Re: LED lighting

[AZ Nomad <aznomad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 21:10:37 -0700, AZ Woody <Reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>"AZ Nomad" <aznomad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:slrne0nbm5.tk2.aznomad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> On Sun, 05 Mar 2006 13:43:47 -0800, Jim Baber <jim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Jim Baber writes:
>> >They are quite expensive, but seem to be base common to regular
>> >incandescent and compact fluorescent bulbs.
>>
>> >I would wait there are other goodies in the pipeline, One is a new
>> >derivation on the LED that uses a LED to excite other diodes on the
>> >inner surface of a bulb that reportedly gives the same lumen output as a
>> >standard 60 W incandescent does with only 1.0 W of input power at
>> >115VAC.  That is much better than CFL or regular LED, but still in
>> >development
>>
>> I find that hard to believe.  Are you saying that incandescent's
>> are less than 0.016% efficient (assuming that your superduper LED
>> is 100% efficient)?
>>




>How much of the power for an incandescent is turned into heat?
I would guess less than 98%.


>How much for a bunch of LEDs?
More than 0%?