1. Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
    Dismiss Notice

Worldwide lighting made 20% more efficienct.

Discussion in 'Members Lounge' started by Flyback, Jun 29, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Flyback

    Flyback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    34
    Hello

    http://www.isotera.com/

    ....this company has the answer to make worldwide lighting 20% more efficient.

    Why?...well, because the PFC stage is centralised to a power hub, and then the LED lamps draw from it. The central PFC stage is 99.5% PFC, far better than today's units where each LED lamp has to have its own PFC, being only about 85 % PFC.

    This hugh PFC improvement will mean huge savings as there will be much less i^2R heating in the supply system cables.

    So why is the world not asking for an isotera system?
     
  2. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    How much is it? Couldn't find pricing.

    Actually I could find very little about the technology on their website, Google revealed even less. Not sure how efficient a contact-less coupling would be or why it's even necessary in a light fixture.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2013
    • Like Like x 1
  3. ronv

    ronv Well-Known Member Most Helpful Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,725
    Likes:
    488
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ. USA
    I think the problem with LED lighting in general is initial cost and light output. LEDs are about 5X more efficient than incandescent and they still aren't setting the world on fire. So another few percent doesn't mean much. CFLs offer similar savings and fit in existing fixtures for lower initial cost.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. dave

    Dave New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 1997
    Messages:
    -
    Likes:
    0


     
  5. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada

    Ahh iSotera is a new startup that got funding from Angel Investors in the UK. Quality modern ATX power supplies can be 99% PFC, why isn't everyone using one in their PC?

    OP do you work for iSotera?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Flyback

    Flyback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    34
    the coupling is very high 90's efficient.
    Lighting is 20% of the worlds energy cosumption...more than computing.

    The PFC needs to be centralised into a highly efficient hub, where it can be made 99% PFC....that much we agree i am sure(?).....then you either have DC coming off that or high frequency AC.

    The problem with DC is that you need it to be high dc voltage to keep current down....but then you get too much contact sparking when you hot-plug lamps in and out.

    I dont work for them but my organisation is considering installing from them, and we have been offered a grant to do so. I can see this massive efficiency saving due to the centralised PFC, and i am thinking, surely its gotta be the way?
     
  7. WTP Pepper

    WTP Pepper Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    648
    Likes:
    41
    Location:
    UK
    Looks like some form of inductive coupler to me.
     
  8. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Do they have any data on the coupling? Where did you get 90%?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. tcmtech

    tcmtech Well-Known Member Most Helpful Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,651
    Likes:
    429
    Location:
    Sawyer, North Dakota, USA
    Fortunately they typical residential customer is not charged for poor power factor so regardless of having PFC of .2 or 1 the customer does not pay any difference in cost.

    Now that said going from a typical 85% PF to a 99% PF on a lighting system that uses 1/5 the power again doesn't add up to squat in I/R2 losses.

    Try the math yourself.

    Say I have a large incandescent lighting load in my home that takes 2400 watts on a 120 VAC service. Thats 20 amps at a PF of 1 being it's pure resistive load.

    Now I change that out oto LED that uses 1/5th the power but at a PF of .85. So from that I am now drawing roughly ~4.7 amps.

    On my first incandescent lighting system I had .1 ohms of line resistance in the lighting circuit leaving me with a 2 volt at 20 amps load loss or 40 watts line loses.
    Now on the LED system I still have the .1 ohm line resistance which at 4.7 amps gives me a .47 volt at 4.7 amp loss or about 2.3 watts loss.

    Now going with your .99 PF lighting system over my.85 PF system you now drop my losses to .4 volts at 4 amps or 1.6 watts saving me a whole .7 watts per hour.

    Given my present cost of 8 cents a KWH your LED system would take ~1429 hours (59.5 days) of leaving all my lighting on to save me one KWH. Taking that out a non stop running for a full year 24 hours a day your system would save me about 50 cents. :rolleyes:

    Somehow at a savings of at best of 50 cents a year for 24/7/365 running I really don't see your .99 PFC being worth anything to me savings wise. :(

    If you are really looking for good quality lighting systems with high efficiency and very high average service life with color and light characteristics far superior to LED Induction lighting in the way to go! :D

    http://www.sega-technologies.com/pages/ledvsmagneticinductionlighting.aspx
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Mr RB

    Mr RB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    4,716
    Likes:
    194
    Location:
    Out there
    That's complete B.S.

