In August 2006, the services of the inland transport directorate of the EU Directorate General for Energy and Transport launched a public consultation on their approach to daytime running lights, with a view to possible measures to foster their introduction.
172 comments were received from national governments, companies and research institutes, associations and individuals. Follow the link for more:
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety/vehicles/daytime_running_lights_en.htm
AllQuality was also able to offer its opinion to use AMBER turn signal DRLs; it is found in the companies/reasearch institutes section. A direct link is here:
drl_all_quality_enterprises_llc.pdf
Friday, December 22, 2006
Monday, December 18, 2006
Recommendations on reducing greenhouse gases made for eastern Canada and U.S.
FREDERICTON (CP) - An environmental group has released a plan it says governments must act on if they hope to meet greenhouse gas reduction targets for eastern Canada and the U.S. northeast.Environment Northeast, in its 275-page Climate Change Roadmap, makes 10 recommendations that range from investing in energy efficiency to cutting industry and vehicle emissions."The public is increasingly concerned that global warming pollutants are changing our climate and this roadmap offers remedies that can be implemented today," Daniel Sosland, executive director of the non-profit advocacy group, said Monday.David Coon, policy director of the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, said governments need to make deep cuts in emissions."Certainly in our region, New Brunswick and Newfoundland would be the two jurisdictions that have the most to do," Coon said."Many of the others have credible plans in place, some have legislation, and in fact in New England they're part of a regional regulatory system that in law will require power plants to cut their emissions."Many of the report's recommendations deal with emphasizing and investing in energy efficiency."The upshot on the energy efficiency side is that we have to do absolutely everything (including) actually putting in place building codes that set strict standards for new houses and commercial buildings in terms of their energy use," said Coon."We also need strong measures that require utilities like NB Power to look at purchasing energy efficiency resources in the same way as they would purchase new sources of electricity."If fully implemented, Sosland claims the recommendations would cut greenhouse gas pollutants by almost 40 million tonnes from current levels by 2020.He says that would be on track with commitments made by the New England governors and eastern Canadian premiers.Environmentalists have been critical that the province and states are at risk of not meeting their short-term targets.At their meeting in Rhode Island in May, the premiers and governors asked their energy ministers to focus on energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy such as wind, hydro, solar and ethanol.The ministers have been
asked to report before the premiers and governors next meet in June 2007 in Brudenell, P.E.I.
by KEVIN BISSETT; www.canadaeast.com Published 2006-12-18
asked to report before the premiers and governors next meet in June 2007 in Brudenell, P.E.I.
by KEVIN BISSETT; www.canadaeast.com Published 2006-12-18
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Conventional headlight DRLs are energy hogs and bad for the environment
More and more evidence is coming out that conventional daytime headlight usage and headlight DRLs are bad for the environment. This recent article, plus a recent study by the UK Department for Transport, points to the fact that a typical European vehicle with its headlights on during the day consumes about 160/170 watts or more of electrical energy, and causes a vehicle to emit an additional 0.25 kg (0.6 pounds) of CO2 per hour. See for yourself:
http://news.windingroad.com/auto-news/are-daytime-running-lamps-bad-for-the-environment/
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_613618.pdf
The linked UK report shows on page 20 (pdf page 27) analytical comparisons of fuel consumption and CO, HC, and NOx emissions comparisons of 160 watt headlight DRL systems versus 42 watt turn signal bulb DRL systems, just like the AMBER 42 watt turn signal bulbs powered by the AllQuality Turn Signal DRL product [21 watts per bulb times 2]. The EC is considering dedicated white turn signal bulb DRL lighting legislation, hence the reason for the study and comparisons. A letter we have received from the engineering director of one of Italy's premier sports car manufacturers documents that the EC is currently planning introduction of mandatory use of DRL systems on all EU vehicles by June of 2009. AMBER turn signal DRLs have been proven to outperform all white light DRL options in one or more of following categories: conspicuity, energy efficiency, potential turn signal masking, and comparative pollution reductions.
An unnamed US government source has told our company that maybe white light DRLs are 'good enough'. Granted, theoretically any DRL is better than no DRL. Yet the leading Australian DRL expert has found, while studying all US school bus signal lighting types, that full power low beam headlights project a maximum luminance of no more than 437 candela (candela is a scientific measure of light output) in the direction of other roadway users (3 degrees off axis) such as pedestrians, cyclists, and other motorists. By comparison, AMBER DRLs in the US and Canada are targeted to have an output of around 700 candela, AMBER photometrically appears brighter to the human eye that an equivalent output of white light, turn signals are aimed at other motorists instead of being aimed at the ground [like headlights], and turn signals are often designed for better side corner visibility.
Additionally, turn signal AMBER DRLs never masks a vehicle's turn signals, and are proven by NHTSA via a 1998 US Federal Register document to actually eliminate DRL glare with respect to other motorists when compared to white light DRLs. A link to the Federal Register information is listed below:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf29/41090_web.pdf
Bottom Line: AllQuality's superior AMBER Turn DRL technology offers a comparative safety benefit at the highest level, above and beyond virually all white light DRLs, while simultaneously offering an energy/pollution disadvantage at the lowest level for all vehicles with conventional or non-LED DRL lighting.
So, what is holding the US back in this area? Another unnamed US government source has referred to the fact that it is all about bottom line costs to the vehicle manufacturers themselves. As long as it is cheaper to implement headlight DRLs than AMBER turn signal DRLs for US and Canadian automakers, and as long as DRLs are not mandatory in the US, the existing status quo is relatively resistant to change.
Consider it from a simple economics viewpoint: If you are a public US company that makes 1 million cars a year, and you can save just $1 or $2 per car with your headlight DRL implementation versus superior AMBER turn signal DRL implementation, then you have just saved your shareholders somewhere between $1 million to $2 million dollars annually.
