What? Unpaid Internships Could Be Illegal? Ya Think?

I just read an awesome article at the New York Times about unpaid internships, and how it’s looking like this kind of thing is illegal.  The first time I read the headline, I thought to myself:

“Self, well DUH unpaid internships should be illegal.  Free work for “credit?”  Come on.  I may have been born at night, but it wasn’t LAST night.”

Then I read the article and saw that the unpaid internship positions that exist in the USA are being investigated.  I think that this is a good thing.

I have disagreed with colleagues over the years for HOURS about this very thing – exchanging “credit” and “experience” for what can sometimes be a 23-hour-a-day slave labor experience, day in and day out.  I think that it is absolute horse hockey (that’s poop, kids) that this still goes on.  I know that there are unpaid internships in the lighting industries, which is why this is relevant JimOnLight.com material.  I also know that people get taken advantage of in these situations.  It doesn’t take a genius to figure this out.

From the article:

No one keeps official count of how many paid and unpaid internships there are, but Lance Choy, director of the Career Development Center at Stanford University, sees definitive evidence that the number of unpaid internships is mushrooming — fueled by employers’ desire to hold down costs and students’ eagerness to gain experience for their résumés. Employers posted 643 unpaid internships on Stanford’s job board this academic year, more than triple the 174 posted two years ago.

In 2008, the National Association of Colleges and Employers found that 83 percent of graduating students had held internships, up from 9 percent in 1992. This means hundreds of thousands of students hold internships each year; some experts estimate that one-fourth to one-half are unpaid.

Come on.  A quarter to a HALF of internships are unpaid?  I think that this has a lot to do with the things that people tell students that they need to do when they’re trying to get a degree.  It was no different for me when I was in school - I was told on several occasions that an unpaid internship helps you have a better chance of getting a job.  I’m here to call BS on this, people.  I wasn’t having that crap when I was in school – I looked for a summer gig to do in place of an internship for credit in undergrad, where an internship was a requirement for graduation in my program.  So instead of getting abused, I went out as a master electrician on an opera tour and learned something new every day, AND got enough money to buy myself food (and cigarettes at that time, bad bad habit).

More from the NYT article – notice that the examples noted are all entertainment industry internships:

In California, officials have issued guidance letters advising employers whether they are breaking the law, while Oregon regulators have unearthed numerous abuses.

“We’ve had cases where unpaid interns really were displacing workers and where they weren’t being supervised in an educational capacity,” said Bob Estabrook, spokesman for Oregon’s labor department. His department recently handled complaints involving two individuals at a solar panel company who received $3,350 in back pay after claiming that they were wrongly treated as unpaid interns.

Many students said they had held internships that involved noneducational menial work. To be sure, many internships involve some unskilled work, but when the jobs are mostly drudgery, regulators say, it is clearly illegal not to pay interns.

One Ivy League student said she spent an unpaid three-month internship at a magazine packaging and shipping 20 or 40 apparel samples a day back to fashion houses that had provided them for photo shoots.

At Little Airplane, a Manhattan children’s film company, an N.Y.U. student who hoped to work in animation during her unpaid internship said she was instead assigned to the facilities department and ordered to wipe the door handles each day to minimize the spread of swine flu.

People, you have to use your brains nowadays.  Try your hardest not to let people take advantage of you just because you’re a student.  It’s true, sometimes internships pay, and a LOT of time an internship is something that you’ll get to learn a ton while you’re doing it – if the organization providing the internship has their stuff together to make sure you’re being taught.  Also, you can plan on doing some scut work while you’re an internship, this is totally true.  In the lighting industries, for example, if you’re working in entertainment lighting doing an internship, you could expect, for example, to be hosing the body fluids and mud off of feeder cable coming back into the shop from an outdoor music festival.  We’ve all been there.  You do it and you learn about that skill.  You might also get to run a Hog or a grandMA or something else cool during your internship.

Just remember, you gotta take care of yourself too.  So if you decide to take an unpaid internship for whatever reason, research it.  Then research it again, and again, and then sleep, and do it one more time.  Make sure that your time is worth what you’ll be getting.

