World’s first 100 watt equivalent LED replacement bulb

World’s first 100 watt equival...
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb
View 2 Images
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb
Switch Lighting's 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb

Currently the brightest options for those looking to ditch their incandescent light bulbs in favor of the longer life and more energy efficient LED variety are those equivalent to 60 watt incandescent bulbs, such as the GeoBulb II. Things got a little brighter last month when California-based Switch Lighting announced its 75 watt-equivalent LED bulb and now the company has gone one better with the announcement of what it claims is the world's first 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb.

To solve the problem of LEDs projecting light in only one direction, Switch has mounted outward-facing LEDs on metal fingers. But the real key to the brighter bulb is the company's "City of Light" technology that allows for maximum brightness with fewer LEDs by creating a self-cooling environment inside the bulb. To draw heat away from the LEDs, the bulb dome is filled with a nontoxic liquid that flows out towards the surface of the bulb as it warms. The heat then dissipates evenly over the surface of the bulb and the liquid is then drawn back in to repeat the process.

Switch Lighting says all its LED bulbs offer incandescent quality light and the 100 watt-equivalent LED bulb is no exception. The bulbs are also dimmable and can be mounted in any direction. Additionally, in accordance with the Cradle to Cradle principals, all parts of the bulb can be reused, recycled or reclaimed.

Switch Lighting's Chief Strategy Officer, Brett Sharenow says the company's 100 watt-equivalent A19 bulb produces 1700 lumens in neutral white, which is the same white color as halogen track lighting. Switch Lightbulbs will be available later this year and the company says it will also offer a warm white version of the 100W equivalent bulb in mid- to late-2012.

While no concrete pricing has been announced, Switch Lighting says its LED bulbs will cost much less than existing LED bulbs. A figure of US$20 to $25 for the company's 15.5 watt, 75 watt equivalent bulb is being bandied about, which would see the bulb paying for itself in about a year and is much lower than other LED replacement bulbs currently available.

UPDATE: Switch's 100W e LED bulb consumes 16W with an efficacy of 100 Lumens/Watt. Switch says it has an average lifetime of 20,000 hours and is dimmable from 20 to 100 percent.

Cool design, but I\'d like to know how many watts this uses
100 watts equivalent ,ok. What about real watts?
Paul Anthony
I want one! No I want 20, unfortunately I am not willing to shell out $500 hard earned dollars to get them.
I don\'t get it. All this hoohah about 72 lumens per watt? At $20 per bulb? Regular old electronic ballast fluorescent tubes get 80-100 lumens per watt. Yes that\'s better than 17 l/w from an incandescent, but that\'s not hard to beat. LEDs are good for harsh environments or confined spaces, but not for regular old building lights.
Gee Gizmag!! I love u guyz but... what is THAT? Aren\'t ya missing something here? Anybody can build an LED-based bulb that can replace a 100 watt incandescent, the trick is to build one that uses so little power that it is actually worth doing it. Looking at the company website: for their 60 watt replacement bulb they state \"16 watts\" of power needed to obtain the 60-watt-equivalent light output. Lumens per watt for that product are 75. If the 100-watt-equivalent bulb has a comparable performance, it would consume 21.3 watt to get to that 100-watt-equivalent light output. That is good, but not outstanding. There are conventional compact fluorescents (mercury containing, an thus not very nice) with a comparable efficiency available, and have been for over a decade. LEDs already on the market exist with a light output of 100 lumens per watt, albeit not in the most desirable wave lengths that people want to light up their living rooms with. Laboratory records have recently gone up to near 200 lumens per watt, but are far from production. For the time being, people will still buy compact fluorescents if they want to save energy without draining their wallet. Only if they also want to be nice to the earth and not poison their children\'s drinking water supply, they will shell out the four, five, or eight times higher cost to get one of these new LED products. I hope to see some of these relevant numbers in future Gizmag articles about LED lighting. And yes, I still dearly love you, Mag. My sweet Giz.
James Van Damme
You put that isotropic pattern LED in a conventional lamp, and the shade attenuates half the light. I want a lamp that incorporates an LED array effectively, so that I get the light where I want it, without glare or shadows.
Mark Burgunder
Guys, this is hardly a first. Have a look at the EarthLED EvoLux (http://www.earthled.com/evolux-led-light-bulb.html). For 13 watt you got 100 watt equivalent lighting. We\'ve got a number of these over a year ago and couldn\'t be happier with them.
The picture is so bright I had to put on my sunglasses to look at it! We have come along way sense burning whale oil but there is along way to go. The first goal should be price and then the product. If you could only combine photo illuminating chemicals, florescent and LED at an affordable cost then you will have my full attention.
Mr Stiffy
I made my own LED lamp that runs off 240V. Just string together enough 3.5V very high brightness LED\'s, to run them at about 80% maximum input voltage - bingo = very bright and an interesting project.
Am I the only one here who absolutely HATES the \"light\" these wretched things produce?