[HN Gopher] Closing the "green gap": energy savings from the mat...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Closing the "green gap": energy savings from the math of the
       landscape function
        
       Author : raphlinus
       Score  : 34 points
       Date   : 2025-02-24 20:22 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (terrytao.wordpress.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (terrytao.wordpress.com)
        
       | roenxi wrote:
       | > The decrease is almost entirely due to gains in lighting
       | efficiency in households...
       | 
       | The article is an interesting treatment of how lighting is
       | getting more efficient and well worth a read. But pedantically
       | zooming in on this one throwaway phrase for a second... this is a
       | misinterpretation of the data on 2 levels.
       | 
       | 1) The (badly labelled) graph seems to be displaying a very very
       | slight linear uptrend for "residential".
       | 
       | 2) Energy is literally the first example of where we expect to
       | see Jevons paradox [0]. If its use is going down, that is because
       | energy is getting more expensive in real terms. If the only trend
       | here was lighting getting more efficient, households on aggregate
       | would find ways to use more electricity because it is extremely
       | fungible.
       | 
       | By default the proper way to interpret the data (if for the sake
       | of argument I say what I would interpret as a slight uptrend is
       | actually a downtrend) is that electricity is getting more
       | expensive real terms. The impact that has on living standards is
       | cushioned somewhat by improvements in lighting efficiency. But if
       | electricity costs were steady and lighting efficiency improved
       | we'd expect to see an increase in electricity use.
       | 
       | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
        
         | clcaev wrote:
         | Is Jevons' applicable here? People only have a fixed square
         | footage in their house that needs to be lit, and often negative
         | utility to having rooms lit all of the time.
        
           | formerly_proven wrote:
           | If electricity were cheaper you might turn the lights higher
           | instead of balancing cost vs. comfort, wouldn't use the eco-
           | mode on the dishwasher that occasionally results in dirty
           | dishes, would probably not think twice about washing clothes
           | at 30 degC instead of 40 degC, maybe use a dryer instead of
           | clothes racks blocking the living room for a day, use the
           | more comfortable tankless warm water heater, properly
           | preheating the oven giving you the results you want etc. pp.
           | ... the list is endless.
           | 
           | But electricity often costs upwards of 30 cents/kWh nowadays,
           | so you avoid doing all those comfy things. 'cause they're
           | expensive.
        
             | mikeyouse wrote:
             | My power is still $0.11/kwh... I haven't turned off my
             | christmas lights in 3 years. There are huge swaths of the
             | US where power is still (relatively) dirt cheap and nobody
             | thinks twice about the heavy soil function on the
             | dishwasher or leaving landscaping lights on.
             | 
             | This list matches my experience;
             | https://www.electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/
        
             | dworkr wrote:
             | If I have to spend more than 30% of my monthly budget on
             | power, I will not be taking cold showers or living in the
             | cold. Consuming energy replaces other hobbies. High energy
             | prices have been normalized, at least in my state. Same
             | with gas. People had to stop caring, or leave.
        
           | edflsafoiewq wrote:
           | HOA I know wants every house to have more lights kept on all
           | night (for "safety"). They explicitly say LEDs are what makes
           | this cost effective.
        
         | taeric wrote:
         | For 2, I think this just doesn't come to terms with how much
         | more efficient modern lights are?
         | 
         | I remember when folks were resisting LED lights at the start.
         | Folks would literally promote turning off the lights earlier to
         | save energy. Remember back when making sure the lights were out
         | was a big deal?
         | 
         | Turns out, 60-100 watts down to 10 is just ridiculously hard to
         | come terms with. Turn off the lights early just doesn't
         | compete. Not even close.
         | 
         | This also ignores how much more efficient other things are.
         | Televisions would be an amusing one. It isn't as dramatic,
         | sure, but it is about a quarter of the energy?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-02-24 23:00 UTC)