Blogs

New lightbulb outshines all others

Hank Green — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:31:47 PDT

Let's face it -- to a real EcoGeek, CFLs are old news. My entire house was converted more than three years ago. I don't even think about them anymore. Frankly, I can't believe incandescents are still on sale!

There just hasn't been very much excitement in the consumer space in lighting. Some fantastic research, sure, but nothing I can buy.

Well, one of the few companies that makes LED lightbulbs has changed that. It may be silly of me to get excited about a lightbulb, but I can't help it.

EarthLED already has a few amazing products. The CL line is my personal favorite -- I have two of them in my house already. But while they work for my house, with its low ceilings and cave-dwelling inhabitants, folks were previously disappointed by the lack of any 100-watt equivalents at EarthLED.

Well, that's changed. The new Evolux line at EarthLED puts off just as much light as a 100-watt incandescent but consumes only 13 watts. A 13-watt CFL, on the other hand, puts out about as much light as an 80-watt incandescent would.

And yet, that's not its sole claim to superiority. The new line also promises to be cheaper than CFLs over the life of the bulb, not so much because of energy savings (though that helps) but because of the bulb's lifetime. CREE's LEDs are rated at over 50,000 hours, which is more than a decade of use ... and five times longer than CFLs.

Of course, no one's actually tested these bulbs for all 50,000 of those hours. And as the bulb actually has a moving part (a small, silent fan to keep the circuit board cool), the life of the fan might be more important than the life of the LEDs.

Besides being more efficient and longer-lasting than CFLs, the bulbs also contain no mercury, are significantly more durable so they won't shatter if dropped, and never get too hot to touch.

The company is about to release another version of the bulb that will turn any lamp into a dimmable lamp. Simply by turning the lamp on and off quickly, you can select 150-lumen, 750-lumen, or 950-lumen settings.

Of course, there has to be bad news, right? Though the total cost of ownership will be lower -- because you'll only have to buy one every 15 years or so -- the initial investment of $80 might come as a shock. But, really, is it that much of a price to pay to be the only person on your block with "the world's most advanced lightbulb"?

From my perspective, I see it as both a cool thing to have in the house and a way to encourage companies like EarthLED and CREE to continue working their fingers to the bone creating these amazing new products.

EarthLED's Evolux Bulbs

Eco-mythbusting

Trystan L. Bass — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:28:24 PDT

Think CFLs aren't worth it because of all that mercury? What about the idea that recycling costs more than chucking junk in a landfill? Hear the one about wine corks being endangered?

These and other myths keep many folks from going green and helping the environment. But a little bit of fact-checking shows that you can clean up the planet in lots of small, easy ways. And you may save some money too.

Compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs) save energy and money, that's a fact. But the incredibly tiny amount of mercury they contain has scared off some people.

I can't remember the last time I broke an incandescent bulb (maybe when I was a teenager?), and I've never cracked any of the CFLs in my house and garage. If it did happen though, I'd head to the Environmental Protection Agency handy guidelines for cleanup and disposal. No big deal!

Recycling is another no-brainer that occasionally gets harassed. Sure, you might have to sort bottles from cans in the bins, but that's better than creating a mountain of garbage. The benefits of recycling are huge -- less trash in the landfills, energy saved from not using virgin resources, and more jobs are created.

The City of Fort Collins' recycling program notes that recycling aluminum saves 95% of the energy that it would take to mine new aluminum. The Curbside Value Partnership (PDF) estimates that recycling 10,000 tons of waste creates 36 jobs -- but dumping that same waste into a landfill only creates six jobs.

Biodiesel has been the source of many eco-myths lately. I pointed to recent studies that decried biofuels, while also mentioning that different types have different impacts. Clayton B. Cornell goes into more depth on biodiesel and separates it from ethanol. Useful info if you want the real deal, not just the hype.

Have you heard that making little changes won't help the environment? What one person does can't possibly matter? Not so. In a detailed article on Bankrate.com, a spokesperson for the Natural Resources Defense Council reminds us that if everyone in the U.S. bought just one package of 100% recycled paper napkins instead non-recycled ones, we'd save 1 million trees.