Check out the NYT article here – great read.  Read both pages, the whole article is a bit shocking.  Also, thanks to withmyba.com for the hilarious image!

You Got $870 bucks to Spend On A Lamp, Then Trash It?

First, watch this – you’re seeing the Less Lamp, created by Jordi Canudas:

The Museum of Modern Art website is selling this lamp for $875 USD – only $787.50 if you’re a MoMA member – as a piece of light art.  It’s an interesting statement of art, right?  But mostly I just want to meet someone who has a grand to spend on “light art” like the lamp by Jordi Canudas.  I am all about light, art, and light art, but I just don’t have that much cash to “invest” on something like that right now!

Jordi, don’t take offense – I’m writing about it, aren’t I?

Check out Jordi Canudas’ portfolio site too – he’s got interesting wares there!

It even comes with the hammer so you can destroy it.

Stock Market – Lighting Edition

Something hilarious happened to me last week – well, hilarious to me.  I was watching the news early in the morning, and as I flipped through the various new sources it was literally “the stock market” this, and “the blue chips” that, and “Main street took another hit today.”  Oh – and JP Morgan irked the United States a few weeks ago when it unveiled its plans for high pay and big bonuses.  Again.

I could not help but thinking that no one talks about lighting industries’ stocks.  We provide the world with the ability to light up the darkness – we bring innovation to innovation.  While people in our industry lose their jobs one after the other and stimulus money gets tossed into projects across the nation, don’t you wonder how the companies IN our industry are doing?

I captured some 90-day stock market charts last week for a handful of companies in the lighting markets.  Obviously this is not an exhaustive list – if there are stocks you follow that you think I should be following, will you either post a comment below or send me a comment through the contact form?  Pretty please?

Okay, let’s start out with Barco (Barco NV – BAR):

On January 26, 2010, Barco’s stock closed out at $28.94 per share, down 47 cents (or -1.6%).  Barco’s market cap is $369.35 million – “market cap” or market capitalization is a number that represents a corporation’s outstanding number of shares multiplied by their price.  What this means is that Barco has 12,760,000 shares of stock, each valued at around $28.94 each.  Multiply $28.94 X 12,760,000 and you get around $369,350,000, their current market cap.

Something that strikes me as a bit sad, whether it is related or not, is when you put news against the market reports.  For example, look at their stock price around the beginning of December, right when they laid off a bunch of High End Systems workers.


Look at Lighting Science Group – a company that engineers and makes LED products (Lighting Science Group Corporation – LSGC):

LSGC’s stock as of 1/26 was at 88 cents per share, with 30,460,000 shares outstanding – giving LSGC a market cap of $25,890,000 (remember, shares X cost = market cap).  That share cost was up 3 cents (or 3.53%).  For those of you following the news, LSGC announced at the beginning of the month that they were taking on Zachary Gibler, Carlos Gutierrez, Michael Kempner, Joe Montana and Michael Moseley to their board of directors.  You might recognize Carlos Guitierrez as a CNBC news contributor and Commerce Secretary under George W. Bush.  And yes, Joe Montana is THE Joe Montana, the football guy.

LSGC just this last week announced that they were commencing a rights offering for up to about 25 million Series D shares of non-convertible preferred stock (and warrants), which represents the right to purchase up to about 25 million shares of common stock.  All of these terms are extremely confusing to people (like myself) who don’t follow the market nose first.  LSGC’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings on this news are here.

You might be asking yourself, “What on earth are “Series D Non-Convertible Stocks?”  Preferred stocks are debt instruments (like all stocks) that have a higher payout priority than common stocks.  This means that dividends must be paid to preferred stock holders first before common stock dividend payouts.  In the case of these stocks, the holders don’t have the option to convert them to common stocks, and preferred stocks normally don’t have voting rights.  It’s all very complicated in my humble opinion.


Now look at General Electric (General Electric Company, GE):

GE has not had that great of a time lately as far as the stock market is concerned.  As of January 26, their stock was down 6 cents at $16.29, and they were having one of the worst periods in their almost 120 year history.  GE lost its AAA credit rating last year, and its GE Capital division ain’t doing so well – their commercial real estate division is getting hammered with vacancies and all that kind of real estate crap.  GE is a HUGE company though – their market share is 173.48 billion – that’s $173,480,000,000 – with 10,650,000,000 shares outstanding at about $16.29 a share.  That’s a lot of zeros.


