ESL lamps ?

Interesting. The article made some good arguments against the CFLs, but not so much about the LEDs. The only points made against the LED was it's initial cost ($40), and its higher color temperature. The ESLs have a 6,000 hour life and the LEDs have a 40,000 to 50,000 hour life. Assuming the ESL lamp costs $20 and its LED equivalent costs $40, the ESL lamp costs $0.003 per hour of life and the LED lamp costs $0.001 per hour of life. That means the LED lamp is really 66% less than the ESL. Sounds like a gimmick to me...
 
Interesting. The article made some good arguments against the CFLs, but not so much about the LEDs. The only points made against the LED was it's initial cost ($40), and its higher color temperature. The ESLs have a 6,000 hour life and the LEDs have a 40,000 to 50,000 hour life. Assuming the ESL lamp costs $20 and its LED equivalent costs $40, the ESL lamp costs $0.003 per hour of life and the LED lamp costs $0.001 per hour of life. That means the LED lamp is really 66% less than the ESL. Sounds like a gimmick to me...

Link broken and I have never heard of ESL lamps before that I remember. I was prepaired to look thru ANSI codes for a no doubt much different lamp.

So given a broken link, educate me about this concept?
 
Based on the sketchy and cryptic description, it seems like somebody is using cathode ray tube technology in a small form factor. I wondered what happened to all those picture tube manufacturers when LCDs and Plasma put them out of business.
 
Since the CNET article is dated Sept. 16, 2009, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this technology didn't work out so well. Plus, ESL would be a marketing nightmare down here in Texas where ESL is primarily known as English as a Second Language.
 
I remember hearing about ESL tech quite some time ago. In everything I've heard about it, they've been quite vague about the technology in specifics.

It does however seem a reasonable replacement for incandescents in residential/commercial "can" lighting situations. A far better solution than CFL anyways (I've always HATED CFLs).

Why does it seem tech like this is not taking off? I think that's pretty simple, as usual different technologies get pushed aside for a time when another is selected to be pushed forward. There has been such a big boom in CFL and fluorescent tech development and manufacturing that it is no small wonder hardly anyone has heard of ESL lighting.

It takes a lot of money and time to tool up for production of a new product, and a lot of lamp manufacturers have been spending that last TEN YEARS I believe in revving up for the "CFL revolution". They simply aren't even looking at different or new tech.
The most they are likely to want to do is simply improve on CFL and LED lighting tech (remember that both CFL and LED lighting has been around for a LONG time (the roots of LED lighting being just over 100 years ago! And you all know how long fluorescents have been around)).

The money has been put into improving and "fixing" Fluorescent and LED tech, not looking at new ways to produce light.

Is ESL ready for the market at large? I have no clue!

Would ESL take off if mass produced and placed on the world market today? NO! Too many people are fixated on CFL and LED.

Do I think we need to put more R&D into various forms of creating light? YES!

Right now for many applications I'd still much rather use incandescent light than any of the alternatives accessible. I like the quality of the light. In a home especially I much prefer the warm, even, soft, cosy, delightful light of an incandescent. For me it is not about "keeping things the same" (however some people stick with incandescent for that reason Im sure).

I find fluorescent light leads to headaches, and it is a major contributor to Seasonal Effective Disorder. I also think that for many applications fluorescent light looks like, pardon me, but total crap. Yes it is drastically improved, it is SO much better than it was 20 years ago, but it will never have the right feel.

LEDs have their own drawbacks, such as the heat problem (when trying to produce copious amounts of light). The quality of the light is also not quite right either. Look at most of the (especially cheap) LED stage fixtures out there right now. That and the price (which has drastically dropped, because so many manufacturers are now 'tooled' to make them and much of the R&D is done).

I think ESL might be cool to look at. I think that developing it certainly won't hurt! If it does not form a good product, perhaps the research will lead to something else down the line!

Edit: Plus the Enviromental factor for CFLs is one of the main reasons I don't like them....

Checked for the Vu1 website. One of the latest pieces of news:

December 22, 2010 - Vu1 Corporation (OTCBB: VUOC), a developer and manufacturer of mercury-free, energy-efficient, general illumination lighting technology, today announced that it has received 57 individual preliminary orders for its unique ESL R30 light bulbs in the first 100 hours since the December 17th launch of direct-order functionality on its website. The orders range in size from eight to 50 bulbs and comprise individual consumers and a number of small to medium-sized businesses and organizations...

