xt22
Electrical
- Nov 12, 2009
- 6
I have the task of going through the lighting technical standards for my company, and I've been focusing a lot on LED lighting.
Everywhere I do research, I get blasted with info on how economical LED lighting systems are. But, when I do a simple calculation, they extra cost of an LED fixture is NOT offset by its energy efficiency.
For example, I could replace a 250W HPS fixture with a 100W LED fixture. The initial cost of HPS is $300, and the initail cost to replace it with an LED is $1300.
Obviously, the LED is more of an initial investment, but its energy savings of 150W should eventually pay for the difference, right?
But, when I take into account the lifetime of each fixture the HPS is always cheaper. It takes 24,000hrs for a HPS bulb to reach 70%, and it takes 60,000hrs for an LED fixture to do the same. To replace the luminaries, the HPS costs $30 for a new bulb, but for the LEDs I need to buy a whole new fixture at $1300. When taking these three factors (up-front cost, energy consumption, luminarie maintainence) into account, LEDs are not cheaper....ever.
Does this make sense? Or did I screw something up? Why are LED lights considered the long-term $$$ saving alternative?
Everywhere I do research, I get blasted with info on how economical LED lighting systems are. But, when I do a simple calculation, they extra cost of an LED fixture is NOT offset by its energy efficiency.
For example, I could replace a 250W HPS fixture with a 100W LED fixture. The initial cost of HPS is $300, and the initail cost to replace it with an LED is $1300.
Obviously, the LED is more of an initial investment, but its energy savings of 150W should eventually pay for the difference, right?
But, when I take into account the lifetime of each fixture the HPS is always cheaper. It takes 24,000hrs for a HPS bulb to reach 70%, and it takes 60,000hrs for an LED fixture to do the same. To replace the luminaries, the HPS costs $30 for a new bulb, but for the LEDs I need to buy a whole new fixture at $1300. When taking these three factors (up-front cost, energy consumption, luminarie maintainence) into account, LEDs are not cheaper....ever.
Does this make sense? Or did I screw something up? Why are LED lights considered the long-term $$$ saving alternative?