Let’s move on to a company that people are hoping will do some amazing things with their Electron-Stimulated Luminescence technology, or ESL – the VU1 Corporation (VUOC):

VU1 is actually up 5 cents from the time I polled these numbers – but as of January 26 it was at $0.49 a share, with almost 86 million shares outstanding.  Their market cap was $42,050,000 approximately, and they were down about a dime a share last quarter.  The ESL technology is interesting, and on the VU1 blog there is talk of progress on an ESL replacement for the typical fluorescent tube.


Ok, now look at semiconductor manufacturer Cree, Inc (CREE):

Cree is having a great time right now – their stock price is up over 10 bucks since October 2009, and set a new record for the company’s stock prices on January 19, 2010.  They’re actually down 2 bucks since January 26 when I pulled this report, but they’re still kicking some tail.  With 106 million shares at around 60 bucks is giving Cree a market cap of 6.31 billion dollars – $6,310,000,000.  I love to actually type out the digits, it really gives you perspective.

I wish I had a few extra buckaroos to invest, because I’d probably toss some of it into Cree stock.  Analysts are flipping out over Cree’s prices and growth.  I hope their growth spawns new and excellent technologies that are positive advancements towards our growth as an industry and not just the same old stuff for more money.

Some news I did not expect to hear lately was the agreement that one of their competitors Arrow Electronics signed with Cree to provide Arrow’s customers with Cree power products (Silicon Carbide JBS).  Go, Cree!


The last company I want to actually talk about is Philips (Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV – PHG):

From when I pulled this report, Philips’ stock is down a buck or so per share.  Philips is another enormous company with so many divisions – they have almost a billion shares of stock outstanding – 927,460,000 shares.  Their market cap (927.46 million shares at around 30 bucks a share) is $29.17 billion dollars.  Huge.

Philips is a monster in the LED business, and if you’re in the lighting industry you’ve heard of their LumiLED products.  TIME Magazine gave Philips the honor of calling their LED replacement lamp as one of the best inventions of 2009, and people rave about their other product lines – LED wash fixtures, high output LEDs, and their various lines of consumer non-LED products, including incandescent and fluorescent products.  They’re an industry leader.


None of this stuff is easy to understand, and believe me – I’m a lighting designer, not a market analyst.  But it doesn’t take a Merrill Lynch quant to break down the major components into understandable pieces.  I kinda look at it like this – when more people understand what is going on with a subject, it becomes that much more difficult for insiders in that industry to screw the public over.  If I can help make that happen even a little bit, then we have collectively made an investment in our future and success.

I’m not gonna talk about the reports below, but they’re just graphs of some other companies’ stocks that I follow.  If you have suggestions of companies I should watch, drop me a line or comment below, will ya?

Tatsuta Electric Wire and Cable – HOLY CRAP – $14.15 billion dollar market cap (for only 65 million shares), and their stock is at $217 a SHARE!

Chung Wa Picture Tubes:

Molex Inc – everybody knows Molex, right?

Barco Lays Off More High End Systems Employees, Just in Time for Christmas

barco-pink-slip

I just found out in a round-about way that digital lighting and display company Barco let some more High End Systems employees go last week.  And JUST in time for the holidays, too!  How fantastic.

You know, I am no MBA holder, nor would I know how to conduct a multi-million dollar business, so I won’t.  But I do have to say that it seems to me like you are trying to erase an American lighting icon from the industry altogether.  I have a problem with that.  Does it matter what I think?  More than likely not in this case.  I have a suggestion, though – why don’t you come on over from Belgium and get to know the people and equipment that people like?

The stock picture – six months:

barco-6month-stock

The last two days (December 15-17, 2009):

barco-2day-stock

On November 27, Barco acquired another business entity, FIMI Medical Imaging.  From Reuters:

Dow Jones reported that Barco NV has reached an agreement with Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV about the acquisition of FIMI. Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV is to sell FIMI for EUR 19 million in cash and the agreement includes an earn-out-construction from which it will earn EUR 10 million in the next five years. The transaction is expected to be completed at the end of 2009.