I guess the reason that we haven't heard anything new, is because they are just barely tooled up for manufacture. Hell look in that video earlier, they could not come even close to producing lamps at a rate for sale. They'd have to build a LOT of stock.
 
Last edited:
Link broken and I have never heard of ESL lamps before that I remember. I was prepaired to look thru ANSI codes for a no doubt much different lamp.

So given a broken link, educate me about this concept?

Hmmm.. link works for me. Here's the article

A novel design for energy-efficient lightbulbs can produce incandescent-quality light and does not contain mercury like compact fluorescents (CFLs), according to manufacturer Vu1.

The Seattle-based firm has been working on an alternative to CFLs and LED lights for five years and just rolled out a demo video, below.

Vu1's Electron Stimulated Luminescence (ESL) lights can last up to 6,000 hours, about three to four times the lifespan of incandescents and comparable to CFLs. They produce 50 percent less heat than incandescents.
The ESL bulbs contain an electron source that fires electrons at a proprietary luminescent phosphor, which then glows. The screw-in apparatus is encased in standard lightbulb glass.

One disadvantage to CFLs is they contain about 5 milligrams of mercury, a small amount but enough to prompt some jurisdictions to ban dumping them in the trash. Burnt-out CFL bulbs should be disposed of with hazardous waste where possible or returned to the retailer, which then recycles them. The EPA recommends evacuating the room if a CFL bulb breaks.
ESL bulbs will be trash-bin disposable, according to Vu1.

Meanwhile, LED bulbs are energy efficient at around 40,000 to 50,000 hours a bulb but tend to be expensive. For instance, Panasonic's new EverLeds light will likely retail for around $40 when it hits stores in Japan next month.

Vu1's ESL bulb would be around $20 when it hits the market, according to spokesman James Quick. Vu1 might market the bulb in mid-2010 if its funding holds up. It plans to begin manufacturing at its EU plant by the end of this year.

The company says its ESL bulbs would produce light that's "essentially indistinguishable" from incandescents, contrasting it with the greenish or bluish light from CFLs and LEDs. To my eye, the ESL light in the video looks a shade colder than incandescent.
The prototype ESL R-30 bulb, which would replace a 65-watt incandescent bulb, has a color rendering index of more than 90 and a color temperature of 2800K, according to Vu1. It also turns on instantly and is fully dimmable.

ESL looks quite promising. Let's see if this bright idea makes it to market.


Read more: Are ESL bulbs better than CFL or LED? | Crave - CNET
 
Hi, guys. I've been following this company for almost 3 years now and I'm extremely impressed with the company and its technology. Price isn't the only advantage Vu1's ESL has over LEDs. First of all, they have improved the technology to where their lifespan is now rated at 10,000 hours. Though that's still not as long as LEDs, selling at half the price of an LED I would venture to say more people will be inclined to spend half the money on a bulb that doesn't last as long, but still lasts a long time, quite a bit longer than an incandescent, and few of us were ever complaining about the lifespan of most of our incandescents. There are applications where the superior time span of the LED does make enough difference to compensate for paying double the price of an ESL--such as street lighting, parking lots, and the like--but for the average consumer, keeping an extra $20 in your pocket will favor ESLs.

Another important point in this comparison is that LEDs suffer from what is referred to as droop. They may last longer, but the quality of the light diminishes relatively quickly, to where their already dull light becomes even less bright and bluer in color. This is a problem for LEDs. ESL don't suffer from this.

Most on this board seem to be referring to an old article. Vu1, the company that developed and is producing ESL, has come a long way in the past year. They received UL certification for their first product, an R30 recessed lamp, this past August and have recently delivered their very first order to a lighting distribution and retail company called Seattle Lighting/Destination Lighting. Destination Lighting, the retail arm of Seattle Lighting, sold out of their first order of R30s in a matter of hours. They immediately placed another order.

So Vu1 is just now coming on line, literally as I type this. In fact, I'm expecting them to issue a press release announcing the introduction of their first product, the R30, within the next few days. Seattle Lighting has been running tests on these bulbs before shipping their orders out and they are supposed to have their testing completed either today (Wednesday, Jan 19) or tomorrow. I'll give them til Friday in case they weren't factoring in the Martin Luther King holiday.

