Commentary: LEDs for lighting, but only if it makes sense

Feb. 18, 2009
Rather than promoting LEDs as the ultimate and immediate alternative to CFLs and incandescents, the LED industry should continue to penetrate the applications where LEDs make most sense.
While I was away in December, enjoying the delights of New Zealand, Europe moved a step closer to banning the energyhungry incandescent lamp. Legislation has yet to be ratified and will need to be approved on a country by country basis, but the clear intention is to remove from sale the most inefficient lamps, in a tiered manner, so that before too long it won’t be possible to buy most types of incandescent lamp.

Whether or not you think this is a good idea depends on your viewpoint. Purely based on energy consumption, it certainly sounds sensible – but only if you believe the numbers concerning relative energy consumption of incandescent lamps versus CFLs. Clearly, the mercury content of CFLs should be a concern, but apparently not to European legislators. Other groups point out that CFLs are totally unsuitable for certain applications. Their light quality can leave a lot to be desired, and can even cause problems for people with poor vision.


This article was published in the January/February 2009 issue of LEDs Magazine.

To read the full version of this article, please visit our Magazine page, where you can download FREE electronic PDF versions of all issues of LEDs Magazine.

You can also request a print copy of LEDs Magazine (available by paid subscription) and sign up for our free weekly email newsletter.