From Barco’s press release:

Eric Van Zele, Barco’s President and CEO, stated: “Our Medical Imaging Division has been performing strongly in recent years both sales and profit-wise. The acquisition of FIMI fits well within the overall growth strategy of the division as it further strengthens our existing product portfolio, opens opportunities in new segments of medical imaging, and strengthens our strategic relationship with Philips.”

Well, I really hope that you’re going to do more with the High End Systems brand. Those people are good people, and you have an asset in Richard Belleveau.  I hope you realize that and understand the entertainment industry before you spill white-out all over history and innovation.  You could be an industry leader.  Don’t forget, they were doing things well way before you.

Pandemic Studios Rumored to Close Today

When I was in grad school, I took this class called “Digital and Physical Light,” which was a grad seminar class between the lighting designers in the School of Theatre and the grads in the ACCAD (the Advanced Center for Computing and Design).  The ACCAD kids were the future of animation and digital lighting – Maya people, animators, etc – and it was interesting to see light from an animation side.  I gained a lot of respect for those digital lighters that semester.

The above rambling is relevant to the article because a bunch of animators and digital lighting designers are rumored to lose their jobs today – EA Games’ developer Pandemic Studios in LA is possibly laying off 200 people today.  This is in part to some cutbacks EA is having.  Isn’t it weird to read about light in video game news?!

EA just ponied up $300 million bucks to buy “social game developer” Playfish, a company that develops games for the iPhone, Android, and Facebook platforms.  Why they would do that seems fairly obvious, being that it’s a huge market and all.  James Riccitiello, EA’s CEO, said that “EA is performing well, with quality, sales and segment share up so far this year.  We are making tough calls to cut cost in targeted areas and investing more in our biggest games and digital businesses.”

It sucks that the holidays show up, and people lose their jobs.  It sucks any time of year that people lose their jobs – it just sucks even more for me when it’s cold out.  Thanksgiving and Christmas are around the corner.

You gotta love the economy.  I wonder how those Goldman Sachs bonuses are going to be this Christmas.

Thanks, Gamasutra.

So Much Progress, So Few Local Artists

MainStreetGardenSpotforChristmasTree
(image from UnFair Park, the Dallas Observer blog)

Ah, I love being back in Dallas, Texas.  There are so many things going on in Dallas right now, from new construction, to art installations, to new construction with art installations implanted.  As a lighting designer in the DFW Metro, I am extremely excited to see the projects being put into play in the downtown scene come to fruition.

Case in point:  the new Main Street Garden, with lighting installations from New York light artist Leni Schwendinger and a very soon-to-be large Christmas tree designed by New York landscape designer Thomas Balsley.  After all, Dallas is a place that is growing and changing like the best of the cities in our great country.  We’re proud of Dallas.  We’ve got the big new AT&T Performing Arts Center to house some of the best work ever to be presented on stage, the Dallas Theatre Center and their ever-so-awesome seasons of life-changing theatre and works of genius, and a city so full of artists, designers, and other extremely creative people that it’s busting at its seams.

Since Dallas is full of people who love art, love light and lighting, and certainly love this city, why are the majority of the lighting designers and lighting artists chosen to do work on the city of Dallas from places like New York, Chicago, or LA?

When it comes to lighting the city of Dallas itself, why aren’t local companies and local lighting artists chosen?  Does the fact that a designer or artist lives in Dallas make that person exempt from creating “good” art?  Believe me – there are people right here in the Dallas area who have ideas and design talents just as good as those from any other “big” city.

I’m certainly not naive, don’t get me wrong – with regional theatre companies like Dallas Theatre Center, it can be impossible to light a show there if you’re not from New York, LA, or Chicago.  I guess it really comes down to who you know – which is a shame considering the talent in DFW.  From a budget standpoint, doesn’t it seem like hiring local talent might cut back on expenses that could otherwise be avoided?

So how can we change this and give local talent a chance to do what no one in Dallas seems to believe we can do?  I know that this problem isn’t a Dallas-only issue.  So how would you improve this in your community?

Thanks, UnFair Park!