    Lighting makes a very small fraction of domestic energy use, much less than 5% and in areas where people have a lot of heating might be less than 2%.

    And lighting is much lower % of electricity in industry than in domestic.

    And that's just in actual electricity "energy", if you include all the other energy use by the world (ie oil) then electric lighting is only a tiny fraction of 1% of the world's total "energy consumption".
     
    • Like Like x 3
  11. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I just can't see that non contact straight through 51kHz coupling being very efficient. Certainly not 90%
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. MikeMl

    MikeMl Well-Known Member Most Helpful Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    Messages:
    11,045
    Likes:
    541
    Location:
    AZ 86334
    Well, not in the US
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. crutschow

    crutschow Well-Known Member Most Helpful Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,592
    Likes:
    477
    Location:
    L.A., USA Zulu -8
    According to this the losses in the power grid are typically 6-8% of the power consumed. Assuming those loses are mainly due to the resistance in the grid, the power factor only affects that 6-8% loss due to the increased current cause by the PF. For example a 0.85 PF would mean there is a 0.15 increase in the total current from the device. This increases the resistive grid loss by the square of the current increase or 1.15^2 - 1.0 = .32. Thus the increase in grid loss would be 0.32 * 6-8% = 1.94-2.58%. So the best you could do by increasing the PF form 0.85 to 1.0 would be to reduce the total power by 1.94-2.58%, significant but not a large factor.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. Flyback

    Flyback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    34
    ..i am talking about the losses in the supply system , before the electricity even gets to the house or building..theres miles of cable out there.
     
  15. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    What does that have to do with isotera?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Flyback

    Flyback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    34
    centralised pfc (as in isotera power hub) = better overall pfc for the lighting = less current in the supply cables from the power station
     
  17. Flyback

    Flyback Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,989
    Likes:
    34
    but thats a fantastic reduction.....lighting is an enormous amount of power...so thats a huge reduction
     
  18. blueroomelectronics

    blueroomelectronics Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,536
    Likes:
    168
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Okay I've asked you before, where are you getting these efficiency numbers from? I've checked isotera's web site and the few PDFs and I'm not getting any real data. I couldn't find the 99.5% number you quoted and that's only PFC (I found PFC 95.5% in one of the data sheets) but that's not the overall efficiency of the device. LEDs are excellent but they do get hot and heat is wasted energy.

    Those inductive couplings are either magical or inefficient. I can't find any info on the couplers, I can't even find isotera's Patent.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. tcmtech

    tcmtech Well-Known Member Most Helpful Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,651
    Likes:
    429
    Location:
    Sawyer, North Dakota, USA
    The utility supply side has its power factor constantly monitored and adjusted by the power companies themselves. If they wanted a higher power factor than they normally run at they can easily adjust their system to compensate for it.

    Now more importantly apparently you do not understand that to get the power to move through the system there has to be a some amount of PF offset or they system will not work which is why they try to keep it in a range of roughly .9 - .95 as a whole on their side of the meter.


    Personally I have no want need or concern in spending more of my money to solve a problem that does not exist in a system I have no say over in how it's operated.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Mr RB

    Mr RB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2008
    Messages:
    4,716
    Likes:
    194
    Location:
    Out there
    Wow. Thanks for the information I'm really surprised at 13% of domestic electricity used for lighting!!

    From those stats it looks like Americans have LOTS of lighting, don't cook much, and use natural gas etc for central heating and hot water instead of electric heating.

    Anyway even if their figures are correct it is 12% of total electricity used for lighting, not 20% of "total energy consumption", which is a massive difference.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Vizier87

    Vizier87 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes:
    12
    Location:
    Johor Bahru, Malaysia
    I presume most % went to the factory motors and whatnot?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page