No more twisty bulbs for me! I’ve installed a new LED lighting system for my home that beats twisty bulbs in every way. It has been awhile since I discussed technology here, so this will be an interesting diversion for many readers.
I’ve always been a fan of alternate energy and improved energy efficiency, and I don’t just write about it like some people we know, I do things about it. I try out new things, I do the work. Longtime readers of my blog know that I’ve done two solar power projects, drive an electric car for my local short distance jaunts (I have two now, a really sharp new model, but that’s another story). I’ve put a 10KW solar array on my home, plus a 125 KW solar array on one of our local schools when I was a school trustee. I’ve retrofitted my home with CFL’s in some places, as well as installed timer switches on many of our most commonly used lights. I live in an an Energy Star rated home. However, I’ve not been all that pleased with the lighting that came with the house. Now I’ve changed the largest wattage draw of lighting in my house from incandescent to LED lighting.
No matter what you think about the veracity of global warming claims, there’s really not much of an argument anyone can make against improved energy efficiency as a way of reducing all emissions, not just CO2. Literally, CO2 sucks all the oxygen out of the energy efficiency issue. The goals of full spectrum pollutant reduction can also be accomplished via improved energy efficiency, and with much less rancor, in my opinion.
I’ve never liked the twisty fluorescent bulbs, even when practically given away. They are slow to illuminate, don’t live up to manufacturer’s lifetime claims, and contain toxic mercury making them a disposal hazard. Watts to like?
Up until now, I hadn’t liked the color temperature of the light that LED bulbs had put out. They were mostly a harsh blue-white. Now, that’s been solved.
So that was my weekend project, improving my energy efficiency. It was painless, fast, and the result was fantastic.
The problem: 5 recessed incandescent lighting fixtures each with a 65 watt bulb for a total draw of 325 watts. My kids leave the hallway lights on constantly as it is the most trafficked area of the house.
The solution: swap in LED recessed lighting fixtures at 12 watts each for a total draw of 60 watts
A liberal professor friend in the bay area (who also happened to be best man at my wedding) turned me on to these new recessed incandescent fixture replacements from a company called CREE Lighting. I was impressed the first moment I saw the light they produced. It was warm, not harsh, and even better, it worked on a dimmer control.
The neatest trick with these lights is that they combine yellow and white LED’s in a matrix to get a color temperature that is 2700K or 3500K (your choice) which makes them give similar light to incandescents. Here’s what they look like inside:
Besides making less heat through lower power consumption, They also seal against the ceiling better than incandescent recessed lighting fixtures which are essentially open to the attic.
Here is what it looks like outside:
I bought one for my office immediately, to put directly over my desk, replacing a 75 watt flood in a recessed fixture. It worked out great, so I decided to do my entire house hallway of 5 fixtures.
Here’s the details on this new technology:
Product Description
The LR6 is a downlight module for new construction and retrofit that installs easily in most standard six inch recessed IC or non-IC housings. The LR6 generates white light with LED’s in a new way that enables an unprecedented combination of light output, high efficacy, beautiful color, and affordability. U.S. Patent # 7,213,940 issued. Numerous patents pending.
Performance Summary
• Utilizes Cree TrueWhite™ technology
• Nominal delivered light output = 650 lumens
• Nominal input power = 10.5 Watts
• CRI = 90
• CCT = 2700K or 3500K
• Dimmable to 20%
• Three Year Warranty
Cree TrueWhite™ Technology
• A better way to generate white light that utilizes a patented mixture of unsaturated yellow and saturated red LEDs.
• Tuned to optimal color point before shipment.
• Color management system maintains color consistency over time and temperature.
• Designed to last 50,000 hours and maintain at least 70%
of initial lumen output.
Construction
• Durable die-cast aluminum upper housing, lower housing, and upper cover.
• Integrated thermal management system conducts heat away from LED’s and transfers it to the surrounding environment. LED junction temperatures stay below specified maximums even when installed in attic insulation with temperatures exceeding 60 degrees Celsius.
Optical System
• Proprietary optical system utilizes a unique combination of reflective and refractive optical components to achieve a uniform, comfortable appearance. Pixelation and direct view of unshielded LED’s is eliminated.
