This iReport is part of an assignment:
Tech talk
About this iReport
- Posted November 8, 2012 by
- tristateled Follow
Location
Greenwich, Connecticut
Greenwich, Connecticut
Assignment
 |
More from tristateled
- New York's Cerebral Palsy Association Gets Help With Seesmart LED Lighting
- Westchester County's (DPW) Saves Thousands with Seesmart LED Lighting
- Fort Knox residential neighborhood moves ahead with large LED lighting retrofit
- The Ashforth Company reduces energy consumption with Seesmart LED Lighting
- Has LED lighting reached a benchmark for commercial real estate in NY?
More iReports you should see
Redbird LED tube lights removed from the Design Lighting Consortium's QPL
Yesterday, in reviewing the latest Design Lighting Consortium's (DLC) Qualified Products List (QPL), I noticed all Cardinal™ LED linear tube lights manufactured by ©Redbird LED Inc. were removed from the QPL. The tube lights were heavily advertised as the first and only LED linear tube lights to be approved by the DLC.
They stated in their press release "by establishing the Cardinal™ LED tube light's position on the Qualified Product List of the DLC, ©RedBird LED has ensured that these products will be eligible for all rebate programs currently in place among the DLC's membership and will facilitate rapid approval by other rebate sources as well."
Although, I do not know the specific reasons the products were removed from the QPL, consumers should be aware of the removal from the list to avoid the misconception that they will be able to receive a rebate from energy reduction programs utilizing the DLC's QPL for these particular products.
In addition ©Redbird LED Inc. recently recieved the IES 2012 progress report award for their Cardinal™ LED tube light as a significant achievement towards the art and science of lighting. One has to wonder what will happen with the award now that the product has been removed from the QPL.
Readers may remember my report published on September 21st, 2012 in which I questioned the only listing of LED linear tubes on the QPL stated below.
"During a more detailed review of the tube and components utilized within, reviewers found the reported lumen output to be questionable. For this reason a third party submitted this QPL approved lamp for testing to Lighting Sciences Inc., UL Verification Services. When the results from the testing report were reviewed, this lamp did not appear to meet the required 2,200 lumens either. It is unclear to me how this approved lamp appears on the QPL. Since the DLC does not perform it's own certified testing, it is possible that the the reported results were misinterpreted or in error. The third party has submitted the independent testing report to the DLC and are awaiting an answer regarding the discrepancy."
I commend the DLC for their prompt attention in reviewing this listing on the QPL. Having examined the Lighting Sciences report I am not surprised it was removed. I fully support the importance of having strict specifications that ensure only quality LED linear tube lights are certified by the DLC however, I think it is clear that the current methodology for evaluating LED linear tubes is not the most accurate way to measure the delivered light of a given LED lighting fixture and therefore achieve DLC certification.
While I am confident that leading LED manufacturers will soon achieve the required lumen output necessary for inclusion, the problem will be the delivered light will be too bright to utilize the approved product in many applications as well as force end users to purchase a higher wattage lamp than necessary if they want to obtain a rebate.
I have tested and reviewed numerous LED tube lights in a variety of fixtures and have found several tubes from leading manufacturers that provide equal or superior delivered light to the task area below while significantly reducing power consumption as compared to the existing fluorescent technologies. If an LED tube light is UL/ETL certified and can provide the necessary light levels as established by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) while meeting the warranty requirements I believe it should be considered for inclusion by the DLC.
It is my hope that the DLC will review the evaluation process currently in place and confer with LED industry experts to establish a better system for inclusion. I encourage all LED manufacturers, property owners and facility managers to discuss the evaluation process currently in place today.
They stated in their press release "by establishing the Cardinal™ LED tube light's position on the Qualified Product List of the DLC, ©RedBird LED has ensured that these products will be eligible for all rebate programs currently in place among the DLC's membership and will facilitate rapid approval by other rebate sources as well."
Although, I do not know the specific reasons the products were removed from the QPL, consumers should be aware of the removal from the list to avoid the misconception that they will be able to receive a rebate from energy reduction programs utilizing the DLC's QPL for these particular products.
In addition ©Redbird LED Inc. recently recieved the IES 2012 progress report award for their Cardinal™ LED tube light as a significant achievement towards the art and science of lighting. One has to wonder what will happen with the award now that the product has been removed from the QPL.
Readers may remember my report published on September 21st, 2012 in which I questioned the only listing of LED linear tubes on the QPL stated below.
"During a more detailed review of the tube and components utilized within, reviewers found the reported lumen output to be questionable. For this reason a third party submitted this QPL approved lamp for testing to Lighting Sciences Inc., UL Verification Services. When the results from the testing report were reviewed, this lamp did not appear to meet the required 2,200 lumens either. It is unclear to me how this approved lamp appears on the QPL. Since the DLC does not perform it's own certified testing, it is possible that the the reported results were misinterpreted or in error. The third party has submitted the independent testing report to the DLC and are awaiting an answer regarding the discrepancy."
I commend the DLC for their prompt attention in reviewing this listing on the QPL. Having examined the Lighting Sciences report I am not surprised it was removed. I fully support the importance of having strict specifications that ensure only quality LED linear tube lights are certified by the DLC however, I think it is clear that the current methodology for evaluating LED linear tubes is not the most accurate way to measure the delivered light of a given LED lighting fixture and therefore achieve DLC certification.
While I am confident that leading LED manufacturers will soon achieve the required lumen output necessary for inclusion, the problem will be the delivered light will be too bright to utilize the approved product in many applications as well as force end users to purchase a higher wattage lamp than necessary if they want to obtain a rebate.
I have tested and reviewed numerous LED tube lights in a variety of fixtures and have found several tubes from leading manufacturers that provide equal or superior delivered light to the task area below while significantly reducing power consumption as compared to the existing fluorescent technologies. If an LED tube light is UL/ETL certified and can provide the necessary light levels as established by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) while meeting the warranty requirements I believe it should be considered for inclusion by the DLC.
It is my hope that the DLC will review the evaluation process currently in place and confer with LED industry experts to establish a better system for inclusion. I encourage all LED manufacturers, property owners and facility managers to discuss the evaluation process currently in place today.
- TAGS:
- lighting,
- qualified,
- consortium,
- products,
- list,
- breaking_news,
- dlc,
- illumination,
- qpl,
- design
- GROUPS:
- Tech and science
What do you think of this story?
Select one of the options below. Your feedback will help tell CNN producers what to do with this iReport. If you'd like, you can explain your choice in the comments below.
Be and editor! Choose an option below:
More from this assignment - Tech talk
iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.
© 2013 Cable News Network. 
Comments