cell phones, batteries and other devices,
and their associated plastic and metal enclosures, which have become a major
issue of ultimate disposal. Trashing them
is far more convenient than taking them
somewhere or paying for recycling.
I’m an engineer. I also have been environmentally involved for 30 years, starting
with asbestos and lead abatement, then
hazardous materials and fluorescent lamp
reclamation, and now dealing with the effects of global warming.
In our zest to solve some of our world
problems, we can create others. Accordingly, we should proceed cautiously. More
efficient lighting certainly makes sense,
but more importantly, educating users on
wasteful practices can prevail. One good
aspect of incandescent light is that it mimics natural light. Fluorescent lighting and
LEDs can yield eyestrain.
Finally, in her last paragraph, Ms. Fischer refers to a three-fourths reduction in
electricity with the use of CFLs versus incandescent lamps. I question this amount!
Also, readers shouldn’t be swayed into
thinking that this is for all electricity. The
primary “draw” of all electricity is by
electric motors.
Fred J. Wittenberg
Evanston, Ill.
The Editor Responds:
You and other readers are correct in pointing out that changing to CFLs won’t reduce total electrical consumption by three-fourths, but rather lighting energy
consumption. Thank you for your mindful
interpretation.
Charles T. Troy
Senior Editor
LEDs vs. CFLs
I wanted to drop you a quick note and tell
you and the staff of Photonics Spectra how
useful, relevant and interesting the articles
are in this month’s (January 2009) issue.
As I read through the magazine, I began
to flag the articles of interest. When I was
finished with January’s issue, it had more
flags than the famous amusement park.
I’ve been following news articles related to governmental attempts to ban incandescent lighting. Most I’ve seen mention compact fluorescents (CFLs) as the
replacement and more often than not fail
to mention LEDs as an alternative. I particularly liked the last line of your “
Banning the bulb” article: “Imagine how much
we can save when LED lighting begins replacing compact fluorescents.”
It seems that the articles I’ve encountered compare either CFLs or LEDs with
incandescent bulbs. I’m curious; has
Photonics Spectra published articles with substantial data comparing and contrasting the
benefits and cost savings of CFLs and
LED technologies over incandescent
lamps? If you have published stories, I’ve
unfortunately missed them and would appreciate it if you could point me to those
articles.
Fonda Moyers
Regional Manager
Opto Technology Inc.
Wheeling, Ill.
The Editor Responds:
Thank you for your high praise! We have
not written articles comparing CFLs and
LEDs just yet because LEDs are still in the
development phase – at least as replacements in general-lighting applications. We
are tracking the applications, however, and
will provide our readers with comparison
data and information about new developments as soon as possible.
Anne L. Fischer
Senior Editor
LEDs and light pollution
On page 63 of the January issue (“LEDs
Light the Way to Homes and Businesses”),
you wrote of installing LED outdoor lighting in drainage gates, which looks clever
because it minimizes the wiring problems.
However, this approach illuminates the
sky, not the ground!
Wherever possible, we need to avoid
illuminating the sky at night. It not only
wastes energy, but it prevents us from
viewing the moon, stars and planets.
I’d suggest a follow-up piece about
efficient and effective outdoor night lighting.
Chris Curtin
Electronic Displays
Friday Harbor, Wash.
The Editor Responds:
The topic of light pollution is covered in
this very issue.
Anne L. Fischer
Senior Editor
LEDs and the environment
LEDs are rightly being heralded as the
next great advance in general lighting
technology (“GreenLight,” January issue).
But to implement real environmental stewardship, we must look beyond just energy
savings, especially in outdoor illumination. The effects of artificial nighttime
