Sciencegasm!

[BigV]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

It is the city. The point is there is no meter to measure the amount of juice they use and charge accordingly. The city pays a flat yearly fee for each light, and it's substantial. If they are switching to lower consumption lights, they should renegotiate the charge per light with the utility company. duh.

Ah. I believe I have discovered the source of my confusion. Allow me to illuminate the local situation.

The City of Seattle is responsible for municipal functions such as streets and streetlights. But, with regard to delivery and paying for the power for such lights, the city has to do business with Seattle City Light, our local public power utility.

Created by the citizens of Seattle in 1902, Seattle City Light has served our customers with electricity and related services for more than a century. Over the years we have worked very hard to keep Seattle's electricity affordable, reliable, and environmentally sound. Today Seattle City Light is a recognized national leader in energy efficiency and environmental stewardship. We look forward to continuing this tradition in the 21st century and beyond.

...

Public power is one of the oldest forms of electric utility ownership in the U.S. It is a gift inherited from past generations. Thanks to the Seattle voters who approved a bond issue to develop a hydroelectric facility on the Cedar River in 1902 — beginning of public power in Seattle, and the nation's first municipally owned hydro project. Thanks also to J.D. Ross, "Father of City Light" who supported public power. At Seattle City Light, we pride ourselves on serving our customers with public power.


What Is Public Power?

Like community schools, parks, and hospitals, public power systems are local institutions working together to meet local needs. Without earning a profit, public power systems operate to provide an essential public service at a reasonable cost. We are governed by elected Seattle officials, guided by public involvement, and supported by customer revenues, not taxes. In fact, the utility pays substantial taxes to state and local governments.

I know somebody's measuring it, but I think that any savings accrued would be enjoyed by the users and the providers, since we're one and the same. Just as if I purchased a new more economical vehicle, once I'd paid the capital costs, I would enjoy lower operating costs, since I am the one paying to power it and use it.

Perhaps my electrical rate would rise, but I doubt I'd see a change in my taxes that could be traced to these changes.

Regardless, this is a Sciencegasm for me. I have several years experience with led light sources and I'm a big fan. I know that the technology is more efficient and more durable. I have switched from incandescent lamps to led lamps in many applications, mostly portable, and I can't be happier. Fewer battery changes, and far fewer (in fact,*zero*) bulb changes in all the devices I've used.

I admit I have not made any household incandescent/fluorescent to led switchovers yet, but that has been mostly for cost reasons. But just as I have made the change from incandescent to fluorescent in the house as the cost per bulb has fallen, I expect to make another change when the led bulbs become reasonable.

[tw]

Originally Posted by BigV

I admit I have not made any household incandescent/fluorescent to led switchovers yet, but that has been mostly for cost reasons. But just as I have made the change from incandescent to fluorescent in the house as the cost per bulb has fallen, I expect to make another change when the led bulbs become reasonable.

You have not done it because it does not yet exist economically. From Electronics Design Magazine of 9 April 2009:

The Department of Energy is offering a prize of as much as $10 million to create the first solid-state replacement for the 60 W incandescent light bulb ... "

Sylvania recently offered one for consideration. Reliability still remains a problem.

LEDs have a 100,000 or 50,000 hour life expectancy. Life expectancy and efficiency numbers that fall quickly with higher power ratings. A low power LED would typically do 90 lumens per watt. A 100 watt incandescent bulb is 1500 lumens. A 20 watt compact fluorescent at 1500 lumens is 75 lumens per watt. LEDs at these lumen levels still are not competitive with compact fluorescent. A 180 watt sodium lamp is 27,000 lumens - or 150 lumens per watt. LEDs have a long way to go.

Now for history. No matter how many advances are made, we routinely spend 0.72% of GDP on lightning. Lights with greater efficiency did not mean less energy use. But it does mean an economic increase in productivity. How great? Varies significantly. Advances dur to LEDs (productivity increases) would be greatest in Africa. But the idea that LEDs will decrease energy consumption contradicts the lessons of history.

What factors cause lighting energy reduction? Increases in cost of energy or a reduction of living standards.

[dar512]

Chess set made of vacuum tubes.