SLAO, new technology for LEDs. What's the impact?

[All Darc]

SLAO it's beinbg said as promissing revolution for LEDs, making it cheaper, easy to manufacture, and less energy demanding for ilumination.

The material was discovered by advanced compuiter simulations... Interesting.

Today energy for ilumination it's not as hige, comparad to total energy consumption of a country. So it it help but nothing drastic to save a lot of energy, unless all cities was like Vegas.

[freebeard]

this?

https://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/163273.php

[oil pan 4]

Last time I looked into it the efficiency hold up for compact high intensity LEDs like we use today was due to quantum physics level stuff.
It looks like the ability to turn electricity into light in that manor was approaching the physical limit making LEDs the way we do now with a few small high intensity chips.

The biggest gains in efficiency would likely be from not making them out of dirt cheap inefficient power supplies that bring 120v AC down to much lower voltage DC as cheaply as possible.

[All Darc]

I must confess I did a mistake. I was in the next room and heard the TV (which I refuse to watch sice I deeply hate LCD/LED screens) during NEWS, talking about a discovery of a new material, cheaper and able to save 75% of energy from LEDs (new LED with such material). So I researched on web and found SLAO, which I concluded that was the material.

But I found the TV NEWS on web minutes ago and it's a discovery from brazilians researchers. And LED light was suposed to be already very close to maximum efficiency of convertion of electricity to light, so it should be impossible to create a LED that saves 75% of energy, unles the LED produces energy or "burn" (convert) something of his own into light.

In portuguese:

https://youtu.be/RPvLCdiekC0?t=2588


For other side if modern high intensity LEDs was more than 95% efficient, it should not warm/get hot so much, since many LED chips produces a lot of heat.
Incandescent bulb convert only 5% of energy into light. But what is the efficience of LEDs???
The TV NEWS it's crazy, since to save 75% of energy the LEDs we use in screens should have efficiency no more than 25%.

This other report says that LEDs converts only 20% or 40% of energy into light, and the rest it's heat. REALLY ????????????????. Most journalist texts about LED lighting revolution we are said actual LEDs was converting nearly all light into electricity
We reach space but people, even who write text for TV, don't know how percentages and text concordance works

Other texts on web, not about this TV NEWS, says LEDs mconverts almost all energy into light, very unlike incandescent light bulbs.

[All Darc]

Ok, I think I solved the things now.

LEd vary a lot in efficiency. Some are just 20% efficient and other reach 60% efficience. About domestic LEDs, for room lighting or TV backlight, I don't know, but I bet mosts are more than 20% efficient.

Anyway if this discovery really have how creat a LED with a efficience of 75%, with lower cost and more pure light, it's interesting, but far from make your iphone battery lasts 4x more.
To make the absurd statment some news report said (about last 4x more) they need to ignore the energy consumption of processors and circuits. And they also needs to take as reference the worst kind of LEDs, with efficience of just 20%.

Journalists should be forbidden of make science NEWs, since they all tend to interpret things wrong and distort what scientists said. There should be a special class to wrote about science NEWS.

[niky]

Originally Posted by All Darc

Journalists should be forbidden of make science NEWs, since they all tend to interpret things wrong and distort what scientists said. There should be a special class to wrote about science NEWS.

Speaking as a journalist, yes, this is a pretty sticky problem.

But as a rebuttal: As long as the journalist does their homework and researches the topic before writing about it, they can avoid these traps.

-

Sadly, most "journalists" nowadays are too frigging lazy to practice due diligence.

Not like that's anything new. It's bad journalism to blame for the 70's "New Ice Age" headlines that are still circulating until today.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by niky

It's bad journalism to blame for the 70's "New Ice Age" headlines that are still circulating until today.

In the 60's & 70's, there were 7 science reports, dealing with Global cooling. The Newsweek article really got into the minds of people. However, there were 44 Science Papers, written about Global Warming, that were NOT reported to the public effectively.

[All Darc]

Lazy or sensationalism???

They want to impress... A NEWS anouncing about a huge discovered (more than reality) atract more views to the TV. They always anounce in the begining of TV NEWS, to keep people watching until the reportage start.

Even some scientists uses sensantionalism, especialy the medical field.
If we would take as suposed science breakthoughs, put together, and if all was true, we would be like in Star Trek.

Originally Posted by niky

Speaking as a journalist, yes, this is a pretty sticky problem.

But as a rebuttal: As long as the journalist does their homework and researches the topic before writing about it, they can avoid these traps.

-

Sadly, most "journalists" nowadays are too frigging lazy to practice due diligence.

Not like that's anything new. It's bad journalism to blame for the 70's "New Ice Age" headlines that are still circulating until today.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by All Darc

I refuse to watch sice I deeply hate LCD/LED screens

I have already been used to LCD screens since I was a kid. My first LCD TV was a handheld one similar to this:

I just don't remember when I disposed it, but in some years the only defect it had was the display becoming black-and-white.

But I found the TV NEWS on web minutes ago and it's a discovery from brazilians researchers.

I guess your computer didn't have a CRT monitor anyway...

[All Darc]

I'm forced to use LCD (LED) because the CRTs I had faded and wasn't 16:9.
But I don't like the LED monitor I have. Indeed I hate it. I would like to destroy it in 1000 pieces, just like I wish the same to the 4K LED TV.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

I guess your computer didn't have a CRT monitor anyway...