It is called a XED lamp. It emits a light spectrum like sunlight with no blue spike. And is 20% more efficient than LED.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/xed-light-better-than-led-debesh-choudhury-ph-d-

This is really cool, they even look like traditional HID lamps. Unfortunately I don't think anything is going to replace LED at this point and this article was posted over a year ago. One advantage I could see these having is that they might not require all the toxic chemicals that LED lights need. Then again, they do appear to only be able to run on electronic drivers.

I have a feeling these are going to be like those new "groundbreaking" battery technology discoveries though that happen every month or so. Randomly pops up, is a huge deal and looks very promising, and then after a week it's completely forgotten and nothing comes out of it.

Wow it would be awesome if this technology could take over LED! At least for roadway and other outdoor lighting applications. So that maybe we could keep our traditional cobrahead luminaires.

I see a pattern here when it comes to these new technologies.

I'm not really convinced about this. If you check website of the company mentioned in that article https://xedlight.com/All-products/xed-tunnel-light/ at least for me it looks the site is badly broken. Also the fixture pictured in that site list typical light sources like SON-T and MH-T in the front glass so I guess it's not pic of actual product. The link "where to buy" leads back to front page or text is not link at all in certain pages. The article has pic and text saying some factory has used this product since 2010. It's 10 years, if it's so ground breaking and they had working product 10 years ago why is it totally unknown technology still? Also googling didn't turn up much about it either.

Can we see an XED lamp lit?Surprized the grow light folks haven't gotten on to this.

Well, to me it seems to have one little problem (or better one of the two):
It either does not exist or does not work.
What I mean is mainly the "more efficient than LED" (what would need spiky spectrum) together with "sun like spectrum" (a thermal radiator efficacy).

There is no way to prevent a significant Xe emission in the UV and IR and redirect the related power to radiate in visible.
In fact it is impossible for anything broadband from nature (starting from incandescents).
If you want to radiate only in certain part of the spectrum (so strictly limited range of photon energies), you have no other way than assemble the spectrum from rather narrow and explicit band lines, mainly the parts around its ends (red and blue).
The nature just does not allow sharp rectangular spectrum, it allows only a kind of bell curve.
The bell could be so wide the section you are interrested in is nearly flat, but then you loose a lot of energy from the parts of the "bell" that are outside of the band (e.g. thermal radiation).
Or the bell could be narrow to not loose energy where you do not need it, but then it can not serve the whole band you want.
You may "assemble" your spectrum from e.g. a somewhat moderately wide "bell" sitting in the middle of your range and then add multiple lines to cover the ends without significant leak to the IR or UV.
But for this you have to use distinct material for each line, what means you may have just few of them.
There are materials emitting a bunch of lines over wider spectrum range, but those use to emit also bunch of similar lines outside of the range you want (again, all the lines use to go again along some kind of wide distribution function), an example is the Xe discharge.

You want to use selective reflection to mirror the unwanted energy back (to recuperate it)?
Well, these surfaces either allow sharp cutout in reflected band, but then just behind the cutout edge it absorbs all of the energy, as you are moving further away the absorption lessen, only then it became transparent.
Or vice versa, if you make the transparent band sharp, it then continues as absorbing with no reflection, then only further away the reflection becomes more efficient.
Or it will gradually change the transparent/reflective ratio.
In any case you will either not reflect big part of the unwanted spectrum back for recuperation or somewhat restrict the visible part, so have far from "sun-like" spectrum.

So the only way to get high efficiency is to assemble the light from few narrow band radiators (wih the green center one you may get away using a wider one, as it is far enough from the unwanted bands to leak there significantly), but that would always have the disadvantage of having a lot of energy in each narrow band line.

And dont fall for the "LED blue light bad" scam. Yes, the LEDs emerged at about same time as the knowledge of the blue part of the spectrum influencing the day cycle, but the real point is it is not just the LED blue peak, but ANY blue radiation. And that includes fluorescents, halogen, Xe discharge and al others.
In fact if it were just one single narrow peak what were the culprit (and not the whole blue region), the easiest way would be to "tune away" the blue primary LEDs. But it is not, so tuning the LEDs wont help anything.

The only thing what makes this problem related to LEDs is the LEDs were the first practical low light output devices emitting cold white light (so a lot of the blue; as per the cheapest LEDs) that were attractive for nightlights use where the cold light makes the problems. The former Neons or incandescents were weak in blue, but the same way a decent quality warm white LEDs are the same low relative blue output. Or best to sleep really at dark...

Huh, never heard of the XED lamp. I wonder if these lamps would go on the market soon? Might be interesting to get one.

Not sure what to think here, not only do they look like they use Venture halide tubes, they seem to be missing the energy point!!, the cost of wholesale energy keeps going higher and higher each year both for consumers and municipalities so why boast of a perfect spectrum lamp that STILL needs a ballast to run and still uses 150 watt as per existing HID installations!

There have been light sources that are better than LED for a hundred years, LPS being one of them. But that's just my view, YMMV.

I hope the fixtures don’t look ugly!

Do these need a ballast?

According to the XEDlight website, there are two types of lamps, a 3000K lamp with 85 to 90CRI and a lumen efficiency of 125LPW, and a 4200K lamp with 95CRI and a lumen efficiency of 110LPW. They also claim the average life of these lamps is over 30,000 hours, they also claim other things like low light decay, no glare.

But even with all of that, i doubt these will be replacing LED anytime soon, and if it did, Us (the collectors) would start hating this light source as much as we hate LED now (and if you need more proof, look for old posts where people are hating HPS and saying that LED will be a good thing for wiping out HPS).

This company has a youtube channel as well:

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCwPzJlvxvkmsAwaEQpPgiNw

It seems odd, though, since high pressure xenon lamps are only supposed to be about as efficient as incandescent, to two times as efficient, in the case of the Soviet xenon long arc lamps that didn’t need a ballast ( look up “lamp xenon dkst”) Xenon discharges are unique in that respect. This is pure conjecture, but maybe they have an efficiency boost on high frequency operation, such as what fluorescent lamps have.

These look really similar to automotive xenon lamps. I do know those are generally very efficient so I wouldn't be surprised if these are scaled up versions with a few tweaks.