088
TECHNOLOGY / SUSTAINABILITY
A RED LIGHT FOR LED?
Henrietta Lynch investigates a recent report about the supposedly perverse affects of LED technology
In Greek mythology Zeus commanded his son Hephaestus, who was the god of craftsmanship, to create Pandora, the first woman on earth. Zeus later gave Pandora a ‘box’ or jar, and ordered her never to open it. Unfortunately Pandora disobeyed this order and opened the box to release all the evils of the world, but also hope. On August 26th 2010 The Economist maga- zine published an article titled ‘Not Such a Bright Idea – making lighting more efficient could increase energy use, not decrease it’. This article drew public attention to research work carried out by Dr Jeff Tsao and his colleagues of the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico, which was published in the Journal of Physics D: Ap- plied Physics. This research predicts that the introduction of solid state (LED) lighting could actually act to increase the consump- tion of lighting in homes and buildings by a factor of up to ten within two decades, therefore increasing, rather than helping to reduce our energy consumption as might otherwise be expected with the introduc- tion of a more efficient technology. This research is based on the premise that history has frequently shown us that im- provements in efficiencies of a technology can lead to its greater adoption and associ- ated increases in energy use. In this particu- lar case Dr. Tsao ‘et al’ argue that efficiency improvements in LED lamp technology will act to stimulate the desire to use more light and therefore energy, as was experi- enced with the introduction of gas lights as replacements for candles and oil lamps. In order to arrive at this conclusion, Tsao and his colleagues made various assump- tions relating to global economic output, the price of energy, the efficiency of LED lamps and their cost. They calculated that if, by 2030, LED lamps are more affordable, around three times more efficient than fluorescent lamps, and that consumers are accordingly inspired to install enough of this lighting technology into their homes so as to match external daylight levels, which they argue are about 90% higher than cur- rent internal space lighting levels, coupled with real term electricity prices remaining stable, then the amount of power used by consumers for their lighting could dramati- cally increase.
The final conclusion of this research was that electricity prices would need to triple to prevent this unfortunate and perverse
consequence of the introduction of a more efficient lighting technology.
In the Economist article it was argued that this research indicated that we may actu- ally be better off not using LED lighting but instead sticking to the use of our existing (GLS) incandescent lamps, which are preva- lent in the USA but are, for good reason, currently being phased out in the EU and elsewhere.
Whilst the introduction of many new tech- nologies and efficiency measures has lead to unintended negative consequences, for example the building of new roads helping to increase car use rather than alleviate congestion, I am reluctant to believe that the conclusions of Dr. Tsao and his team are correct for many reasons inclusive of the following:
1. Considering the widely predicted global situation in relation to oil and fossil fuel supply, I do not think that electricity prices will remain constant for the next 20 years, but are instead much more likely to rise due to stress on these resources and the necessary cost of introduction of new power generation capacity to replace old fossil fuel systems. 2. I think that Tsao’s idea that everybody would wish to replicate external daylight levels in all homes and buildings at all times takes no account of people’s desires in terms of visual comfort, which not only vary according to culture but also according to our physiology, and which do not necessarily lead to situations where people prefer the brightest and most constant levels of light on a continuous basis. 3. Tsao has not taken into account how the installation of these new light fittings/lu- minaires will impact in terms of space and associated electrical infrastructure and whether or not this will be an attractive proposition for the consumer. 4. While there are still many places in the world where regulation in terms of build- ing design and energy use are inadequate, inclusive of many ‘developed’ countries, there are current moves to improve upon these regulations by many nations, not just in the US and Europe. Mechanisms are also currently being developed and deployed to try and better understand and regulate building energy performance, such as is be- ing progressed through the implementation of legislation such as the Energy Perfor- mance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) in the
EU, which may not completely save us from our own destruction, but it might help. Whilst I understand that we need to be sceptical about believing too strongly only in the positive benefits of any new technology that may also have negative impacts, a question that I would like to ask is – who has paid for this research? Has it been instigated by those who are adverse to change and who do not want to see the introduction of new technologies that may ‘affect’ their current business models? For example we have recently seen occurring, with disastrous consequences, in the case of large sections of the US automotive industry that were reluctant/unable to change and improve overall efficiency standards of vehicle design to equivalent levels of those of European or Asian car manufacturers? Or has it just developed out of academic curiosity and a quest for knowledge? Are we looking at a case of history repeat- ing itself? For example, after the introduc- tion of fluorescent lamps in the 1930s many US utility companies became worried that their high efficiency would impact on their businesses.
“The utilities started to fear that the high efficiency of the fluorescent lamp might reduce their electricity sales,” the utility executive Carl Bremicker of the Northern States Power Company said about his utility employees,“they had better get their white wing suits ready because very shortly Gen- eral Electric and Westinghouse would have them out cleaning streets instead of selling lighting.’’ An internal Westinghouse memorandum lends support to the utilities’ worries. It concluded that ‘the average utility lighting man sees in the rise of fluorescence a de- crease in his relative importance’. p.228, Chapter 4, ‘Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs – Towards a Theory of Sociotechnical Change’ by Wiebe E. Bijker. I think that Tsao’s research is extremely interesting and provocative for many reasons. Hopefully it will prove to be just an academic exercise that, with the Economist’s take on it, acts to warn us that the introduction of new technologies can have unintended consequences, rather than it being a prediction of the future develop- ment of solid state and low energy lighting.
The Economist article can be found at -
www.economist.com/node/16886228
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168