• White Lower Reflector balances brightness of refractor with the ceiling to create comfortable high-angle appearance. Works with refractor to deliver an optimized distribution that illuminates walls and vertical surfaces increasing the perception of spaciousness.
Electrical System
• Integral, high efficiency driver and power supply. Power factor > 0.9 Input voltage = 120V, 60Hz
• Dimmable to 20% with certain incandescent dimmers (reference www.CreeLEDLighting.com for recommended dimmers)
Regulatory and Voluntary Qualifications
• Tested and certified to UL standards. Suitable for damp locations.
• Utilize GU-24 base for new construction projects in California or other areas where high efficacy line voltage sockets are required.
• Exceeds California Title-24 high efficacy luminaire requirements.
• ENERGY STAR® qualified Solid-State Lighting Luminaire.
Full Spec sheet here
The company has a savings calculator here
Installation was easy. I’ve photo documented it below. If you are interested in reading how, here is the installation manual in PDF form, and more info here.
FIRST and most importantly: turn off your a/c circuit breaker that supplies power to the lights.
The box:
The contents:
The top with special socket:
One of the five incandescent flood lights to be replaced:
Beginning disassembly, take out the bulb, pull down the trim ring:
Squeeze the spring clips and pop them off:
Cut the wires off the existing socket:
Install the wire splice block:
Add the new socket and crimp the splice block:
Socket installed:
Final step, all it takes is two twists. I couldn’t hold the camera and do this so I’m relying on diagrams. Twist the socket onto the fixture, push the fixture into the hole and twist until it locks into place:
New LED fixture installed:
Can you tell which ones are the incandescent floods and which one is the LED light?
The one in the foreground is the LED lighting. It puts out more light than the floods it replaced, and uses 1/5th the energy.
All done, three in the main hall, one in each side hallway are not shown:
Want one? Get them here from a company that operates in my town, called Lighting Direct:
UPDATE: I got called away before I could finish this post, so here’s a few more points on why I’ve done this swap.
1) I’m usually an early adopter of technology, this is something I’ve been looking forward to. But it is not for everybody yet.
2) I bought a 5 pack, so I got 20% off. You can call the company at the link listed above and ask for similar discounts. There’s also other sources online: here, here. Some commenters have asked about screw in LED models, here’s one also based on CREE’s patented LED illumination engine.
3) In California, I won’t be able to buy incandescent bulbs soon. This was my way of beating the state mandate on my own terms.
4) These have an advertised life of 50,000 hours. I figure if they log 8 hours per day, I’ll get 17 years out of them. They’ll pay back long before that.
5) CFL floods aren’t that cheap either, and from experience I only get 2 years out of them. For example I can buy a CFL flood at my local ACE Hardware for $14.99 plus tax. If I have to replace it every 2 years, I’m into some significant cash and significant disposal issues in a few years. Even with the higher cost of the LED units, I see myself as still being ahead in the long run and I’m not generating mercury toxic waste.
6) These lights are sealed, so there’s no air leakage to/from the attic. This should help on heating/cooling issues since when the wind blew above 15mph I could feel air being blown into the old recessed lighting fixtures. Not anymore. It will keep dust and attic insulation fibers out of the house also.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks for the article Anthony as it gives me some ideas about using LED’s in my house. Living in Kamloops we do get cold weather although usually not much below -20 C. LED’s will function very well at these temperatures unlike fluorescent lamps which just give a dim glow at the ends (the long tube types) and CFLs don’t work. I have a workshop that is unheated unless I’m in it and during the winter I have to chop kindling using an LED windup flashlight for light and after an hour or so the wood stove will have warmed up the fluorescent lamps enough so that they will come on. I have motion sensitive lights all around my house and will have to ensure I have a 20 year supply of incandescent bulbs for these as only these, or LED’s will work in the winter.
