The future of the LED is bulb is, to some extent, already determined. If Haitz’s Law holds true, the technology will become increasingly affordable and, following that, the lamps will become ever more popular. With clear advantages over both incandescent and CFL lighting, LEDs will likely be extremely widespread in four to five years and the other two will continue to wane. The competitors won’t ever go away—for example, Edison and Marconi-style bulbs are available in delightfully old-timey versions—but they will be increasingly relegated to specialty uses, in favor of more efficient technology.
A commonly held belief among people in the industry is that the explosion in growth will come when LED bulbs reach a certain price point. Some insiders put this at about $14, while other accounts predict $10, or even $5. Still, others regard this watershed level as a closely guarded secret and refuse to talk about it. Regardless of the amount, this will mark an inflection point when consumers will begin to clear the mental hurdle of solid state lighting’s high initial price point and understand that it is a more affordable option. It’s going to be a revolution in the consumer lighting industry, even if efficiency of scale prevents this level of pricing to arrive at all manufacturers at the same time.
When the price of CFLs hit about $14, their popularity exploded and mass consumer adoption started. While there is no guarantee that this will happen with LED lighting, growth will start as prices drop, and we can reasonably expect that a sharp increase will occur as bulbs drop below the point that the mainstream consumer finds to be unpalatable.
CFLs experienced a sharp increase in sales in 2007 and reached their peak sales figure that year. Their sales have been steadily declining since the early part of that year and show no signs of improving. Incandescents experienced a small upswing in sales in mid-2010, according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association’s (NEMA) July 2011 numbers. This 1% rise gave incandescents a dominant 79% market share—though the report does not seem to take LEDs into consideration at all. Of course, part of the drop in CFLs was due to their price during hard economic conditions after 2007.
Despite LED sales not yet exploding, hopes are high for the future. In other words, LEDs won’t be left out of reports for much longer. According to recent DisplaySearch numbers, LED lighting usage increased 20% in 2010 and is on the rise. Their figures put LED lighting usage at 1.4% in 2010, and the firm expects it to rise to 9.3% in 2014. Government policies, such as the use of LEDs in street lights, could accelerate this trend. Japan is the largest user of LED bulbs, having an incredible 63% of the market. Additionally, Pike Research estimates that by 2021 LED lamps will have over 50% share of the commercial market. Over the next 10 years, the share of incandescents and fluorescents will drop thanks to SSL, but the report also notes an interesting side effect: the long lives of these lamps will cause a “steady decline in the commercial lamp market.”
One step forward in the movement towards mass LED sales was Home Depot’s release of a sub-$20 LED bulb in August 2010. The Lighting Science Group’s EcoSmart LED A19 bulb was a 40W equivalent (452 lumens). It sold for $19.97, and Home Depot reportedly had trouble keeping them in stock when they were first released because of high demand. Now, less than two years later, that same bulb is still available from Home Depot, but it sells for just $9.97. It’s a clear display of what the technology and scale can do to a growing market, even if it is just one bulb. (That said, it is an in-store exclusive, so we have no way of knowing if it is a loss leader for the company.)
Over time market forces will almost inevitably make LED bulbs the most popular choice, but before then, other factors are putting their thumbs on the scale. The Bright Tomorrow Lighting Prize (better known as the L Prize), held by the US Department of Energy, was designed to promote the usage of solid-state lighting as an alternative to incandescents. The contest consisted of two awards in order to facilitate the replacement the standard 60W incandescent and the PAR 38 halogen incandescent bulb (i.e., indoor flood lights). There is a third prize, but it has yet to be fully defined.
The first prize, for the 60W bulb replacement, was won by Philips Lighting North America in August 2011 with the 10A19/LPRIZE-PRO/2700—essentially, a high-performance version of the AmbientLED. This outcome was something exciting for LED insiders. To win, the bulb had to beat five separate components of the L Prize requirements, including lumen level (over 900 lm), wattage (under 10W), efficacy (over 90 lm/W), CCT (within the range of 2700K–3000K), and finally, an adequate CRI (over 90). The Philips bulb passed with 910 lm, 9.7W, 93.4 lm/W, 2727K, and a CRI rating of 92. Over 200 units of that bulb passed the LM-79 test procedure before the award was granted.
While the prize has been awarded already, the longevity testing is still underway. The 200 bulbs are being run continuously at 45° Celsius, and the data for the first 7,000 hours was used to extrapolate (at 95% confidence) that the bulbs would last the expected 25,000 hours at adequate brightness levels. The testing put the model’s survival rating at 99.3%, while the prize’s requirement called for a mere 70%.
Philips pulled in $10 million for the win, but the the real prize was the improvements that were made. For example, at the time that Philips took home the prize, the company already had a 60W equivalent bulb for sale, the EnduraLED, that ran at 12.3W. Meanwhile, the L Prize-winning design runs at 9.7W, making it over 25% more efficient. The L Prize winner is also brighter, running at over 900 lm while the EnduraLED ran at 800 lumens.
The PAR 38 part of the contest was closed in January 2011 and was reopened in March 2012. To win the $5 million prize, a company must produce 32 samples of a PAR 38 halogen incandescent replacement lamp that emits over 1350 lm, consumes 11W or less, has a luminous efficacy of 123 lm/W, has a CCT of 2750K or 3000K, fit the industry standard size/shape, and has a CRI of 90 or higher (the R9 value must be 50 or higher). Finally, the lamp must maintain 70% its initial brightness (L70) for 25,000 hours.