Since DRLs are voluntary in the US, no DRLs at all offers similar or even greater overall company savings. Also, because DRLs are proven to reduce not only the overall total number of accidents but are also proven to reduce accident severity, this subsquently means that no DRL offerings on your vehicles just about guarantees that you will sell more proprietary frontal collision repair parts such as bumpers, headlights, hoods, fenders and airbags. This may be capatalism at work, but it could also potentially telegraph to the public that your company cares more about making an extra $5 per vehicle than it cares about the overall safety of the occupants of your vehicles, and that your company is just in it for its own maximum economic benefit.
It should be noted here that there are already about 25 million vehicles or more currently on US and Canada roadways that now have AMBER DRLs, currently offered on select models as either standard or optional equipment by manufacturers such as Chevrolet, Kenworth, Cadillac, Lexus, Pontiac, Toyota, GMC, Peterbilt, Buick, Freightliner, Saturn, Volvo Trucks North America, Hummer, Saab, and Thomas Built Buses; as well as on some formerly produced Oldsmobile products and select DaimlerChrysler minivans offered in Canada only from the early to mid 1990's. Below is a link to photos of nearly all of these vehicles:
http://www.daytime-running-lights.com/blank?pageid=14&catstart=0&prodstart=0
http://news.windingroad.com/auto-news/are-daytime-running-lamps-bad-for-the-environment/
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_613618.pdf
The linked UK report shows on page 20 (pdf page 27) analytical comparisons of fuel consumption and CO, HC, and NOx emissions comparisons of 160 watt headlight DRL systems versus 42 watt turn signal bulb DRL systems, just like the AMBER 42 watt turn signal bulbs powered by the AllQuality Turn Signal DRL product [21 watts per bulb times 2]. The EC is considering dedicated white turn signal bulb DRL lighting legislation, hence the reason for the study and comparisons. A letter we have received from the engineering director of one of Italy's premier sports car manufacturers documents that the EC is currently planning introduction of mandatory use of DRL systems on all EU vehicles by June of 2009. AMBER turn signal DRLs have been proven to outperform all white light DRL options in one or more of following categories: conspicuity, energy efficiency, potential turn signal masking, and comparative pollution reductions.
An unnamed US government source has told our company that maybe white light DRLs are 'good enough'. Granted, theoretically any DRL is better than no DRL. Yet the leading Australian DRL expert has found, while studying all US school bus signal lighting types, that full power low beam headlights project a maximum luminance of no more than 437 candela (candela is a scientific measure of light output) in the direction of other roadway users (3 degrees off axis) such as pedestrians, cyclists, and other motorists. By comparison, AMBER DRLs in the US and Canada are targeted to have an output of around 700 candela, AMBER photometrically appears brighter to the human eye that an equivalent output of white light, turn signals are aimed at other motorists instead of being aimed at the ground [like headlights], and turn signals are often designed for better side corner visibility.
Additionally, turn signal AMBER DRLs never masks a vehicle's turn signals, and are proven by NHTSA via a 1998 US Federal Register document to actually eliminate DRL glare with respect to other motorists when compared to white light DRLs. A link to the Federal Register information is listed below:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf29/41090_web.pdf
Bottom Line: AllQuality's superior AMBER Turn DRL technology offers a comparative safety benefit at the highest level, above and beyond virually all white light DRLs, while simultaneously offering an energy/pollution disadvantage at the lowest level for all vehicles with conventional or non-LED DRL lighting.
So, what is holding the US back in this area? Another unnamed US government source has referred to the fact that it is all about bottom line costs to the vehicle manufacturers themselves. As long as it is cheaper to implement headlight DRLs than AMBER turn signal DRLs for US and Canadian automakers, and as long as DRLs are not mandatory in the US, the existing status quo is relatively resistant to change.
Consider it from a simple economics viewpoint: If you are a public US company that makes 1 million cars a year, and you can save just $1 or $2 per car with your headlight DRL implementation versus superior AMBER turn signal DRL implementation, then you have just saved your shareholders somewhere between $1 million to $2 million dollars annually.
Since DRLs are voluntary in the US, no DRLs at all offers similar or even greater overall company savings. Also, because DRLs are proven to reduce not only the overall total number of accidents but are also proven to reduce accident severity, this subsquently means that no DRL offerings on your vehicles just about guarantees that you will sell more proprietary frontal collision repair parts such as bumpers, headlights, hoods, fenders and airbags. This may be capatalism at work, but it could also potentially telegraph to the public that your company cares more about making an extra $5 per vehicle than it cares about the overall safety of the occupants of your vehicles, and that your company is just in it for its own maximum economic benefit.
It should be noted here that there are already about 25 million vehicles or more currently on US and Canada roadways that now have AMBER DRLs, currently offered on select models as either standard or optional equipment by manufacturers such as Chevrolet, Kenworth, Cadillac, Lexus, Pontiac, Toyota, GMC, Peterbilt, Buick, Freightliner, Saturn, Volvo Trucks North America, Hummer, Saab, and Thomas Built Buses; as well as on some formerly produced Oldsmobile products and select DaimlerChrysler minivans offered in Canada only from the early to mid 1990's. Below is a link to photos of nearly all of these vehicles:
http://www.daytime-running-lights.com/blank?pageid=14&catstart=0&prodstart=0
Maximum daytime collision avoidance safety with an environmentally green product that is photometrically superior to other known competitive DRL products - that's what the patented and patent pending AllQuality DRL technology and product line potentially brings to your existing car, truck, bus, or motorcycle.
What about your current vehicle: Got AMBER?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)