World’s most energy efficient light bulb

Electronic Products ^ | 01/31/2013 | MELISSA SUE SORRELLS GALLEY

[null and void]

NanoLight surpasses standard fluorescents and LEDs

It may look a little funny, but NanoLight is used to the stares. The futuristic-looking light bulb has an unconventional look big enough to match its unique energy-efficiency.

A 12-watt NanoLight in white.

The bulbs look a bit like a three-dimensional jigsaw puzzle, all sharp corners and seams, because that’s essentially what they are: several small circuit boards with LEDs connected that are cut to fit together. The loose, interconnected design allows the bulb to dissipate more heat than a standard bulb while also directing light in all directions.

“Most bulbs are hidden away in enclosures and never seen,” say NanoLight’s creators, Gimmy Chu, Tom Rodinger, and Christian Yan. “The look should not be important. In certain installations though, we think the NanoLight is quite fitting, offering a unique futuristic look. We can’t wait to see what people do with them.”

Currently, NanoLight comes in 10W and 12W bulbs. While the 10W uses 50% less energy than a compact fluorescent bulb with the same light output, the 12W is NanoLight’s breakthrough product. The bulb generates more than 1600 lumens, equivalent to a 100W incandescent light bulb. That works out to a little more than 133 lumens per watt — about 200% more efficient than other light bulbs on the market.

10-watt black NanoLight in a desk lamp.

Despite its incredible efficiency, both versions of NanoLight stay cool to the touch even after hours of use. And, unlike compact fluorescent lights, the NanoLight achieves full brightness the instant it is turned on, eliminating the slow, flickering effect.

The project almost immediately surpassed its $20,000 goal on Kickstarter with more than 2,000 backers pledging over $100,000. Until March 8, you can add your pledge to the campaign. A 10W bulb is available for a $30 pledge, while the 12W version requires a $45 pledge.

Despite their success, Chu, Rodinger, and Yan continue to improve on NanoLight. They’re working with a graphic designer on the possibility of printing artwork onto the bulb and are also developing a dimmable prototype of NanoLight.

To learn more about NanoLight, visit the Kickstarter page. ■

[null and void]

Assuming the bulb is on ~20 hrs a week?

[Uncle Miltie]

22 hours per week, the U.S. Average.

Your mileage may vary. ;-)

[fireman15]

According to a “cost calculator” I found here, assuming the cost of electricity they provide, the cost of running a 100 watt bulb for 40 hours a week over a year is $127.02. While the cost of running a 12 watt bulb would be $15.24.

I used the same calculator. 40 hours a week comes out to 5.7 hours per day, I put in the national average of $.11 per kilowatt hour. Your cost calculator said that the cost to run a 100 watt light bulb for a year was $20. If you had your 100 watt light bulb running 24 hours a day for a year... the cost would still be only $96.36. What figures did you input?

http://www.citytrf.net/costs_calculator.htm

I am a big fan of LED flash lights, but I don't think that they make good sense yet for interior lighting. But if Comrade Obama gets his way and out rates "necessarily skyrocket" they may pencil out better in the future.

[CGASMIA68]

and does the addition of the other P make it a PNP transistor or something like that.
I remeber some thing from basic tr theory at the NATC as Not Pointed in and Pointed in

[Diogenesis]

Click for semiconductor physics tutorials

[Western Phil]

The problem is not that the LEDs go bad one at a time, but that the Chinese electronics fails and the whole thing goes out.

[Empire_of_Liberty]

It looks like one of these Chinese “cottage industry” products. They send out boxes of parts to peasants who hand-assemble them in their own homes. All twisting-wires and snap-together assembly, no soldering.

Hard to believe that mass mechanized production wouldn’t be cheaper, but the people have to have something to do, right? The LED’s are probably made at some factory set up by a Western company and these are just the ones that fell off of the back of the truck.

[UCANSEE2]

My Tiffany lamps wouldn’t appreciate these.

Changing the cube surfaces from 'white' to 'mirrored' would make a big difference in their 'look'.

[null and void]

Given your assumptions my numbers are in close agreement with yours. I get about 3.8 years.

Given the low end 25,000 hour estimated life, it would last about 22 years.

That would save you about $260 in energy costs assuming the current rates don’t go up.

Given Chinese manufacturing quality? You’d about break even...

[jeffc]

.....the cost of running a 100 watt bulb for 40 hours a week over a year is $127.02.

I must be missing something somewhere (like brain cells, I'm told!). My kilowatt hour is 10.4 cents. A 100 watt bulb will burn a kilowatt in 10 hours. That's 10.4 cents (+ tax....). 40 hours a week would be 41.6 cents. Times 52 (for a year) would be $21.63. For a regular 100 watt incandescent bulb.

Did I calculate wrong? BTW, 75 watt is the brightest we use, except for porch lights. Normally, it's a 60 watter in each light fixture.

[Uncle Miltie]

I should have said, “About the end of the fourth year in use”, which is exactly 3.793 years by my calculations. We disagree by 23 hours.

:-)

[Red Badger]

PNP & NPN are transistors. A single PN junction is a Diode.......

[1Old Pro]

It’s great for applications when you want constant on - 168 hours per week.

[1Old Pro]

It’s great for applications when you want constant on - 168 hours per week.

[null and void]

3.796848188 by mine.

[AndyTheBear]

Oh my bad...I put 40 hours in the "per day"! Some how I read it as "per week"! Good catch Fireman. I used the 8.7 cost per killowat hour they had by default.

Revised with an 8 hour "day"...it takes $25.40 per year for the 100 watt standard and $3.05 for the 12 watt LED...so we are looking at maybe 2 years rather than 6 months to get your investment back if the LED is around 45 bucks.

[Uncle Miltie]

You’re living up to the accuracy of your name.

Being Uncle Miltie, my answer is close enough. The decreasing returns to the marginal effort applied to achieve more accuracy are not worth the marginal gains.

:-)

[Little Ray]

I bought the biggest LED light bulb in Home Depot to try out on my reading lamp. It was hideously expensive and didn’t put near enough light to read by.

Keep trying. Meanwhile, I’m sticking with incandescent.

[Eye of Unk]

Emp or brownouts will kill an Led quickly

[Romulus]

The payback period is a lot faster than anyone’s suggesting, because no one’s taking into account the heat produced by incandescent bulbs, which requires costly air conditioning to remove.