What? Ohio Public Utilities Commission and FirstEnergy’s $10.80 Stupidity

What?

Have you ever had a volunteer come to your door with a free compact fluorescent lamp?  When my wife and I lived in Oklahoma City,  a community program volunteer brought a free compact fluorescent lamp to our house for us to have and use in order to save energy.  How nice, right?  We thought so.  A public utility, FirstEnergy in Ohio, set up a program (that was approved by the Ohio Public Utilities Commission, by the way) that distributes compact fluorescent lamps to customers in Ohio.

Cool program, right?  Free fluorescent lamps for all.  Except they’re not free – FirstEnergy will be charging their customers $10.80 each for the lamps, automatically, with no opt-out program.  Hold on a minute – for $10 I can go down to Target, Home Depot, or Lowes’ and buy a half-dozen compact fluorescent lamps.  What’s with this $10.80 per lamp crap?

Last year, the Ohio state government passed a bill saying that utilities had to cut their customers’ usage 22% by the year 2025.  Apparently this is how FirstEnergy is going about reducing energy usage – by charging customers way, way too much for something that people can buy on their own for 1/6 the price.

An article from John Funk at the Plain Dealer in Cleveland states:

FirstEnergy bought Chinese-made bulbs from three distributors including TCP Inc. of Aurora, because it couldn’t find any made in the United States. A California company will deliver 3 million of them door-to-door to Illuminating Co., Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison customers. The rest will be mailed.

Passing out the bulbs is not the way to persuade people to use them, Migden-Ostrander said. The company should have given its customers discount coupons and let them shop for the best deal, she said.

The company’s lawyers resisted that, arguing that FirstEnergy had to begin cutting back power deliveries right away to meet the terms of the new law.

Hmm.  You know what really sucks about this?  If you have seen the letter from FirstEnergy VP of Customer Service John Paganie, it seems like they’re giving these lamps away for free:

We are pleased to provide you with two energy-efficient CFLs. When you install these bulbs in place of two 100-watt incandescent bulbs in your home, you could save about $30 over the life of each bulb.  Here’s how:

Traditional incandescent bulbs cost less to buy than CFLs, but they might only last 750 hours. Your new CFLs should last 10,000 hours, which is 10 times as long. This means you would need to buy more than 13 traditional bulbs to equal the lifespan of one CFL.

Also, your new CFLs will use 75 percent less electricity than a standard 100-watt incandescent bulb, and will produce the same amount of light. When you combine the longer life and decreased energy usage of the CFL, you can see significant, long-term savings for each bulb you replace.

FirstEnergy’s Ohio utility companies – The Illuminating Company, Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison – are providing these light bulbs to residential customers in Ohio.

We’re dedicated to helping our customers reduce the amount of electricity they use while increasing their energy efficiency. These CFLs are just one simple way you can improve energy efficiency in your home. We’ve also enclosed a booklet with more than 100 energy-saving tips.
For additional information, please visit firstenergycorp.com/energyefficiency.

Thanks, and enjoy your two compact fluorescent light bulbs!

Sincerely,
John Paganie
FirstEnergy Vice President of Energy Efficiency and Customer Service

What the hell.  Doesn’t this seem like a bit of a misleading statement?  I think it does, and apparently thousands of Ohioans also thought it did, because the Ohio Public Utilities Commission, who approved the program in the first place, has turned around and said that they have now asked FirstEnergy to postpone the start of the program until someone knows what on Earth it is going to cost, and what exactly is going on.  From the Consumerist website, a pro-consumer news site (I’m sure you know who they are), who posted the response from the PUCO on the FirstEnergy backlash:

“The PUCO has received a large volume of calls and emails in response to the compact fluorescent light bulb program approved last month for FirstEnergy. Today, I received a letter from Gov. Strickland asking that the PUCO postpone the program until such time as we can address several questions raised by the governor, members of the Ohio General Assembly and FirstEnergy customers related to program details and costs.