The other thing that doesn’t get mentioned much about CFL’s is that they are the only consumer product that will fail in an explosive manner. I’ve had 4 CFL’s self destruct with one of them showing burn marks on the outside. Taking these units apart revealed that the failed part appeared to be an electrolytic capacitor in every case and there was considerable scorching of the PC board and adjacent components around the capacitor. These electrolytic capacitor failures are eerily reminiscent of the exploding electrolytics problems on computer motherboards in 2000-2001 and I lost 3 motherboards to this failure with one having actually caught on fire but the fire was contained within the computer tower case. I no longer use CFL’s and all of my fluorescent lighting is the long tube lights which I really like and they last for a very long time unlike CFL’s.
While I like conventional fluorescents they are electrically extremely noisy. When I worked in electrophysiology we had the lighting in the experimental room changed to IC and turned off the fluorescent lighting in adjacent parts of the lab as the interference at 60 Hz and 120 Hz was incredible even with our attempts to make the experimental room into a partial Faraday cage (there were two doors going into it and we did need AC power). We were recording signals that were <1 mV and this gives one a real appreciation of how much electrical noise surrounds us.
My only LED lighting now is some 1W bulbs that I got on sale and I have them installed at various places around my house and leave them on constantly and have wired them without switches. They are barely visible during the day but provide quite adequate illumination at night. I have an upper deck which is good for astronomical observations and I've got this lit up with a 1 W red LED which lets one see where one is walking but doesn't destroy night vision.
Most people do not know this, but if you use electric heat, your power utility and the law of conservation of energy have a special deal for you: As long as you are heating your home, the power for all electric appliances that dissipate their energy within the heated area of your home is essentially free. This is because the heat from these appliances will also heat your home reducing the energy required by the main system.
If you are using another form of heating, you save the differential cost. Of course, when you turn on the air conditioner, the deal is off.
Well, you are comparing apples to pine-apples…
You replaced a 65w CFL… there is no such thing. There is a CFL equivelant to a 65w incandessant. That draws 13w max, and tapers down to 10w, which is less than your LEDS. Those lights also produce 900+ lumens, which is more than the light output of that LED replacement.
You could have just moved to a lower CFL light which matches that lumens, and that would be only 8 watts, which is more efficient than the LED light, with the same output.
By the way… if you were paying $14 for a CFL, and it only lasted you 2 years… you got ripped twice. Most energy-star lighting has 5-10 year replacement guarantees for CFL’s, and those only cost about $1.50 in most places. (You purchased a special “Flood” that was “Dimmable”, which was just pointless. Dimmable lights draw more power than any equivelant other light, unless you have a super expensive digital lighting dimmer. The dimmer consumes the power that the dimmed light would normally produce, which is why they get hot and burn-out. The fact that you used a dimmer, is partially the reason why you killed the lights so fast.)
Notice that the LED’s have large heat-sinks on the back… that is because they waste more power than they say. Thoe heat-sinks are to disipate the massive heat generated by the power-driver for the LEDs. LED’s only operate on low voltage, so they need a wastefull power-driver. The LED bulbs themselves consumes 10.5w, but the voltage-driver consumes twice that much. Hook it up to a “Kill-a-watt”, and you will see the true power. The CFL was clearly the beter choice. CFL’s use a high-frequency driver, which is also a higher voltage, so it consumes less.
The new CFL’s are even better. They produce more light than the older CFL’s, and are smaller, and consume less power, and obviously they produce less heat.
It’s amazing how “heat sinks” are presumed to be power wasting devices. The very existence of a heat sink is evidence of its power wasting function.
A 60 Watt incandescent lamp doesn’t have any heat sink on it; well not that you would notice it; so it clearly can’t be wasting any power. Of course it operates at far too high a temperature to be safe to touch or have in contact with flammable materials; or even inflammable materials.
So it might be about 3 inches in diameter for the main bulb, and occupy about 250 CC of space. It is generating probably 50 Watts of “heat”, which is about 200 mWatts per cc. or if you like 200 microwatts per cubic mm. Totally peanuts power density that nobody would even notice.
