22 Mar 10

Under California’s Title 24 building codes (http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/) builders are required to consider energy efficient light sources. To meet this requirement, many Builders have chosen to install compact florescent lights (CFL) in kitchens, bathrooms and hallways.

But there has to be a better solution than compact florescent lights.  Compact florescent lights don’t solve the problems.  They simply present new problems.  While they are indeed more energy efficient than incandescent lighting, they contain mercury http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury poisoning#Fluorescent lamps).  So now we have traded energy efficiency at the cost of a healthy environment.  Likewise, any savings gained by installing CFL lighting will be reduced by maintenance and disposal costs (http://earth911.com/).

The flicker and warm up time for the CFL bulbs simply beg a new solution to meet the energy efficiency requirements being imposed by local, state, and federal requirements.

So what is a builder to do? A little research goes a long way. New technology using gallium nitrate LED lights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium) offer the solution. New technology offers LED fixtures that are brighter, uses less energy than even CFLs, last far longer, and contains no mercury. In fact, some states will even offer tax incentives to convert to a quality, commercial LED down-light.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Mixx
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Posterous
  • Technorati
  • Print

Filed under: Emerging Technology, Government Grants, Government Incentives, Green Energy Solutions, LED vs. CFL

Trackback Uri

blog comments powered by Disqus