While the L Prize is notable, the cash prize and bragging rights are small motivators compared to what will come as prices drop and millions of lamps are sold. This is what will truly propel companies and enable them to take market share away from incandescents and CFLs, but competition can still slow down the LED’s path to dominance. A US Congress bill mandated that certain incandescents would be effectively outlawed in 2012, thanks to restrictions on power usage (more on this later), but since the bill was passed there have been a number of advances in incandescent technology. Now bulbs like the Philips Halogena Energy Saver are able to decrease power usage by up to 30% compared to older designs. These bulbs are more expensive than traditional incandescents, and they are less efficient than CFLs, but they are very affordable. Unsurprisingly, they are an attractive alternative for consumers.
An upcoming competitor in the updated incandescent space is a company called Vu1, which uses a technology known as electron stimulated luminescence (ESL) in their lamps. This allows for instant-on, mercury-free lighting, but isn’t quite as energy efficient as CFLs. The technology ESL uses is not unlike that of the cathode ray tube (CRT)—the large, boxy televisions and computer displays of the past. Until LED bulb prices drop further, ESL could be a competitive solution, provided that products are readily available and consumers continue to shy away from CFLs. ESL’s strengths include that the shape of the bulb is quite malleable (unlike fluorescents, which require a tube, and thusly a helical shape to save space), the color of the light is close to that of incandescents, and less heat production than incandescents. Best of all, they should eventually be as cheap as CFLs to produce.
Vu1’s 60W equivalent, the R30, operates at 2800K (warm white), has a CRI of 85, puts out 600 lumens, and sells for just $14.95. The bulb has a life of 11,000 hours and operates at 19.5W. It works in recessed spaces, making it a reasonable replacement bulb for standard incandescents. The bulb has a longer life than a typical CFL, but at this point, consumes more electricity and costs more.
As for incandescents, researchers say that more efficiency gains are on the way, so they won’t fade out as quickly as we might expect. Low prices and cost-sensitive consumers will ensure that incandescents stick around for the time being, but there will be limitations on their future. Barring further advances they are still less efficient (in the sense of lumens-per-watt) than LED bulbs, and while they are more affordable now, the price of LEDs should continue to drop and present a cost-effective alternative.
Technology isn’t the only force pushing away incandescent bulbs. In a number of countries, including the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, and China, governments are intervening and getting ahead of the market, putting legislation in place that phases out, and ultimately bans, high-power consumption lighting. Of course, a ban is never the goal—it’s just the enforcement measure needed to improve lighting performance.
In the United States, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA, also known as the Clean Energy Act) put new efficiency standards in place for both appliances and lighting. The bill didn’t ban incandescents outright; rather, it required greater efficiency from them, making it so that the bulbs that were on the market in 2007 would not be able to be sold in 2012. The mandate for about 25% greater efficiency meant new incandescents would have to be developed, or that buyers would have to seek out alternatives.
Specialty bulbs would be exempt, but a main target was the 100W incandescent. The bill said that bulbs with a lumen range of 1490-2600 must have a minimum life of 1,000 hours and use no more than 72 watts by January 1, 2012, which effectively outlawed the present-day 100W bulb. Next would come a restriction on bulbs at 1050-1489 lumens, which would not be able to exceed 53W after January 1, 2013. 40W and 60W bulbs would not be affected by the legislation until 2014, as per the set levels (750-1049 lumens and a maximum of 49W).
Unsurprisingly, today you can purchase a Philips EcoVantage 72 watt bulb (it’s a halogen lamp, a type of incandescent) for under $7 for a two-pack. The packaging clearly states “72W = 100W” which explains how it consumes less power but is just as bright. The clear (non-frosted) version consumes 72W, produces 1,490 lumens, and has an averaged expected life of a the government-minimum 1,000 hours. The company’s Ecovantage explanation page clearly states that the bulb is EISA 2007-compliant and that “compared to a 100W Natural Light A19 incandescent bulb with 1,350 lumens, the 72W EcoVantage bulb with 1,200 lumens provides similar light and at least 28% energy savings.”
Philips also has a 29W EcoVantage model that serves as their 40W equivalent and a 43W bulb that is their 60W equivalent, rounding out their offerings.
Ecovantage or not, LEDs will win in the end. While legislation will help, technology will prove the deciding factor. LEDs will be so formidable that the lower price of incandescents will be a non-factor. This will take time, but as LED technology advances in the labs, it will trickle down and affordable bulbs will be better than ever. A recent prototype from LED manufacturer Cree, known as the 21st Century Lamp, was able to produce 1300 lumens at an incredible 152 lm/W, a number far beyond Philips’ L Prize winner. Also from Cree is the newly announced XB-D LED. It might not sound like anything special, and ultimately it might just turn out to be another light-emitting diode, but this tiny unit is able to provide over 135 lm/W in cool white (6000K) and over 105 lumens per watt in a more indoor-friendly shade of white (3000K). In their labs Cree has an LED capable of 254 lm/W, so we know that incredible things are in the pipeline
Of course Cree’s 21s Century Lamp and the projects hidden away in their labs are prototypes that will probably never be available for sale. It’s little surprise that a new year brings new LEDs, but the important thing is that the technology is out there. As prices drop, we’ll start to see the tech and high-end parts trickle down, and soon enough LED bulbs will replace 75W and then 100W incandescents. By that time, 40W and 60W replacement bulbs will be more affordable than ever and the LED will be well on its way to being the world’s dominant lighting technology.
One curious product that we probably won’t be seeing much of in the future is the Panasonic LDAHV4L27CGLED Nostalgic Clear Type. This is an LED bulb designed to look like an incandescent. It has all the features and perks of an LED bulb, but when it’s off it appears to have a filament inside. It lacks a heat sink, so it’s only good for a paltry 210 lumens, or 20W equivalent. It’s a strange and silly product that assumes people won’t want one of those new-fangled solid-state lights or at least that they are OK with a dark house and fooling themselves into thinking they are using an old-fashioned bulb. Ultimately, it’s a handsome bulb…but what’s the point?