Let's say just for the sake of argument that AGW is real

[longview]

Or a light bulb that yields as much light as an Edison Special but only uses 15% of the power and emits less heat.

For computer rooms, I try to tell people every watt of power used, must be pumped out as heat.
Light bulbs are the same way, we don't see in the IR, so it is useless for light bulbs to radiate there.

 

[KLATTU]

Well, first of all, we should banish all the people who have been falsely misrepresenting science to the sidelines. .

Thank You! We agree.

Good bye Al Gore!
Goodbye Barack Obama!

 

[Papa bull]

Or a light bulb that yields as much light as an Edison Special but only uses 15% of the power and emits less heat.

Sounds like LED to me. That technology is already here. Except I think we're talking 75% less energy instead of 85%. But let's not quibble over 10%. That's still very, very good.

 

[MoSurveyor]

Sounds like LED to me. That technology is already here. Except I think we're talking 75% less energy instead of 85%. But let's not quibble over 10%. That's still very, very good.

And it took government to get that moving.

 

[Papa bull]

And it took government to get that moving.

That statement is false.

 

[MoSurveyor]

That statement is false.

Using LED's as a replacement for light bulbs and not just indicator lights?

According to Dr. Ray Wheeler, lead for advanced life support activities in the Engineering Directorate, using LED lights to grow plants was an idea that originated with NASA as far back as the late 1980s.

NASA - LED Lights Used in Plant Growth Experiments for Deep Space Missions


You are welcome to present evidence to the contrary.

 

[Papa bull]

LED use and development by industry predates NASA.

http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/components/led-lighting/50-year-history-of-the-led-2012-10/

 

[MoSurveyor]

LED use and development by industry predates NASA.

Not as
light bulbs, which is what we were talking about. They only came into common use as an indicator lights in the late 80's - and they were all red, IIRC. Other colors came later.


But like I said, you can present evidence to the contrary.

PS
Your link ...

By 1987 AlGaAs LEDs from HP were bright enough to replace light bulbs in vehicle brake lights and traffic lights, the first time LEDs displaced incandescent bulbs in a lighting application. AlInGaP followed in 1990, offering at least double the brightness of AlGaAs.

Which doesn't say anything about light bulbs - as in lighting. There wasn't anything but red at that time that was in common use. Even NASA had to add blue fluorescents for their plant application.

 

[Papa bull]

I just did.

 

[Papa bull]

To be more specific. From that article.

LED as bulb replacement
By 1987 AlGaAs LEDs from HP were bright enough to replace light bulbs in vehicle brake lights and traffic lights, the first time LEDs displaced incandescent bulbs in a lighting application. AlInGaP followed in 1990, offering at least double the brightness of AlGaAs.

 

[MoSurveyor]

I just did.

To be more specific. From that article.

We're writing over each other. LOL! Your link wasn't there when I hit the quote button. :shrug:

I'll repeat my edit from above ...

Which doesn't say anything about light bulbs - as in lighting. There wasn't anything but red at that time that was in common use. Even NASA had to add blue fluorescents for their plant application.

 

[Papa bull]

Development and use was ongoing and to say it took the government to get it going is a false statement. NASA didn't invent the LED or even use it as lighting first.

 

[cpwill]

For those fretting about global warming... let's just scrap all the scientific kerfuffle over whether anthropogenic global warming is real and assume for this argument that (a) the Earth is rapidly warming and (b) it's man's Co2 emissions that are causing it.

What would YOU have us all do about it?

Well, flipping my position there to take your assumption, I would have to say I would consider this to be a real problem, which means that the last set of organizations I would want in charge of fixing it would be massive bureaucratic nightmares at the national and international level. I would propose a series of large prizes be offered for someone who can craft a device capable of reducing CO2 concentration in our air.

 

[MoSurveyor]

Development and use was ongoing and to say it took the government to get it going is a false statement. NASA didn't invent the LED or even use it as lighting first.

