North America? Because here in Australia, and certainly in the UK, the cost of electricity is astronomical. This is being increased by even more by our governments to stop the wasteful use of energy (the best way to stop something is to hit the most vulnerable spot, the wallet).

In regards to the warmth of the lighting, there are many companies that use both warm and cool LEDs, this company as an example. www.brightgreen.net.au. They estimate that with power usage where it is in Australia, the break even point on these lights is somewhere near the 2.5 year mark, then you still have another 28 years left of product use!! Or look at the UK which has even higher costs for power.

Further to the above issue, here in australia they have recently changed the lighting regulations for new homes as halogen down-lights have been the leading cause of house-fires for the last 10 years. When you have something in your roof running at 100 degrees Celsius or more, is it any wonder that people who have 60 in their home are a high fire risk?

FYI, There is a new technology called plasma lighting which is even more efficient than LEDs. Plasma lights can produce 140 lumems/watt and produce almost negligible heat.

It is very interesting to know that LED can reduce energy cost in buildings.

I would like to know if the electricity consumption is so low then can we use batteries to power these lights. Further these batteries could be charged from solar panels also.

Can any body throw more information on this?

I like LED Zeppelin.

Interesting stuff. It would have been neat too have seen the consumption drop-off graphically. It's difficult to understand how a building is performing just by looking at a monthly bill. When you can see your usage in real time it's a real eye opener.

For real time energy monitoring checkout this blog and the 31 Tannery Project...
http://31tanneryproject.blogspot.com/

A lot has changed since this article came out about LED Lights. Take a look at our website to get an update about the new technologies: www.todae.com.au