I don't assume Vu1 is going to take over the lighting industry, but I do believe that they have a strong enough technology and good enough management to succeed at carving out a niche for themselves in the lighting business. Keep an eye on this company, particularly in the coming days, and I think you have the opportunity to witness the launching of a formidable company with a competitive technology.
Ginchinchili
 
. VU1 is a new lighting technology and I encourage you to do your research and come aboard. It’s going to be a very exciting ride. I want to lay out a list of points to help you in your research. Please check these points out carefully.

1: The world is phasing out incandescent light bulbs starting in the US in 2012.

2: They must be replaced with energy efficient bulbs we’re currently looking at 3 main technologies. LED, fluorescent, and ESL (electron stimulated luminescent) Lets take a look at them one at a time.

3: LED. They will definitely have their place but as of now they are expensive and they generate a lot of heat. So they are not a good replacement for the ESL R30. They are directional in their light pattern. The color quality is not as good as ESL. The light turns bluish as they age. As of now they cannot be used in all applications, 4” linier tubes etc. In a nutshell they are ugly and much more. Do your research.

4: Fluorescents.
They contain mercury. Google EPA cleanup for a fluorescent breakage in your home. It’s scary.
There is a disposal problem.
Cheaper ones are not dimmable.
Dimmable ones need an expensive dimmer.
Poor light quality.
Not instant on.
Flicker.
Don’t work in the cold.
Don’t fit everywhere.
When enclosed or used upside down life expectancy is greatly reduced.
Much more, do your research.

5: ESL.
Energy efficient.
Can be put into any type or shape of bulb. (Think about that, it is huge)
Instant on.
Dimmable.
Works in the cold.
Great light quality.
Half the price of LED.
No toxic substances.
Low heat.
Much more, do your research.

6: Management.
Check out the entire management and board of directors. I’ll only mention two.
Bill Hamlin helped make Home Depot what it is today. Very impressive credentials.
Charles C Hunt, professor, sciencetist in lighting. Again very impressive credentials.
Both highly respected. Would never risk their reputations on anything less then an excellent technology like ESL. It’s an absolute must that you research these people, then you will understand the significance of their quotes I’m listing below.
1: I have seen a number of new and innovative products during the course of my career, and I believe the potential for Vu1’s unique lighting technology surpasses anything I’ve seen before,” Bill Hamlin
2: For the R30 market, it is a no-brainer winner. Charles Hunt
3: I have seen or talked to no one that has not been really excited after seeing the R30. Michael Polyviou
Management and Board of Directors own a huge share of the company and have not sold a share.

7: You are here at just the right time, at the beginning of something huge. The entire worlds lighting is about to change and ESL is going to be a big part of it and so can you.

8: Do your research and then do it again. You can start out by checking their website reading it from top to bottom. http://www.vu1corporation.com
http://www.vu1corporation.com/investors

UC Davis Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering


9: Good luck to all.
 
1: The world is phasing out incandescent light bulbs starting in the US in 2012.

2: They must be replaced with energy efficient bulbs we’re currently looking at 3 main technologies. LED, fluorescent, and ESL (electron stimulated luminescent) Lets take a look at them one at a time.

3: LED. They will definitely have their place but as of now they are expensive and they generate a lot of heat. So they are not a good replacement for the ESL R30. They are directional in their light pattern. The color quality is not as good as ESL. The light turns bluish as they age. As of now they cannot be used in all applications, 4” linier tubes etc. In a nutshell they are ugly and much more.

4: Fluorescents.
They contain mercury. Google EPA cleanup for a fluorescent breakage in your home. It’s scary.
There is a disposal problem.
Cheaper ones are not dimmable.
Dimmable ones need an expensive dimmer.
Poor light quality.
Not instant on.
Flicker.
Don’t work in the cold.
Don’t fit everywhere.
When enclosed or used upside down life expectancy is greatly reduced.


5: ESL.
Energy efficient.
Can be put into any type or shape of bulb. (Think about that, it is huge)
Instant on.
Dimmable.
Works in the cold.
Great light quality.
Half the price of LED.
No toxic substances.
Low heat.

Steve
 
The company that is putting out the ESL lamps is VU1. Stock symbol VUOC. you can research them at their website, just google VU1. Lots of exciting things are beginning to happen over there.
Steve
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back