Core77

CFLs, LEDs, now ESLs: Yet another lightbulb technology

By Rain Noe - November 9, 2010

in Tech

Looks like we're getting spoiled for choice when it comes to replacements for the venerable incandescent lightbulb, which is due to be phased out in America by 2012. Following in the footsteps of curly-fry CFLs and Philips' steampunk-looking LEDs, the latest bulb tech to pass UL certification is the ESL.

The Electron Stimulated Luminescence bulb, by Seattle-based Vu1 Corporation (whose CEO is ironically named Philip Styles) uses "accelerated electrons to stimulate phosphor to create light, making the surface of the bulb 'glow.'" Vu1 claims their ESL is as energy-efficient and long-lived as CFLs and LEDs, but boasts superior light quality (see photo above) and is dimmable, unlike its cousins. Far as price, the bulbs will go for less than LEDs but more than CFLs: Twenty bucks a pop.

o

Favorite This
Q
13

Comment

Comments

Rich Ronson

13 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

What are the regulations for disposing of these bulbs? Do they contain mercury like CFLs?
!Report as spam
Nick

13 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

I just heard that incandescents are going the way of the dinosaur in Jan of 2012. Well, that means a road trip to Lowes or Home Depot where I will buy mass quantities of bulbs to get me through this assinine time in our country's history were science is trumped by activism.
!Report as spam
Art Donovan

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

Again @ Gustavo.

You reprimand designers for "crying for the past" yet you yourself had to go back to the past (the 1970's) to find the only esoteric ("awesome") lamp fixture that happened to look good with CFL's.

You actually agree with us more than you think.

!Report as spam
Art Donovan

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

@ Gustavo.

I have lived with and designed around CFL's longer than anyone in the industry. So long in fact that I simply had to stop using them because of their grave aesthetic limitations.

As an aside, I don't design lamps that require 70's style, pellet shaped Opaline globes. Many times the bare incandescent bulb itself is part of the design. But that's just me :)
!Report as spam
Gustavo Miranda

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

That's interesting how designes and architects hate CFL... actually there is CFLs with very good color fidelity, like those spiral shapes from Philips, GE and Osram.
Their point is that CFLs are "ugly" and incandescent bulb are easier to fit in a lighting design.
Well, is not the right time to change the lighting design? It would be very good if we'd find awesome lamps designed for those CFL and LED bulbs instead crying for the past. I had to find 70's "modern" pellet-shaped opaline globes to have a good looking ceiling with CFLs because the light market just ignore them... things chages.
!Report as spam
VGMF

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

$20 is more than a CFL (you can get them for less than $1/ea with some of the incentives by the power companies), but CFLs, especially the Reflector type are just awful. Most take too long to come to full brightness and few last as long as advertised. the color of most is also hideious. Then there is the mercury issue. They are supposed to be properly recycled. This new ESL sounds stangely like a cathode-ray-tube - remember those? LEDs are nice if you get the warm ones, but still are way to espensive. Have you seen the hearsinks on some of the 9+W ones? You wonder on how they will survive in an enclosed fixure that almost all interior reflector bulbs go in. Where can I get these ESL bulbs?
!Report as spam
stefano solinas - obsidianart

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

"As you can see on the picture of the model" just make no sense, in a photo you adjust white balance to correct light distortion, they just make a fake photo to fake a picture (notice that the wall is white only in the "new tecnology" picture).
I want kelvine temperature and light cone measurement, not a stupid fake picture...
!Report as spam
Paul

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

I think CFLs are more like $4 to $8. But this is interesting. Are these safer than CFLs, as in less contaminants?
!Report as spam
Art Donovan

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

A very interesting post and comments.

Please let me know when (they) create a bulb as beautiful as the standard incandescent.

All of these "new" technologies are years away from satisfying my aesthetic.

As the very first lamp designer and manufacturer in the world to specify and include CFL's in all our lamp designs,(1990) I am a bit weary of the promises of all of these new bulb technologies.

CFL's, LEDS, OLEDS and ESL's simply don't do it for me.

Regards to All. :)

!Report as spam
Rob @ GruvDesign

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

Despite their fancy naming conventions and high tech sounding description, this is really old technology. Anywhere else, what they are describing is called "electro luminescence". It is used on basically every CRT television since they've been around. The screen is covered with phosphorus on the inside, and it is beamed with electrons, which cause it to light up. They fade gradually over time.
!Report as spam
John

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

$20 each? How is that the same as a CFL?
!Report as spam
anon

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

They are not based in Seattle anymore, just moved to 7th Ave in New York (you could go out to lunch with them and discuss their bulbs)...
!Report as spam
Rob

14 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

LED's with the correct contact temperature and cooling can last around 20 years, they are also infinitely dimmable depending on the supply technology. They also emit an even amount of light across the em spectrum of visible light and are far more cheaper than this new technology and creates less heat. which has a knock on effect for less energy required for air conditioning and also supply if they are powered correctly.

Please don't quote incorrect "facts" without consulting all technologies and as a lighting designer who works within the high-efficiency lighting division its quite disgusting seeing mis-information floating about. It kinda makes my job 10x harder really.
!Report as spam