The US EPA Environmental Protection Agency is creating an Energy Star performance rating for lighting luminaires. The proposed technology-blind criteria lump CFLs compact fluorescent lighting LED-based SSL solid-state lighting and halogen lighting into the Energy Star draft document Energy Star Program Requirements for Luminaires.
The document goes beyond simply specifying light efficacy to specify quality metrics, such as color, color metrics, lumen maintenance, and lifetime. Two representatives of major LED manufacturers-Bill Watkins, chief executive officer of Bridgelux, and Mark McClear, director of application engineering and new-business development at Cree-have strongly differing opinions on whether the proposed ratings are helpful or harmful to the fledgling SSL industry.
Despite their differences of opinion on how best to ensure LED-lighting quality and lifetime, Watkins and McClear agree that Energy Star should have separate guidelines for LED lights. [The current draft] gives a pass to CFLs on lifetime [at less than 8000 hours] but holds LED lights to 35,000 hours, says Watkins.
It unfairly protects the [CFL] bulb guys.
Why does an energy-efficiency program, such as Energy Star, stipulate quality metrics?
A: Bill Watkins It doesn't belong there. It's a question of how you want to police lifetime and reliability. LEDs are about innovation. [With the proposed Energy Star guidelines,] every time we come up with a new die or epitaxy, we have to go through a nine-month test. So, one of two things will happen: Either innovation stops because people have to wait nine months to change things so that everything slows to a snail's pace, or people cheat on the test or fudge the data.
Mark McClear These quality metrics are vital. The EPA is saying that efficacy is important. If the color is bad, it flickers, you can't dim it, or it doesn't last very long, or experiences color changes during its lifetime, then it doesn't matter how much energy it saves because nobody will use it. I think the DOE [Department of Energy] has wisely reached a balance between efficacy and quality because the agency wants to ensure the adoption of the technology and realize the energy benefits.
Is a warranty a better alternative to making quality metrics, such as lifetime, a part of the Energy Star spec?
A: BW A warranty is the best way. With this test requirement, it will actually reduce energy saving because of the [additional] time needed to bring new technology to market and potentially drive up costs, as well. It's not up to the government to decide [product lifetime]; it's not up to us as the source manufacturer to decide.
It's up to the end users to decide what they want. If a standard limits your choices, it limits your options. If we put on the box this thing will go 10,000 hours, and we'll give you a three-year warranty, and we're public and honest about it, what else matters?
MM What good is a five-year warranty from a company that's only been around for a year? I'd get a little nervous about that [scenario].
Also, you look at the balance sheet of these start-up [LEDlighting] companies. If they put products out on the street and they don't have the financial capabilities to warranty them, the warranty isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
I think the overarching theme here is that the DOE has chosen both energy efficiency and quality to ensure that the energy-efficiency gains are realized.
If they leave quality to startup and import companies, you could get bad quality and turn off an entire generation from using SSL.
Energy Star is a voluntary program. Do companies have a choice whether to comply?
A: BW A lot of lighting manufacturers want the rating to get into certain retail channels or because it's required for rebates. Also, many commercial accounts require that their purchases meet Energy Star requirements.
MM If you walked through [last May's] Lightfair [lighting-industry trade show], 95% of the luminaires you saw were not Energy Star-compliant, and people are buying them without it.
What about Energy Star in the broader world arena?
A: BW Asia and Europe don't have lifetime as part of their energy-efficiency specifications. LED innovation will happen in countries where they don't have these sorts of tests. You can't protect the consumer from everything. We need to be able to innovate in America at the same rate as the rest of the world.
MM There is no comparable program in the world. But lighting manufacturers can always enter the market on a level playing field with international competitors and then, nine months later, when you pass the tests and get the documentation, put the Energy Star on the luminaire.