A “One Watt” LED chip on the other hand is about 1 mm square, and maybe 1/4 mm thick. It runs at around 3 Volts and 350 mAmps of current for its one Watt of input power; and it has an internal quantum efficiency that is very close to 100% so all of that one Watt is converted into light. Unfortunately, much of the light is trapped inside the die, by Total Internal Reflection; due to the high refractive index of the LED wide bandgap semiconductors. But the best modern chip designs have been able to achieve over 50% external quantum efficiency, so about half a Watt of light is emitted, and the rest gets re’absorbed and converted into about 1/2 a Watt of heat; all inside that 1/4 cubic mm of LED die; for a “heat” density of about two Watts per cubic mm as compared to the 200 microWatts per cubic mm of a 60 Watt incandescent lamp. That is 10,000 times the power density for the LED lamp; compared to the incandescent.
Now the incandescent thrives on heat; that is what makes it work; but the LED would rather stay cool; preferrably with a junction temperature under 100 deg C. Oh the chip itself can operate ok at 200 deg C or more, but the optical packaging materials need to be kept below 100.
So we have a 1/4 cubic mm device that is dissipating 10,000 times the energy density of a 60 Watt light bulb of incandescent technology, yet it needs to be kept below 100 deg C or thereabouts.
Long ago, people figured out how to take large amounts of heat, and transfer that from a tiny space to a much larger space, form whence it can be dissipated to the surrounding environment, without the source temperature having to get extremely hot.
They call these devices “Heat sinks” for obvious reasons, the couple compact heat sources to cool surrounding environments.
LED lamps use heat sinks to keep that high energy density light source cool.
I’ve designed and built houses and commercial buildings my whole life, and I have a background in lighting design, so I know what i want.
I have a houseful of digital wallbox dimmers, each of which has a minimum connected load of 50 watts. I like the color of incandescent lamps, and I keep all of my sources dimmed to some extent pretty much all of the time. As a result, CF lamps are not an option for me, except in closets and exterior lighting fixtures which were designed to use edison base lamps. I use them in those locations.
In my office, I have a pendant fixture that uses F40 3000K ultralume, high-CRI lamps, in addition to incandescent fixtures for ambient lighting, although I was careful to design the space for ample daylighting.
I recently remodeled my kitchen, and I purchased very inexpensive LED strip lights for undercabinet lighting. http://www.inspiredled.com/products-display.html. Installation is a snap, but even the warm white color is a bit cool to my taste. LED strips are excellent for this type of application, and for other applications in which the LED is incorporated into a product.
Here’s an example: http://www.led-lighting-systems.net/index.cfm?dsp=led-systems
The balance of the fixtures in the room are either 120-volt 50 PAR 20 in cans) or 12-volt halogen (MR_16 in a strip).
I like Steve J’s reference to VU1 Technology, which uses a new technology that they call Electron Stimulated Luminescence. They tout it as: • perfect light quality
• instant-on
• ability to fully dim
http://www.vu1.com/technology/technology.htm
My point is that the market for lighting fixtures and lamps is large, varied, and innovative, and it irritates me to be told what kind of lamp Ihave to use by a government that always makes the wrong bet on technology. The market, left to its own devices will offer an amazing variety of choices.
CFL is a transitory technology that will soon be outmoded. Unfortunately, in some places, it will be mandated by statute, and that’s the crime.
The flaw with all of these systems.
$98 for one light bulb with a 3 year warranty (LEDs might last 50 years, but will the rest of it?). How much of that $98 is from energy input? What kinds of expensive and bad chemicals went into it and in producing it? Is there much chance of this cost coming down to a reasonable sub $10 range that would make it economically viable?
You obviously can afford this, and since it works for you, that is awesome.
Great. How do you like the light?
It seems to me LEDs are a good choice for work areas like bathroom and kitchen that need to be brightly lit. I’ve tried replacing my incadescent floodlights with CFEs but they were just not bright enough and I felt like I couldn’t see. I think maybe I’ll try the same thing.
Anthony,
Food for thought
I pulled this comment from a CBC news article, link at end of the comment.
iball68 wrote..
