Guest post by Jim Brodrick, Department of Energy
A few weeks ago, writing about the CALiPER Round 11 testing results, I mentioned that although LED linear replacement lamps are improving, especially in terms of their efficacy, we’re still seeing major performance challenges in the areas of total light output, light distribution, color quality, and reliability. I noted that although there may be certain situations where such products are viable alternatives, in most cases they’re not yet competitive with their fluorescent counterparts, in terms of both cost and performance.
Consider that most of the LED linear replacement lamps tested in Round 11 were found to have color qualities that didn’t fall within standard tolerances for white light at their manufacturer-rated CCTs. That’s not likely to please consumers. And none of the LED linear replacement lamps that were tested in a parabolic louvered troffer achieved the total light output, spacing criteria, and even light distribution that were achieved by fluorescent T8 lamps in the same troffer. That’s a recipe for disappointment.
Add to that the fact that fluorescent T8s have a known track record and relatively long lifetimes (20,000-40,000 hours). LED linear replacement lamps potentially have longer lifetimes (~50,000 hours). In today’s market, these lifetimes may vary greatly from product to product, and most manufacturers have yet to acquire any significant track record with in-situ long-term operation of their LED linear replacement lamps. What that means is that purchasers of LED linear replacement lamps should be cautious when weighing lifetime as a factor, and focus instead on performance and cost – where LED linear replacement lamps still clearly fall short of their fluorescent counterparts.
There are other factors to consider as well, including product availability and maintenance challenges. Our testing encountered a number of shipping and handling and “out of stock” reports. Purchasers also need to consider maintenance. For example, imagine the difficulties maintenance workers will encounter when it comes time to replace LED T8 lamps that have required unique wiring configurations when they were installed. Will lamps compatible with the rewired fixtures be available? Will the fixtures again have to be rewired, or refitted with a different driver in order to accommodate the replacement lamps available on the market at the time of replacement?
What all of this adds up to is a definite “caveat emptor” when it comes to LED linear replacement lamps. Manufacturers are jumping into the LED linear replacement lamp market right and left, and the marketplace is filling up with new products as a result. The market for T8 fluorescent lamps is too big to ignore, and that puts pressure on suppliers to carve out a piece of the pie.
The reality is that there’s still a lot of R&D that needs to be done for LED linear replacement lamps to compete with fluorescent T8s – which are pretty darned good products in their own right, and have the added advantage that the recessed troffer fixtures in our commercial buildings were designed specifically for them. The manufacturer that does that R&D and succeeds in working out the performance challenges in LED linear replacement lamps, or in developing an exceptional SSL luminaire alternative, will have a huge advantage, because its products will shine in comparison to the other LED T8 replacement lamps out there. But products coming out today – touted as drop-in T8 equivalents but not achieving equivalent performance levels – are adding to the risk that consumers will not be satisfied, and that could have repercussions for all LED technologies.
