Image Credit: Martin Holladay for Energy Design Update
More Green Building News
有些领导制造商在营销材料中夸大其产品性能的证据已经存在了多年。
The Department of Energy, through its Solid-State Lighting Commercially Available LED Product Evaluation and Reporting (CALiPERS) program, has long conducted tests on commercially available LED products. When research findingson the CALiPERS websiteshowed that certain products did not measure up to the efficiency-per-watt levels claimed by their manufacturers, the information was sometimes picked up by news sources, including Energy Design Update, which ran an article on the subject in March 2006 and a related news item a year a later.
It wasn’t until this week, however, that a federal agency took legal action against a manufacturer over performance claims for its LED products. On Tuesday, the Federal Trade Commission提起诉讼在洛杉矶的美国地方法院，称总部位于加利福尼亚的美国灯已经歪曲了其LED灯泡的产出和预期寿命。
Will the FTC be a guiding light?
The LEDs cited inthe FTC complaintinclude one that was advertised as a replacement for a 40-watt incandescent bulb, which typically produces 400 lumens. But in tests, the FTC says, the LED produces only 74 lumens. Similarly, the agency says, an LED advertised as having a 90-lumen output produced only 43 lumens in the company’s own tests.
FTC投诉中提出的另一个问题是美国LED的某些灯光的预期寿命。该诉讼称，该公司在30,000小时时对其灯泡之一的寿命进行了评价，尽管独立测试表明，灯泡的管腔强度在1,000小时后贬低了80％。
After询问纽约时报, a Lights of America executive responded that the company would fight the charges and had already responded to the government’s investigation of its products by removing lumen equivalency claims from its packaging and by revising the bulbs’ lifetime ratings. The executive also told the时代that the bulbs targeted in the suit were produced before LED standards were established.
While the FTC suit won’t clear up all sources of confusion over LED performance and marketing, the need for clarity and accuracy is increasing as the lights become more widely available to consumers. The best of them really do perform well and the worst cause considerable confusion, Chris Calwell, senior research fellow and founder of energy efficiency specialist Ecos, told the时代.
“我们测试过的最好的产品绝对符合他们对轻型产量和瓦特等效性的主张；最糟糕的产品显然不是。”他敦促FTC为LED制造商提供明确的营销指导。
3 Comments
我很高兴LED行业是
我很高兴LED行业是being made to clean up its act at last. I have nothing against the technology but it is not yet ready for prime time in the majority of household applications. Exaggerated claims do the industry no good.
LED灯具的Staus是什么
我正准备建造房子。我想使其尽可能高效，防止未来，因此，如果我可以在预算中弹出它，我一直在考虑使用LED照明。
但是，我在某个时候在某个地方读到，其中一项绿色认证计划仅在使用新样式的灯插座用于LED灯的情况下才能为LED照明提供授予点 - 以防止所有者用常规的灯泡代替LED灯在授予LED照明点之后。这意味着正在进行用于常规灯泡应用的新型灯具。但是，我还没有找到有关LED灯的新型灯插座的任何信息。我也看不到有关新插座样式的荧光灯样式。也许，它们仅针对卷曲Q荧光灯泡和常规的灯泡插座/固定装置。
Was my source on this matter off base, or is something new in the works?
拉里（Larry），只有固定装置
拉里（Larry），只有固定装置take fluorescent bulbs have been around for many years, the bulbs are known as pin-based and they come in a variety of sizes and formats: the Circline fixtures which have been used as kitchen ceiling lights since the 1960's are an example. These qualify for LEED points, as do LED fixtures which come with the LED lamps built-in, e.g. under-cabinet lights.
But the question needs to be asked, is it your first priority to build an energy-efficient house or is it to gain as many certification points as possible? If the former, there's no reason to go with special fixtures unless they happen to suit your needs. Use LED or CFL lamps in standard fixtures, use special fixtures where appropriate, do the best job possible and don't worry about the points.
Log in or create an account to post a comment.
Sign up Log in