As a professional energy engineer I partially agree with the aforementioned study. Using CFL reduce your energy consumption by the % saving will depend on the type and efficiency of the heating system. Lets do the math: Assume lights on in living room, total 200 W, and lights on in kitche 300 W. Assume heating in living room is 2000 W and 1000 W in kitchen. It is known that 90% of energy of incadescent light bulb is emitted as heat, thus assume 500 W x 0.9 = 450 W waste heat going into the occupied space. This represents 15 % of the available heating when the lights are on. Now, we replace the light bulbs with CFL, that has 1/3 of the energy at same light ouput. Thus we now have 0.33 x 500 W = 167 W of energy input. It is known that CFL emit approximately 80% as waste heat, therefore, we now have 133 W of extra heat available, which represents only 4.4 % of the available heating. This means that the waste heat reduced by 10.6 %. In terms of total % energy savings accounting for the “free waste heat”, for electric heating we calculate as follows: 100% – [(3000-133) W + 166 W]/[(3000-450)W+ 500W] = 3.7%. In the case of oil/gas heating, assuming on average 75% effeciency, all heat output is divided by 0.75. Thus the energy savings % is calculated as follows: 100% – [(4000-177) W + 166 W]/[(4000-600)W+ 500W]=14.8% savings. Therefore, greater savings can be accrued if you are heating with oil/gas. There is another issue that the author of the Winnipeg study does not account for is the color rendering index of the lights. CFL have lower CRI than incadenscent lighting. In other words, most people can attest that CFL feel cooler, because they emit less range of natural light as compared with incadesent bulbs. Jury is still out, but definetly there are savings.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/03/04/mb-light-bulbs.html#ixzz0fLFpymrd
I should have mentioned this first
Efficient lighting equals higher heat bills: study
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/03/04/mb-light-bulbs.html
Extremely interesting and informative discussion on where the public stands with regulation of lighting and the general perception of CFL and LED lighting products. I can tell you from experience, I work for an online LED lighting retailer: http://www.polar-ray.com, that the Cree LR6 product has lived up to the expectations of 98% of our customers who have purchased the product. We are selling hundreds of them a week at this point in both the warm white (2700K and neutral white (3500K) color temperatures. To clear up a misconception from a poster above, the LR6 has an extremely high CRI of 92, and most of the feedback from our customers is that they feel they could replace up to a 75W PAR lamp with the LR6. Putting that into perspective, you would be running 6 LR6’s with slightly less energy usage than one 75W lamp. Many suppliers are currently stating the energy consumption of the LED chip(s) as opposed to the lamp or fixture and this can be a very misleading figure, but Cree’s power consumption figure is for the fixture and we’ve measured that with our Kill-a-watt meter to confirm. Cree has recently switched to making the LR6 in the USA and that is another selling point for some. Also, they do have a new product coming out this summer called the Cree CR6 which will carry a suggested retail of approx. $60.
As to the initial pricing and the state of the LED lighting market right now. It only makes sense from an ROI perspective to start replacing your highest usage lights with LEDs because that is where you will see the quickest payback, or in certain locations there can be some rebates or incentives from local government or energy suppliers that help subsidize the purchase. If you care about the broader perspective of environmental impact and using eco-friendly products, there are some great studies out there that detail the reduced amount of carbon emissions and required power plants should we as a nation cut back our energy usage, and approximately 25% of residential energy usage comes from lighting. Throwing away fewer light bulbs every year, especially those incorrectly disposed of CFLs, is a benefit too. I can’t tell you how many calls we get from customers who absolutely hate CFL bulbs and don’t see them as a viable alternative to incandescent. They complain about the slow warm up time which leads to the “blooming” effect, product that burns out or explodes prematurely or don’t work well in the cold, and some aren’t even aware of the mercury content and the special disposal requirements.
As of Feb 2010, no one is currently selling an honest to goodness replacement for a 60W incandescent A bulb, so don’t be fooled by the exaggerated statements. We travel to the light shows in China and visit the factories where the LED bulbs we stock are produced and therefore have a pretty good idea of what claims are totally unsubstantiated by fact. We are getting close to that product being available but we aren’t there yet. There are a lot of great LED products on the market, but you have to do your homework and separate out the junk that many retailers are carrying.