As a result, I have asked FirstEnergy to postpone deployment of its compact fluorescent light bulb program until the Commission can thoroughly assess the costs associated with this program. The PUCO approved the program following consensus reached during discussions among the company and other organizations including the Office of the Ohio Consumers’ Counsel and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Although the PUCO allowed FirstEnergy to implement its program, we did not approve the charge that will appear on monthly bills as a result. Reports in the media place the cost to customers at sixty cents per month for three years, which equates to $21.60 over the life of the program. The PUCO has not approved these additional dollars nor have we received a request by the company to do so.

The PUCO will gather additional information regarding the program and its related costs. Until the PUCO has specific details regarding the program costs, FirstEnergy should not deploy its compact fluorescent light bulb program.”

I’ll be watching for more information on this ridiculance. If you have any more news about the program, please contact me via the contact form and I will get that info published right now.

A record of the legal case for this ridiculance is here – it’s a dry read, but interesting nonetheless.

Cat West – Interview on iSquint – Where is the Industry Heading?

Okay, I love these interviews.  I did one back in mid 2009 with iSquint, and now he’s got an interview posted with our favorite sassy programmer/LD, Cat West.  Don’t waste a second, check it out!

Cat’s actually a ninja – and she WILL kick your butt with her throwing stars made of complex algorithms.

Yeah.  I went there.

The Nirvana LED Bathtub – Yes, A Bathtub With LEDs.

So, sometimes there are things that get marketed to people with lots and lots and lots of money.  There are also times when companies develop things that are only achievable by people of a very high income bracket.  This specific time might be both of those times together.  To be fair, there isn’t a price listed on the website, but my spidey-sense tells me that it’s probably not $250 dollars.

Meet the Nirvana LED Bathtub – a completely touch-controlled LED bathtub with 360 LEDs embedded into the surface:

nirvana-led-bath1

See that display in the lower right corner?  It’s upside down in that picture, but it’s an onboard readout of the temperature of the water – which can be changed with your hand motions.  A tub that boasts chromatherapy, digital readouts, complete control, and automatic-ness.  What else do you need, I guess?  I wonder how much this thing is going to retail for when it hits the market?  Like anything else that’s expensive, once you buy it, attractive women will flock to your bathroom.

Oh yeah, and this tub won a Red Dot award.

nirvana-led-bathtub

Here’s one of the company’s other models – LEDs in a different configuration:

nirvana-led-bath

Thanks, Born Rich!

Panasonic Says 19 Years on Their EverLED Lamp

everled4

Stories of Panasonic’s new EverLED lamp are making their way around the intarwebs in the last week – in October (the 21st to be specific), Japan will see the release of Panasonic’s new line of household LED incandescent replacement lamps.  Panasonic is selling this new LED source as one that will last 19 years if used an average of about five and a half hours a day.  One one hand, awesome!  On the other, will there be a department to substantiate fraud claims if this doesn’t work?  And how on earth have they tested this claim?  I’m no rocket surgeon, but is this all based on mathematical estimate?

First, what does an average of five hours a day equal?  It means about 40,000 lamp hours.  Take that how you will.  40,000 hours is 40,000 hours no matter how you spin it.  But – when you claim 19 years on an average of five and a half hours a day, what happens when you run the lamp constantly for 500 hour stints at a time – or even 72 hour runs on average?

Don’t worry, I’m not poo-pooing Panasonic’s EverLED lamp.  I’m actually excited to see it in action.  We’re testing one of EternaLEDs’ HydraLux-4s in our apartment for testing, and it’s doing great, and provides a good light.  I’m a lighting designer – I am critical AND loving!

The Panasonic EverLED has some interesting efficacy numbers – keep in mind that these numbers are without a luminaire – just the lamp on its own:

  • The LDa7D-A1 model, equal in output to a 40W incandescent, has an efficacy of 82.6 lm/W
  • The LDA4D-A1 model, equal in output to a 30W incandescent, has an efficacy of 85 lm/W

These numbers are very good – they basically make the EverLED models about 40 times more efficient than an incandescent lamp (a rough number is about 12 lm/W for a 40W incandescent).  But what do you think the number one issue keeping consumers away from LED lamps is currently?

If you guessed price, you’re right on the money.  The EverLED is going to cost about $40 bucks (or 4,000 yen), and at this time is only available in Japan.  Similar LED lamps are upwards of the same price range.  When you can buy a pack of incandescent lamps for under two dollars, what’s giving the low-income families incentive to buy something that costs the same as a tank of gas?

