It is the IESNA (Illuminating Engineering Society of North America) approved method for the Electrical and Photometric Measurements of Solid-State Lighting, including LED Lighting. It measures an LED light or integral lamp as a whole (combined) system according to a standard process using specified testing equipment.

Who can perform testing?
LM-79 testing should be performed by EPA-Recognized Laboratories. Only reports from these recognized laboratories are valid. This standard is used for DoE (Department Of Energy) Energy Star program qualification and lighting facts advocate programs.

What does it provide?
The testing report issued according to a standard format will provide

• Color Characteristics (CRI, CCT, etc)
•  Total Luminous Flux (lumens)
• Luminous Intensity Distribution
• Electrical Power Characteristics
• Luminous Efficacy (calculated)

LED lamps have a slight environmental edge over compact fluorescent lamps and a significantly lower environmental impact than incandescent lighting over the lifetime of the products, according to a Department of Energy report.

The report, LED Manufacturing and Performance, is the second part of a DOE project to assess the life-cycle environmental and resource costs in the manufacturing, transport, use and disposal of LED lighting products.

Part 1, published in February, concluded that the life cycle energy consumption of LEDs and CFLs are similar — about 3,900 MJ per 20 million lumen-hours. LEDs consume 12.5 watts of electricity to produce about the same amount of light as a 15-watt compact fluorescent lamp or a 60-watt incandescent.

The new report finds that the energy these lighting products consume during operation makes up the majority of their environmental impact, compared to the energy consumed in manufacturing and transportation.

The study compared the environmental impacts associated with a CFL, an incandescent lamp, a 2012 Philips Endural LED and a 2017 LED (anticipating improvements in manufacturing, performance and driver electronics), by preparing “spider graphs” (pictured), with the impact of each lamp plotted on the graph. Lights with the least impact have their circle close to the center and lights with the greatest impact will be on the outer edges of the web.

Other key findings:

• CFLs have a slightly higher environmental impact than 2012 LED lamps on all measures except their contribution to landfills. The aluminum contained in an LED lamp’s large aluminum heat sink causes a greater impact on landfills because of the energy and resources consumed in manufacturing.
• The report projects that in five years, the environmental impacts of LEDs will be significantly lower than today’s LED products, based on expected near-term improvements in LED technology.
• As the market transitions from incandescent sources to energy-saving light sources that save consumers and businesses money, LEDs and CFLs are expected to achieve substantial reductions in the environmental impacts assessed —  from 1/3 to 1/10 current levels.

The study also makes recommendations for future work, suggesting DOE work with manufacturers to reduce the size of LEDs’ aluminum heat sinks and/or find alternative materials, and work with manufacturers to meet DOE targets for efficiency.

The last part of the project, Part 3, will test LEDs for disposal thresholds.

Credit: Department of Energy Website

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/07/03/doe-study-confirms-leds-most-environmentally-friendly-lighting/

Both LED and Induction Lights are similar in that they are a better solution to traditional HID light sources like Metal Halide and HPS. Both LED and Induction Lights are considered green and are RoHS compliant. Both are instant on – instant off, so the days of waiting for HID Lights to come to full brightness are over. Both maintain their lumen output far better than HID Light sources. While brand new HID Lighting have great initial lumens, they quickly start to degrade along with their usable (scotopic) light. Both LED Lighting and Induction Lighting are rated for long operational life, up to 100,000 hours, far exceeding HID light sources.

But the question remains, when to use LED Lights and when should you use an Induction Lights

LED Lighting – Strengths
Long life, good color rendering, great ability to focus the light where it’s needed, RoHS compliant – no mercury, no hazardous materials, low heat output compared to HID or incandescent lighting. Capable of producing up to 200 lumens/watt, produces no Ultra Violet light that can damage or fade products, can be used in cold environments, has a very high scotopic factor making it appear brighter to the human eye, can be dimmed.

Induction Lighting – Strengths
Long life, excellent color rendering, produces lots of light 65/lumens per watt, great for flooding product in-discriminately (warehouses, street lights, gyms etc), also RoHS Compliant, long track record (15 + years), uses about 40% of the energy HID Lighting does to accomplish the same job, high CRI. Perfect when you want to provide secondary lighting to walls, ceiling as induction is a 360 degree light source.

