Let There Be Light

How a new kind of bulb will transform the developing world.

BY CHARLES KENNY | DECEMBER 13, 2010

We in the developed world are preoccupied with the consumer technologies of the 21st century -- ubiquitous high-speed Internet, the iPad, and the Wii Fit. We forget that vast swaths of the developing world have yet to be transformed by a technological upheaval we experienced more than a century ago: the advent of electric lighting. But the latest illumination innovation could change that, bringing not just greater efficiency to the well-wired West but also better quality of life to everyone else.

The first lighting revolution was powered by gas. As gaslight replaced candles over the course of the 18th century, the amount of artificial illumination produced in Britain each year shot up more than 100-fold. In 1879, Thomas Edison began the second lighting revolution when he strung his Menlo Park headquarters with electric lamps using carbonized bamboo filaments. By 1881, a few blocks of southern Manhattan were illuminated by electricity, and the West has never looked back.

Over the past 100 years, there have been many bulb innovations -- including tungsten halogen, metal halide, sodium, and compact fluorescent. And thanks to improved manufacturing and design, it costs 1,000 times less to light a room today than it did 100 years ago.

Still, the vast majority of light bulbs worldwide today --12 billion of them -- use a filament system similar to Edison's. And for all the progress over the last century, these bulbs remain very inefficient. The amount of energy pushed through a filament that actually emerges as visible light is around 2 percent -- most of the rest is lost as heat. This inefficiency is the big reason why in the United States, the power used to light Edison bulbs produces half as much carbon dioxide as the country's car fleet. And it is why governments around the world are so keen for consumers to switch to more efficient bulbs like compact fluorescents.

But the compact fluorescent is yesterday's news. The new technology leader that will spark the third lighting revolution is the light-emitting diode, or LED. The amount of energy converted to visible light by an LED already climbs as high as 14 or 15 percent. That's a thousand times higher than diodes managed in 1968, and considerably better than today's compact fluorescent bulbs. And efficiency is expected to double again by 2020. Diodes have an array of other advantages: they last five times longer than compact fluorescents (50 times longer than the Edison bulb), they are smaller, less fragile, and inert. That all adds up to a lot less expense in manufacture, storage, shipping, and disposal. And it's likely to mean a considerably easier task for those trying to end our addiction to the filament in the rich world.

Whatever its impact on developed countries, however, the real LED revolution will be in the developing world, where billions of people still live without access to networked electricity. Take Africa -- there are about 110 million households in the region without access to the grid, compared with only 20 million who are connected. The most common way for people offline to get light is to burn something. About half of those homes use kerosene lamps for illumination, while most of the rest still use candles. More than one in ten just pile extra wood or dung on the fire if they need more light. In other words, nearly half of African households are stuck using technologies that were largely abandoned in the United States before the Civil War, and most of the rest use a technology that had passed its prime before World War I.

SIMON MAINA/AFP/Getty Images

 

Charles Kenny is senior fellow at the Center for Global Development, a Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation, and author most recently of Getting Better: Why Global Development is Succeeding and How We Can Improve the World Even More. "The Optimist," his column for ForeignPolicy.com, runs weekly.

DR D

9:34 PM ET

December 13, 2010

cut and paste job!!

this read great - infact the read quality is so scientific (facts after facts, cold, unemotional discussion of facts) that I thought that it DOES NOT MATCH with the language used elsewhere in the text, and so I did a search on facts on kerosene lamp / smoke inhalation - and whoa..!! - the statements are simply CUT AND PASTE JOB

 

SCOOTER

11:16 AM ET

December 14, 2010

CFLs first, then LEDs

LEDs are currently far too expensive to be used in most circumstances.

The economics for Compact Fluorescent Lamps are far more attractive in the short term. We should push for a generation of CFL use before then moving on to LEDs. The rate of return on investments in CFLs are astronomical, particularly for poor countries where the cost of supply of power is often high, and for off-grid users.