Check out some images, and the press release from CompoundSemi:

everled5

everled3

everled2

From CompoundSemi:

September 10, 2009… Osaka, Japan–Panasonic Corporation, a leader in electronics technology and innovation, today unveiled bulb-shaped LED (light-emitting diode) lamps, the latest addition to its EVERLEDS LED lighting products. The new line-up consisting of eight types of bulbs offers the industry’s most energy-efficient(1), lightest(2) and smallest LED bulbs(3). They also include the industry’s first compact type LED bulbs(4) and dimmable lamps. By offering a variety of energy-saving, long-lasting, environmentally-friendly LED lamps, Panasonic encourages consumers to replace traditional incandescent lamps to address climate-change issues.

The new line-up includes 4.0 W (LDA4L-A1 and LDA4D-A1), 6.9 W (LDA7L-A1 and LDA7D-A1) and 7.6 W (LDA8L-A1/D and LDA8D-A1/D) standard type (E26 base) LED bulbs and 5.5 W (LDA6L-E17-A1/D and LDA6D-E17-A1/D) compact type (E17 base) LED bulbs. Available in “Daylight” and warm “Lamp” colors, they will go on sale in Japan on October 21.

The new products use Panasonic’s own heat dissipation technology to increase the bulb’s energy-efficiency. Generally speaking, LED’s luminous efficiency increases as temperature decreases. So it is important to lower and optimize the temperature of an LED package to achieve higher luminous efficiency. By applying alumite treatment to the surface, Panasonic successfully increased heat dissipation to lower the temperate of the LED package.

Combining this technology with the design which tightly joins the LED package and the casing, the company has achieved the industry’s highest energy efficiency in LED bulbs(1).

Also, when used as a downlight, the 6.9 W standard type LED bulbs deliver the brightness equivalent to 60 W incandescent bulbs5). That means it can save up to 2,000 yen per year on energy bills. The 4.0 W standard and 5.5 W compact LED bulbs produce the output comparable to 40 W incandescents and the 7.6 W standard LED bulbs have the brightness of 60 W incandescents when used as a downlight(6).

Panasonic also made the new LED bulbs the lightest2) in the industry by making the casing thinner and reducing the amount of aluminum used in the product. The standard size E26 base bulb weighs only 100 g and the compact size E17 base bulb weighs 50 g.

Further, Panasonic employed its own thermal analysis technology to optimize the heat dissipating configuration (heat sink) to create the most compact E26 base LED bulbs in terms of length and outer diameter. The new LED lamps, including the industry’s first E17 base LED bulbs, will easily fit into existing fixtures with which other replacement bulbs did not physically match.

The E26 base LED bulbs have a long lifespan of up to 40,000 hours. That means they last for about 19 years when used for 5.5 hours a day. The E17 base LED bulbs have about 20,000 hour life span. The new LED bulbs also feature a durable glass globe using glass manufacturing technology Panasonic accumulated over the years. They emit virtually no UV or IR radiation. The 7.6 W standard type and the 5.5 W compact type LED bulbs are dimmable from 10 percent to 100 percent.

Notes:

(1) The standard type LDA7D-A1 LED bulb, which produces the brightness equivalent to a 40 W incandescent lamp when used without fixtures, has luminous efficiency of 82.6 lm/W and standard type LDA4D-A1 LED bulb, which produces the brightness equivalent to a 30 W incandescent lamp when used without fixtures, has luminous efficiency of 85.0 lm/w, as of September 10, 2009.

(2) As a standard type LED bulb, as of September 10, 2009.
(3) In terms of length and outer diameter.
(4) As a compact type LED bulb (E17 base) which produces the brightness equivalent to a 25 W mini-krypton when used without fixtures.
(5) Direct lighting when used with the LB72630Z fixture by Panasonic Electric Works (PEW).
(6) Direct lighting when used with PEW’s LB72106 (4.0 W LED bulb), LB72630Z (7.6 W LED bulb) and LB74059 (5.5 W LED bulb) fixtures.

Thanks to CNet, Inhabitat, and CompoundSemi!