What product works best for your application? Led and induction both have good efficiencies and applications.
LED:
• Led works better in night time applications because of its high Scotopic value.
• Led has better light control, so you can put the light wherever you need it. Light is more focused directional.
• Will work great in very high applications over 30 feet.
• Likes cold environments, does not like the extreme heat. LED’s must be kept cool.

Induction:
• High CRI for night usage.
• Works great in retail high bay areas were light is dispersed all over.
• Should be used in lower applications under 30 feet. Light cannot be focused.
• Works better in cool – warm environments – does not like the extreme cold.

There are many different factors that you need to take into account to answer this question correctly and accurately. If you compare the total lumen output of conventional lights, such as High Pressure Sodium or Metal Halide, against the lumen output of LED lights, it appears that LEDs deliver less light. These comparisons are not accurate, as they fail to take into account  the significant amount of light that is wasted in non-LED Lighting applications.

Lumen output is a poor measure of the suitability of how well a lighting solution performs it’s job. A better measuring stick is how light is delivered, or rather, how much of the light is delivered to a area that needs to be lit. So you must make an accurate comparison on the amount of delivered light, not the amount of available light. If the light cannot be delivered to where it is needed, it is of no value to you.

Several factors come into play, As much as 30% or more of the lumens is lost in a conventional lights delivery. Reflectors, lenses and other factors all reduce lumen output from a normal light source. These lights are radial lights, in the sense that they distribute their light in every direction, and it is the job of reflectors and lenses to collect, redirect and hopefully deliver that light where it is needed. Unfortunately, a lot of usable light is lost in the process.

LED lights, on the other hand, are directional by nature. A well designed LED Light will place and direct all it’s light where it is needed. For example, it makes complete sense for a street light to direct all of its light to the roadway below. LED’s do that by design. The face of a LED Street Light contains all the LED’s, and all the light they produce gets sent down to the roadway. Reflectors are not required.

Secondly, conventional light sources such as Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium suffer from lumen degradation quickly after initial installation. So although the specifications on initial lumens is very high out of the package, what is not advertised is the expected lumen output 3, 6 or even 12 months later. So it may appear that a conventional light is more bright than LED, conventional wisdom shows lumen output degrades quickly which reduces the amount of light available to perform the task.

In conclusion, when comparing LED against conventional light sources, LEDs often perform as well, and in some cases significantly better, than conventional lighting while consuming far less electricity to perform the job.

In the recent study called “LIGHTING THE CLEAN REVOLUTION: The rise of LED’s and what it means for cities” *1, the following findings were published:

• LEDs achieve the expected 50 to 70% energy savings, and reach up to 80% savings when coupled with smart controls.
• Even with these energy savings, the vast majority of tested products exceeded local lighting standards.
• Many commercial LED products tested show behavior consistent with claimed lifespans of 50,000 to 100,000 hours, and LED products generally show very little change in color.
• The ‘catastrophic’ failure rate of LED products over 6,000 hours is around 1%, compared, for example, up to 10% for ceramic metal halide fixtures over a similar time period.
• The public prefers LED products, and around 90% of survey respondents support a full rollout of LEDs across city street lights.

LEDS OFFER ADVANCES IN

• Efficiency. Energy savings from 50% to 70% compared with conventional technologies result in similar cutsto carbon emissions.
• Controllability. Superior control over light color, intensity and direction allows novel lighting system designs that can deliver a wide range of social co-benefits. Outdoor LEDs offer improved visibility for pedestrians and traffic, as well as reduced light pollution. Indoor LED smart control systems have been shown to improve student behavior and study performance. And when smart controls allow LEDs to dynamically change lighting levels in response to conditions, total system energy savings can reach up to 80%.
• Lifespan. Well-designed LEDs are expected to last for 50,000 to 100,000 hours or more. Lifespans can be extended even further by coupling LEDs with smart controls.

To read the entire article Click Here to download

*1 Report Sponsor: PHILIPS LIGHTING, The Climate Group, HSBC Bank