And if you do want to go green on a larger scale, it's not that hard either. Building an eco-friendly house doesn't have to be expensive or horribly complicated, according to the home gurus at HGTV.com. Start with a tight building envelope, use low-flow toilets (which are mandatory anyway), and choose from the thousands of mainstream products that will make your new home or remodel sit more lightly on the earth.

For the garden out back, don't fall for those myths about composting either. The process doesn't have to be a lot of smelly work, and you can even compost in an urban setting. You'll keep useful organic matter out of the trash and improve your soil.

The myths just keep piling up! From computer sleep mode (which could waste 20% of your energy bill) to driving with the windows down (same as the AC), we get suckered in. Some folks even question whether local food really is better for the planet.

And what about that cork myth? Yep, there's a rumor that good old-fashioned wine bottles with natural corks are bad because the cork trees are endangered. Not so. Green Living Online says that the trees aren't chopped down to make wine corks -- the bark is merely stripped. The trees aren't damaged at all, and this has been going on since time immemorial.

So drink up -- you can enjoy life while saving the world.

The world's first OLED lamp

Hank Green — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:27:30 PDT

Organic Light Emitting Diodes (OLEDs) fascinate me. It's not just that they could possibly be both extremely efficient and extremely cheap, but they also create huge new possibilities for lighting.

Very simply, OLEDs are like LEDs in that electrons jumping across a diode emit photons. But instead of being a traditional diode, the OLEDs are actually a printed film. This means that the light comes from everywhere on the film simultaneously, and the film can take on unique properties, like being flexible, lightweight, two-dimensional, and transparent.

Before today, we didn't have anything but our own imaginations and some crazy experiments to try and figure out what an OLED lamp might look like.

But Osram, a leading OLED manufacturer, recently partnered with well-known artist Ingo Maurer (whose extremely expensive LED lamps were previously featured on EcoGeek) to produce the world's first true OLED lamp.

Osram gave Ingo ten small (132 x 33 millimeter) OLED panels to use to create his lamp. The result is actually pretty stunning. And since the panels are limited edition and Maurer is a very famous and respected artist, this might be the most expensive table lamp in history. But that doesn't mean I don't want one.

Here's what Ingo has to say about the OLEDs

They have a totally different look than traditional light sources. They neither require reflectors directing the light into the right direction nor large sockets. Their lightness allows the realisation of long-standing visions of mine.

Osram has a team of over 50 scientists working on OLEDs right now. Though LED lights still have almost no market share, and OLEDs are more advanced and expensive than LEDs, Osram believes that the investment will pay off. There's one picture in the gallery below that really shows of the possibility of OLEDs.

I spent over a minute staring at the picture, trying to figure out where the lamp was. Then I realized, the semi-transparent windows were, in fact, the lamps.

As OLEDs create 100% diffused, non-directional light on two-dimensional surfaces, they can fill a room with light without even seeming to be there. Other possible applications are skylights that become regular lights at night or brake lights as part of a car's rear window.

And, of course, these have all the advantages while consuming a fraction of the amount of energy consumed by regular lightbulbs.

Via OLED Info (Thanks to Ron for the tip.)

Full press release here and here

Just one hour

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:02:52 PDT

What difference can an hour make? You'd be surprised -- when 2.2 million residents and 2,100 businesses in Sydney, Australia, all turned off their lights for an hour in 2007, they reduced energy use by 10.2% that day. That's equivalent to taking 48,000 cars off the road.

Just by turning off the lights for 60 minutes. It was the first Earth Hour, sponsored by several Australians and the World Wildlife Fund.

This year, they've taken the idea global, and Earth Hour will be celebrated on Saturday, March 29, 2008, from 8Â p.m. to 9Â p.m., with more than 20 cities officially participating.

More important than just the energy saved is the idea that one person's actions really do have an affect on global warming. The little things add up when we're all involved. Conserving resources, lowering pollution -- each of us can make an impact by doing things as basic as turning off a light.