I never said NASA invented the LED. Government itself seldom invents any consumer product. They tend to focus on expensive research alone and they support a lot of expensive research projects in private businesses as well - or they did until the USSR fell. They also promote certain lines of experimentation for items that eventually make it into the market. There's a huge list of those from NASA alone. Don't kid yourself about private corporations making all the technical advances by themselves using only private money. Things haven't been that way since before WWII.

 

[Papa bull]

Programs like NASA have contributed to technology mightily but private enterprise has always done the real heavy lifting and does it without taxpayer financing.

 

[longview]

The Jury may still be out on the overall life expediency of LED lighting.
It does look good, but early high intensity LEDs had issues with thermal avalanche.
The current regulation mechanism becomes very important, as long as it functions, all is well.
If the regulation mechanism fails, the led will fail.
The lumen s per watt ratio of LEDs is the best so far, and all of the lumen s are in
the viable spectrum, so minimal wasted energy.

 

[MoSurveyor]

Programs like NASA have contributed to technology mightily but private enterprise has always done the real heavy lifting and does it without taxpayer financing.

You're forgetting one of the biggest of them all, DoD. There's also the NSF but it's small by comparison to the DoD's R&D budget.


LOL! I pay for it every time I fill a drug prescription or buy a Phillips light bulb. It may be done without taxes but we still pay for it.

 

[Papa bull]

You're forgetting one of the biggest of them all, DoD. There's also the NSF but it's small by comparison to the DoD's R&D budget.


LOL! I pay for it every time I fill a drug prescription or buy a Phillips light bulb. It may be done without taxes but we still pay for it.

And we pay for it in a much more fair way. We pay for what we choose and what we use.

 

[Threegoofs]

And we pay for it in a much more fair way. We pay for what we choose and what we use.

Except we don't pay for the environmental costs of releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. We defer those costs to our grandchildren.

But I guess we can just pretend those costs don't exist, like you do.

 

[MoSurveyor]

And we pay for it in a much more fair way. We pay for what we choose and what we use.

Hah! If I could make the drug companies spend less money on R&D, which would bring down the cost of prescription drugs, I would certainly do so but, short of being even more ill than I am, I don't have any control over that - and neither does anyone else.


Everyone uses government research at some point or other, whether it's for specific common cause uses like defense and space exploitation, or whether it's general, cutting edge research using grants, like Bell Labs and GE used to get and many universities still get.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Sounds like LED to me. That technology is already here. Except I think we're talking 75% less energy instead of 85%. But let's not quibble over 10%. That's still very, very good.

Looks like they are down to using 12 watts for 1600 lumen (100 watt equivalent) 88% savings...



I'm one of the backers and expecting my 100 watt equivalent in September. I already have a 60 watt equivalent that if I recall, uses 12 watts of a different brand. Working great now for a year or so. 12 for 60 is 80% savings.

 

[longview]

Looks like they are down to using 12 watts for 1600 lumen (100 watt equivalent) 88% savings...

I'm one of the backers and expecting my 100 watt equivalent in September. I already have a 60 watt equivalent that if I recall, uses 12 watts of a different brand. Working great now for a year or so. 12 for 60 is 80% savings.

Solar may not be ready to cool your house, but lighting is certainly getting in range of a low end system.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I would say it's a false assumption to say government involvement helped with LED development. Industry competes regardless, and the government efficiency mandates did not require LED.

Longer lasting flashlights with smaller batteries I would say was a large driver. LED signal lights also, not because of efficiency, but because of lifespans.

Wow...

Just wow to those who think the government does so many positive things, when nearly all they do is to control the masses.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Don't kid yourself about private corporations making all the technical advances by themselves using only private money. Things haven't been that way since before WWII.

I've seen otherwise. I have worked for such a private company that used their own money, and generated great wealth through invention.

 

[Papa bull]

Except we don't pay for the environmental costs of releasing CO2 into the atmosphere. We defer those costs to our grandchildren.

But I guess we can just pretend those costs don't exist, like you do.

We were talking about research and development and the fact that taxpayers don't subsidize development done in the private sector. This was a non sequitur. You need to do better with the segue back to your talking points when the discussion isn't working for you any more.