Skip to comments.Lighting Al Fresco (A better way: Induction Lighting courtesy of Tesla!)
Posted on 01/25/2012 2:55:32 PM PST by dickmc
Surprisingly, there is a better --not well known-- energy efficient lighting solution than LED for roads, factories, and the like. Interestingly, Tesla invented it! It's called induction lighting.
From the latest issue of Distributed Energy magazine...
"While its more expensive than traditional lighting, it is cheaper than LED. However, it has other benefits, such as long life, due to electrode-less technology. Because there are no parts inside the lamp, it lasts forever, which Shelton equates to 100,000 hours or roughly 20 years if left on around the clock.
LED is an adequate source light, Shelton explains, but it dissipates quicklyinduction does not. Well-suited to high-space, high-bay areas, it works well in parking lots, garage structures, and cobra head streetlights. Induction lighting also uses 60% less power than traditional lighting.
Not another light puts out the same lumens per watt ratio, says Shelton.
(Excerpt) Read more at distributedenergy.com ...
Its catching on now. If their goal is to save money, reduce maintenance, and get the same or better light, induction is the way people will go, states Shelton.
Shelton points out that he considers Blue Sky unbiased, because they distribute both induction and LED lighting. Were on the leading edge, he says. We see induction as the best choice for exterior high-space high-bay applications.
Others agree. Shelton lists projects that include tunnel lighting in Atlanta for the Georgia Department of Transportation, the testing phase of a walkway lighting retrofit in the City of Augusta, GA, and the fact that the Florida DOT uses only induction lighting in their signage.
Eglin Air Force Base in Valparaiso, FL, chose EverLast induction cobra head streetlight fixtures due to the energy and maintenance savings and because of limitations on where LEDs can be used. In addition to reducing their lighting energy consumption by 50%, they discovered the new lighting produces better illumination than the LED streetlights available, according to a statement from Blue Sky.
For information on how induction lighting works see How Inductions Lamps Work
For more info on Blue Sky see here.
BTW, I have no financial interest in any of this. I simply found it fascinating that a Tesla-based light source that I had never heard about was actually commercial today.
“While its more expensive than traditional lighting...”
Well, then LET’S GET IT!!!
It has been available in the industrial market for several years, trying to compete with HID lighting (High Pressure Sodium Vapor, Metal Halide, etc).
It has not been widely used due to cost and many believe it never will as the industrial LED lighting is quickly falling in price.
Just so happens that today I got a case of 100W incandescents which should last me for a while (only use them in a few reading lamps.) I'm hoping that will be time for some of the more promising technologies to develop. Maybe this is one of them.
It is interesting (and frustrating) that Congress wasn't able to repeal the stupid ban, but, then, the damage had been done. American bulb manufacturers had already closed their plants and capital had been shifted to other products.
Who is this guy Al Fresco?
He dines out with a lot of people.
They always say, “We’re dining with Al Fresco”....................
Wouldn't that be 70% savings?
Here’s the problem: “Solid state circuitry then converts this DC current to a very high frequency which is between 2.65 and 13.6 MHz depending on lamp design. “
We have more than enough RF pollution without this crap. Keep the gummint out of the market, let technology and natural demand work, and the best solutions will emerge.
This ain’t gonna be it.
We need another Tesla, but it won’t happen if we have another Obama.
Tesla would flee to China if he were alive today.
What are you considering 'RF Pollution'? Broken power line insulators (I hate 'em)? Microwave ovens? WIFI?
This lighting form may be the best solution for certain circumstances, and is already in commercial use without government mandate.
Here's what you do ~ to make it better ~ and able to cut through aluminum foil or set fires at a distance ~ index the wave generator about 45 degrees to the direction of the vacuum tube. Actually, forget the vacuum part ~ fill it with CO2 (or any other gas that can generate light when induced to do so with a radio wave.
Set up your mirrors at both ends of the tube. Leave a small hole for the emission of the coherent wave form.
And these guys got patents on this?
“Coherent...so it can talk?”
Always wear proper eyewear when screwing around with home made lasers or approximations thereof.
I was just quoting Real Genius.(80’s flick with Val Kilmer)
We would be putting induction lights in every government building if one of zero’s donors owned a company that manufactured them....
Don’t confuse high pressure sodium with low pressure.
I hope you didn't use a wireless router or an iphone to post this.
The initial overcoming of the electrical resistence of the copper wire probably eats up a lot of the initial cost, to which once overcome, the cost probably drops a bit.
Doesn’t matter how the drop is arrived; simple “percentage” arithmetic says that a drop from 1000 to 300 is a 70% drop.
I had a sales rep loan me one of these 400 watt high bay induction lamps to demo in a shop I worked at. At the time, we had over a 100 HID lamps rated at a 1000 watts apiece. You could imagine what the electric bill was like. I installed the lamp in a corner area to get an idea of light output and coverage, and was surprised by how well it worked, and it was instant on to boot. The price was roughly double that of a 1000 watt HID fixture and bulb, but the induction lamp was guaranteed to 10 years for light output and against failures.
Although I don’t know the rate of electrical resistence and I don’t need to to teach a principle, but bear with me.
But let’s say that the first 200 watts are awash, as it is used to overcome the electrical resistence.
That would leave the net wattage, to be used for power for the uninducted lighting at 800 watts and 100 watts for the inducted lighting.
In this case, if it were the case, it would mean a savings of 87.5 percent, once you account for the electricity being used just to overcome the initial electrical resistence.
Nope. Doesn’t matter where the power goes.
All the generator that powers the light cares about is that with one, it has to provide 1000 watts, with the other it only has to provide 300 watts.
A 70% reduction.
It may have been a typo then.
Or it could be a innumerate moron writing the article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.