To encourage individuals to get involved, many world landmarks are joining the Sydney Opera House in shutting off non-essential lights on Saturday. San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge will go dark. The Sears Tower in Chicago, plus both Wrigley Field and Soldier Field will dim. Toronto's CN Tower will go dark, and even Niagara Falls won't be lit up during Earth Hour. The Coca Cola headquarters in Atlanta is turning off the lights. And in the Philippines, the worldâs third largest mall is flicking the switch.

Your city doesn't have to be going totally dark for you to join in. Sign up at the Earth Hour site so organizers have an idea of how many people are involved. Tell your friends and neighbors.

Then simply turn off lights in your home from 8Â p.m. to 9Â p.m. on Saturday night. Enjoy the dark, or break out your beeswax or soy candles and have a romantic dinner with someone special. Play a board game by candlelight with the family. Take a walk with a friend or your dog. Soak in a bathtub with candles nearby.

Looking for more adult ways to enjoy the dark? Check out the Daily Green's list of eight sexy ways to spend Earth Hour. Earth 911 even offers lights-out fashion tips, such as glow-in-the-dark gear and shiny bling.

Shutting down for Earth Hour

Hank Green — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 01:56:37 PDT

I love my computers and Internet, no doubt about it. But I'm looking forward to powering down my life and turning off my house for Earth Hour.

Last year, Sydney, Australia, turned off its lights for an hour in order to save some energy. Mostly,Â it was a statement -- to see the combined effect of a lot of people agreeing that something needs to be done. The event was such a success that the World Wildlife Fund decided to take it global in 2008.

So on March 29th, whenever 8pm rolls around, over 350 cities in 35 countries, millions of individuals, the Sears Tower, the Golden Gate Bridge, and 2,100 corporations including HP, Coca Cola, and McDonald's, are all turning off their lights.

Organizing mass action to recognize the treat of climate change is certainly something that I can get behind. And I'm sure there are going to be lots of pretty pictures of dark skylines to share on the morning of the 30th which I will excitedly write about.

I've signed myself up for Earth Hour and will be having a quiet evening playing cards with my wife in the dark. I encourage all you EcoGeeks to participate as well. Take some time to remember what darkness is, it's good for you.

The Luxim Microwave Bulb in action

Hank Green — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:38:25 PDT

Since 2000, a Silicon Valley company called Luxim has been working on a new kind of light bulb. It's very similar to technology being developed by Ceravision. So far, the bulb doesn't even have a name.

But here's the basics of how it works.Â

A bulb of gas nests inside donut of metal, then, a high-intensity electric field is created in the donut hole. The result is that the gas inside the bulb becomes a plasma. If it's the right kind of gas, a huge amount of light is produced.

ZDNet went to visit Luxim's headquarters to see its new street lamp assemblies. The devices are about 10 times more efficient than traditional incandescent lamps, and twice as efficient as CFLs.

However, their talk of efficiency is a bit sensationalized. ZDNet makes it sound like this is the most efficient bulb out there. Actually, the Luxim bulbs are roughly the same efficiency as high-pressure sodium lamps (the yellow-tinged ones that are often used for streetlights.)

The big advantage here is that they produce a more natural spectrum of light, which can increase safety.

It also means that Luxim bulbs could find their way into indoor lighting, something that's not possible with high-pressure sodium's ugly yellow light. But it's going to be a race between this new technology and white LEDs to see who can get cheap, highly-efficient lights to produce attractive white light in a light-bulb sized package first.

Via ZDNet

GE announces printable light panels

Hank Green — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:14:52 PDT

First we have printable solar panels converting light to electricity ... now we have printable lights panels, converting electricity to light!

After four years of knowing it's possible, but not quite being able to do it, GE has printed an organic light-emitting film in a roll-to-roll process.

So why is this important?

The organic light-emitting diode (OLED) film is extremely efficient.
Printing roll-to-roll makes OLEDs far easier to mass produce and thus cheaper.
OLEDs can be used in a huge variety of lighting applications, moving the world beyond light bulbs and into a whole new paradigm of lighting.

Imagine a world where your wall glows at a brightness determined by ambient lighting and personal preference. Lamps might soon be obsolete, and the whole discussion about switching light bulbs completely moot.

