By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Philips Lighting wins L Prize competition

Philips Lighting North America has won the 60W replacement bulb category in the Bright Tomorrow Lighting Prize with a 10W LED solution.

The prize, also known as the L Prize, was awarded by the US Department of Energy and offers a $10 million cash prize.

The competition challenged the lighting industry to develop high performance, energy-saving replacements for conventional lamps.

Submitted in 2009, the Philips LED lamp successfully completed 18 months of field, lab and product testing to meet the requirements of the competition.

“We looked at the L Prize challenge as an opportunity to innovate and develop an energy efficient alternative to a product that has remained largely unchanged for over a century,” said Zia Eftekhar, CEO of Philips Lighting North America.

Launched in 2008, the L Prize targets the 60W lamp because it is one of the most widely used by consumers, representing roughly half of the domestic incandescent light bulb market. 

It has been estimated that if every 60W incandescent bulb in the US was replaced with a 10W lamp, the US could save about 35 terawatt-hours of electricity or $3.9 billion in one year and avoid 20 million metric tons of carbon emissions.

Readers' comments (2)

  • This is exciting stuff
    - the more lighting choice, the better.

    They also think these Philips LED bulbs will come down a lot in price
    (as indeed have CFLs, even discounting subsidies)

    so why ban simple incandescent alternatives in that case, which of course have advantages too?
    Presumably people will soon WANT to buy all these wonderful new bulbs then - without coercion?


    1. People prefer new bulbs = why ban old bulbs, little savings from a ban, and the old bulbs still have advantages in some situations
    (compare radio valves and transistors, valves were bought less anyway, but are still useful in some situations - any guitarists out there ?!)

    2. People still prefer old bulbs = rather odd to ban them then, as well!
    (and it is a ban, halogen type incandescents will be banned too before 2016 in EU, and before 2020 on USA Energy Act 45 lumen per Watt specification, and anyway have different light quality as well as much greater expense for marginal savings)

    the supposed switchover savings are not there anyway, either for society (less than 1% US energy usage, 1-2% grid electricity)
    or for consumers, based on DOE 's own statistics -
    There are as seen much more relevant ways to save energy,
    in electricity generation, grid distribution, and real consumption waste,
    than from telling people what light bulbs they can or can't use.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Not directly related, but maybe of interest:

    The incredible story of how incandescent lighting came to be effectively banned in the EU, and the manufacturer involvement

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Join our LinkedIN groupLighting newsletters

Follow us

Follow Lighting on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news and latest developments in the lighting industry.

Find out more


Register at to receive our newsletters and job alerts

Find out more