Deep Thoughts on the Future Development of China's LED

On December 30th, the prospects for the development of LED light sources were further questioned: "Energy saving is not money saving", "Neither energy saving nor money saving," "Carnival sequelae are highlighted," "Reappearing in the photovoltaic industry," "All-applicable public lighting has "Risk" and other claims are frequently reported in the media, LED light source is in an uncertain future, and it is urgent for industry professionals to answer questions.

LED light source sinks into the deadlock

Not long ago, Taiwan’s Taichung City Council decided, after reviewing the budget, that the news of the removal of 79 million LED subsidies would be of intensive concern. Li Zhongzhong, a member of the Legislative Council, said that the lack of illumination of LED street lights and the high failure rate resulted in maintenance costs after subsidizing the installation of street lights. This did not save money.

Coincidentally, Guangdong's push for public lighting within three years has recently been strongly questioned. Industry sources believe that regional mandatory replacement technology is not mature, and LED lighting products with low technological content cannot be questioned. The bigger problem is that LED lighting products need to consume a large amount of non-ferrous metal resources, which is inconsistent with the national energy conservation and low-carbon policy. Therefore, the use of LEDs in public lighting has certain risks.

The future is uncertain LED lighting industry should rethink how to develop

After the carnival of previous years, the aftermath of the LED lighting industry has continued to show up, and its reshuffle period is likely to continue until mid-2014. If LED lighting companies do not see the market environment in a timely manner, it is possible to repeat the recovery of the photovoltaic industry.

For a while, LED light sources that have been favored by the government and the industry have been caught in an uncertain future. At the same time, from another perspective, the chaos after the industry began to calmly ponder the future direction of LED light sources.

Be wary of "doing bad things"

According to sources from Shanghai, LED lighting in Shanghai was once the government's eye-catcher, and most of the upstream LED chip companies have given huge subsidies. However, since the beginning of this year, companies that have received subsidy have not achieved any results. The source claimed that Shanghai began to curb the development of LED lighting. In 2009, the Yangzhou City Government of Jiangsu Province introduced the MOCVD subsidy policy, which has led other Chinese local governments to follow suit. However, at the beginning of last year, Yangzhou halted the MOCVD subsidy policy, and MOCVD subsidy has been gradually halted. Obviously, if the informed person reveals that Shanghai will begin to curb the development of LED light sources, then this is very likely to be a microcosm of LED light source development in the country. Local governments have also become more rational about the development of LED light sources.

LED development so far, the introduction of policy subsidies one by one, from upstream equipment to downstream applications procurement readily available. However, how many enterprises are really committed to R&D, expansion of production, and contribution to the development of the industry, instead of being spent on "spending money" themselves? If the subsidies are in place, the development of enterprises will not be effective. What should the government take? Is it necessary to save the law? Is it necessary to take legal procedures for accountability? Or is it that the people's hard-earned money can be lost without accountability? Also, what kind of situation will the subsidized enterprises face after the huge financial subsidy policy is terminated? What are the implications for the industry? These important issues require in-depth thinking.

From now on, the government subsidy is understandable, but the development path of guiding ideology and choice should obviously be re-thought and vigilance turned into a “good intention to do bad things”.