Of course, the news comes with a dark side as well:

OLEDs are not yet as efficient as regular LED and compact fluorescent lights.
They may allow us to increase energy use by decreasing the cost of lights. Imagine OLEDs in advertising on every shelf in the grocery store, all consuming electricity with the goal of making us buy more.
OLEDs currently don't put out an attractive light, and the technology is still at least three years away.

GE says that they could have OLEDs for sale commercially as light sources by 2010, but that seems wildly optimistic to me. I expect it to be another five to ten years before the light quality and efficiency are acceptable to consumers.

It is certainly possible that this system might be used in electronics by around 2010, but as a dedicated source of lighting, I just can't see it.

Note: EcoGeek has been offered the opportunity to discuss this new technology with GE's head OLED scientist Anil Duggal. If you've got questions you'd like me to ask Anil, contact me. I'll see what I can get to.

Via GE Press Release

Getting the most out of your CFLs

Noah Buhayar and Laurie Ramroth — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 21:51:05 PDT

Noah Buhayar and Laurie Ramroth are fellows at Rocky Mountain Institute.

You've taken the plunge. You've replaced all those incandescent bulbs in your house with energy-saving compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs). You've even gone as far as installing dimmable CFLs for the few places where you'd like to be able to control the intensity of the light.Â

But, lo and behold, some of those new lights are burning out sooner than the manufacturer claims they should. What gives? Aren't CFLs supposed to last 10 times longer than the cheaper incandescents?Â

Here's some straightforward information about how you can get the most out of your CFLs, and why you're probably still saving emissions and money even if you don't get all the advertised hours out of each lamp.Â

"Operating cycle" and CFL life
The life of your CFL depends on how often you turn it on and off, and how long you leave it on. In engineering lingo, this is called the lamp's "operating cycle."Â

Operating cycles can vary for practical reasons. Think of the CFL in your garage versus the one in your bedroom. The one in your garage probably stays on for only a few minutes: when you open the garage door, or when you go out at night to put something in your car. The CFL in your bedroom, however, probably stays on longer: when you read or watch TV in bed.Â

CFLs usually fail when the electrode's emissive coating (the part of the bulb that emits electrons into the tube to create and maintain an electrical arc) evaporates. This loss of coating occurs slowly during operation, but is accelerated each time the lamp is turned on, and the electrode is bombarded with mercury ions.Â

That means the more frequently you turn your CFLs on and off, the shorter its operating cycle, and the shorter its life.Â

Greenhouse gas emissions
The good news is that even if you're operating your CFLs for short periods of time, you're still putting less greenhouse gas into the atmosphere than you would have operating that old incandescent in the same manner.Â

A group of researchers at RMI recently studied the emissions associated with manufacturing, distributing, operating, and disposing of both incandescent and CFLs.Â

They found that even if a CFL's average operating cycle was reduced from 1 hour to 5 minutes, greenhouse gas emissions were still lower -- 63.4 percent lower -- than those of an incandescent. That difference takes into account the shortened life of the CFL (and the fact that another one would have to be assembled, shipped, and purchased at a store).Â

Getting your money's worth
Of course, saving greenhouse gas emissions may be a small consolation if you're buying CFLs more often than you think you should have to, and watching the up-front costs add up.Â

Remember, though, that CFLs save you money in 2 ways: (1) They last longer than incandescent bulbs, and (2) They use less electricity to provide the same amount of light.Â

In our emissions analysis, RMI's researchers also looked at average payback time for CFLs under different operating conditions and at different electricity costs.Â

Even with extremely cheap electricity ($0.0492 per kilowatt-hour) and a drastically reduced life (1,500 hours on a lamp rated for 10,000 hours), the CFL still paid back its extra retail cost before failing. This held true even if the retail price for a 23-watt lamp varied from $1.65 to $5.50.Â

Taking it to the next level
The bottom line: Even if you're replacing your CFLs more often than you think you should have to, you're still coming out ahead in terms of reducing emissions, and are most likely saving money.