Just finished reading about your switch to LED lights and I’m so excited! Thanks so much for walking your readers through the process. Just so you know, Anthony & other readers, each month at Cree we give away five of our Cree LR6 recessed lights on http://CreeLEDRevolution.com as part of a photo contest. We would love to see some of you submit poor lighting photos for a chance to win.
I just switched out the Halogen lighting in my kitchen. Its a vaulted ceiling, and a big space so I had 8 – 75watt Halogens=600watts! Naturally, I wanted to replace this energy hog, but found solutions to expensive. So I’m at Costco last week here in Phoenix, and they have 4-packs of CFL Flood light style lighting for only $4.50 with at the register state discounts! So I replaced my 600w with 112W for $9.00, and it looks even brighter that before! Now I’m going to use them in all my Arroyo Craftsman lights!
This is very interesting. Looks like the primary distinction of LED vs fluorescent continues to be in factors other than energy savings, as LED’s put out less light-per-watt than CFL., especially as the brightness goes up (standard 4 foot fluorescents now get 100+ lumens/watt; these Cree units get 62 lm/w.)
LED: longer life, better dimming, quick-start, no mercury
CFL: much lower cost
It will be very exciting to see if/when the long-term LED problem gets resolved: high brightness LED’s currently use a ton of power…
It is interesting , I am also slowly chnging all the lights in to LED lights. I also sell the LED solar lighting systems.
I would like to know how the Corbon credit can be calculated for using 50 Watts of LED street light in place of 150W of Mercury lamps?
the article itself, as well as 90% of the comments, are but a giant PR piece. There is nothing wrong with traditional light bulbs. As a non-“professional energy engineer”, and as a non- “specialist this or that”, I would like to go through some rather simple facts without indulging in (high)tech- fetishism. As was reported, 2-5% (give or take a few-depending on the region and the source) of electricity usage goes to home lighting. Yet this is the first target of the “energy efficiency” campaign? Straight into your living room. Someone here reported 25% of residential energy usage goes to lighting. That is a different category altogether, and is of no great importance for this particular discussion. Most of the time you want artificial light in your home, you also want heat. If you need additional light in your home during the summer, I propose a window. Classical light bulbs are dirt cheap, easy to install, and contain no harmful materials. Hardly ever do you need the full 80-100 (or more) watts of any given light bulb for any significant length of time. LEDs are expensive, require love for fashion and solving various technical problems. The technology is heavily patented and it wouldnt be in the least surprising if after a few burned down houses, they required a certified person to install them. There go the “cost-efficiency” and “energy efficiency”. How much energy does it take to produce them? and such things as “durable die-cast aluminum housings”? How much energy does a 300ft yacht of a “major company” CEO consume? And all the other people making loads of money on this fad? Nope, it is the kitchen light bulb sector that is of most concern. If there are any cost-energy savings in this technology for large consumers they will use it anyway. No ban necessary. So what is the ban good for? Well, they might just have to check your house once in a while to make sure you are not braking the law. And it doesnt take a genius to notice the corelation between the new “emerging” “energy-efficient” patented products, AGW, and a ban on those bad old light bulbs. And this goes for el. cars as well. How much energy does it take to develop, produce, and sell electric cars, ship them and build the infrastructure to power them (especially “sustainable” infrastructure) compared to say an old style “european” (small) car with a lifetime of 20 years or more? Especially if you dont drive all that much. And why do most people need to drive a lot? well, to go to work producing windmills, electrical cars, “low energy houses”, marketing them etc. :). Not to mention the “executive branches” involved. And given the “new standards” each 10-15 years, and trashing the old, how is that efficient? I live in a 70yr old brick house, grow a lot of what I eat, heat on wood from an half an acre of my own forest. My electricity consumption is around 2000kwh per year for a family of four. I have no “energy efficient” devices other than the fridge. Fashion doesnt make you happy.
Most of the time you want artificial light in your home, you also want heat. If you need additional light in your home during the summer, I propose a window.
When I want light in my home, I usually just want light. I.e. it’s dark outside. With a well insulated, earth-sheltered home, I’ve run the heat for about 3 hours so far this winter. But I’m not willing to sit in the dark for the 4 hours after sunset before I go to bed.