The article kept repeating the same buzz words without every giving any specifics.
They can save a lot of energy which is good, but what else? They make it sound earth-shattering without any proof.
“The article kept repeating the same buzz words without every giving any specifics.”
Welcome to Marketing! Your desk is over in the corner...
Other than eliciting the usual and hilarious luddite reaction from some on FR, this is hype and BS, pure and simple. There is a solid value proposition associated with replacing low-efficiency lighting with LEDs just as there is by replacing open fires with clean burning gas furnaces. But there is no unmet need that can be solved by enabling the street lights on Elm to talk to the street lights on Maple. Other than controlling traffic signals for emergency vehicles (which has been done for 40 years), GEs PR machine is emitting smoke.
As soon as I saw the word “repurposing” I knew it would be a vacuous marketing nothing.