 

DR2CHASE

12:02 PM ET

December 14, 2010

CFs lack durability

LEDs are indeed expensive, but they're incredibly durable. People build bike lights using them, ride the bikes in horrible conditions (across potholes that dent rims and crack fenders from the shock) and spritz them with wet, mud, and road salt. Imagine a CFL after that sort of treatment.

They're also well suited to cruddy, intermittent power (again, think bicycles) -- there's no penalty for cycling them on and off, and no warm-up time before they emit good light.

 

YVETTE618

1:27 AM ET

December 15, 2010

CFLs are certainly much

CFLs are certainly much cheaper, but they contain mercury and also produce very dirty energy. I worry about people with not much education not understanding how dangerous mercury is. I recently read an article about how using CFLs affect your health.
LEDs are more expensive and they are not quite up to par either, but I will start replacing my CFLs with LEDS.

 

PONDERING IT ALL

10:29 PM ET

December 15, 2010

LED efficiency

The authors comparison of LED and CFL efficiency is utter fantasy. Here are the real values:
Incandescent 12-20 lumens/watt
halogen 12-22 lumens/watt
white LED 28-93 lumens/watt (120 VAC standard-base lamps)
linear flourescent 30-110 lumens/watt
metal halide 65-115 lumens/watt
CFL 114-124 lumens/watt (spiral tube with electronic ballast)
high pressure sodium 85-150 lumens/watt
low pressure sodium 100-200 lumens/watt

While white LEDs may be great for developing world applications, its not because they are so efficient: Its because the minimum-sized lamp (a single LED) can be used to produce a very small amount of light very inexpensively. The smallest CFLs produced put out much more light, at a higher initial cost. This does not mean anyone should replace their 120 VAC CFLs with LED equivalents: They will either put out less light or run at lower efficiency than the CFL. LED efficiency also gets much worse when it gets hotter, which is a problem with high power LED modules. There's also the cost factor: LED bulb replacements still cost many times more than CFLs for the same number of lumens.

 

PAT DELANY

12:23 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Really cheap LED lights are available now!

An Ebay search on "LED map lights" will result in a list of over 8000. Most of these are designed for specific cars but I found many "universal" types for under a dollar. A quick search led to this "2 for 99 cents" offer, TinyURL.com/3953h8e. I have tested a similar light for months and it worked well for task lighting.

A pollution-free generator type battery and cell phone charger is also necessary for any lighting project. My answer to this is the "Genny" project. A mechanic can build one of these from automotive scrap and plywood. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/africapowerandlight/

My other projects are "almost free" machine tools for Developing Country schools, shops and small factories.
The Multimachine project is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/multimachine/ and my concrete based machine tool revival effort is at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Multimachine-Concrete-Machine-Tools/

I have a Power Point presentation describing all this that I will be glad to send anyone. It was shown this year at Maker Faire Africa.

Pat Delany
Palestine, Texas
rigmatch@yahoo.com
903-723-0980

 

ERIC POOLE

12:15 AM ET

December 16, 2010

Don't discount the effect LEDs could have ...

... in the developed world. The Allegheny County Jail in Pennsylvania has already cut lighting costs by 75 percent since changing out its fluorescent fixtures for LED ones. Pittsburgh International Airport officials expect similar savings in its garages and passenger drop-off areas.

If government agencies at the federal, state and local levels made the changeover to LED office, garage and warehouse fixtures, you could kiss climate change goodbye.

I've been writing on this subject for years.

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20444687&BRD=2724&PAG=461&dept_id=563781&rfi=6

 

ORMONDOTVOS

3:43 PM ET

December 17, 2010

 

BENJAMINFRANKLIN

11:06 PM ET

December 17, 2010

So many facts leading to such wrong conclusions

The problem with LEDs is that their touted efficiency is for DC electricity, not AC. Converting AC to DC consumes so much power that LEDs are only about 1/12 more efficient if the power source is AC. This is why you see them in cars, but rarely in houses. CFL's for AC cost about 1/30 the cost of LEDs with built in converters for AC to DC. Who wants to pay for a $15 light bulb when the power savings is 8%? (Costco pricing - retail is much higher.)