Next time you screw in a CFL, though, see if you can make it last longer by changing its operating cycle. Monitor your energy bill and see how quickly you can get a return on investment. And know that the more efficiently you use your new lights, the more greenhouse gas you'll be keeping out of the atmosphere.

LEDs two times more efficient than anything

Hank Green — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 23:07:07 PST

It seems like the word "breakthrough" gets tossed around a lot. But we try to save it for the real deal. Well here's the real deal.

LEDs are fantastic. But for a long time, they've been fantastic more because of what we think they can do than what they actually do. We've been pretty sure that LEDs can produce warm, white light at efficiencies far beyond even the much-touted compact fluorescent bulbs. But we've yet to actually see that.

Years ago, scientists were already producing LEDs that were far more efficient than fluorescents. The problem was, they only did it at very specific wavelengths. So the light was either pure red, pure orange, or pure blue. And while it'd be nice to have an efficiently lit workspace -- I'd prefer it if everything in my life wasn't purple.

So in the last ten years, scientists have switched their goals from producing efficient LEDs to producing "natural light" LEDs. Unfortunately, whenever they did this, they had to make significant efficiency sacrifices. Well, here's the breakthrough -- those days are no more.

Using a nano-crystaline coating, scientists at Bilkent University in Ankara, Turkey, have created an LED that produces attractive white light while wasting next-to-no electricity.

For every watt of light produced, about 300 lumens are visible to the human eye. Fluorescents produce about 80 lumens per watt, and other white LEDs are closer to 60.

300 lumens per watt is two times more visible light per watt of radiation than I've ever heard of for any light source, and they've done it with natural-looking light.

Honestly, the results are so spectacular that I must admit a bit of skepticism. If anyone can cast some light on how efficiencies like this could be possible, I'd love to hear from you.

The nano-crystalline coating bends the wavelengths exiting the light into a broad spectrum. The key is that the process is nearly 100% efficient, and the LEDs themselves (which are blue) are extremely efficient as well.

Of course, any scientist will tell you that making something happen in a laboratory and putting it on a shelf at Wal-Mart are two very different things.

The nano-crystalline coating is very expensive and difficult to produce, and, so far, there aren't a lot of ideas as to how to mass produce these things.

But the question is no longer "if," the question is now "when" and that's a breakthrough that I can celebrate.

Via New Scientist

Sneaky CFL replacement

Hank Green — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:09:52 PST

I just don't know quite how to feel about this! After a few years of seemingly logical replacement of hotel and office lighting with compact fluorescent light bulbs, a problem has arisen.

It seems that demand for the bulbs, while slacking in store sales, goes way up when the bulbs are just a few twists away.

Office and hotel mangers have begun to complain about CFL theft in a big way.

While the bulbs save a ton of money over their lifetime in energy costs, they don't save money when they disappear after a few months and need to be replaced.

The alternative, it seems, is to either stop using CFLs or use theft-proof fixtures that need a special key to be replaced. We assume the key is only held by the maintenence staff.

It's good that we've got these solutions now, since LED bulbs, just around the corner, promise to be even more expensive, while saving more energy in the long run.

The good news is, the more CFLs offices and hotels buy, the more CFLs there are in the world.

However, it seems odd that hotel-goers and office workers, not known for their levels of extreme poverty, are the ones stealing the bulbs. It seems to me that they could afford to save money the old-fashioned way: by making a modest investment in slightly more-expensive bulbs at WalMart.

Via MT.GOV

Gravity lamp debunked

Hank Green — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:11:04 PST

In a display of the awesomeness of the Internet, users of the website Slashdot have thoroughly debunked claims made by the inventor of the Gravia Gravity Lamp. The inventor claimed that the lamp could use a 50lb weight dropping five feet to power a 700 lumen LED for 4 hours.

But when the Slashdotters actually did the math, they discovered a few flaws. First, the inventor assumed 100% efficiency.

Much worse is that the Gravia guy seems to have put a decimal in the wrong place and ended up with completely erroneous numbers:

There's 50lbs of weight that fall about 4 feet, if I'm reading the diagrams right. That's 200 ft-lbs. Which comes out to ... hmm ... 0.075 watt-hours. Over 4 hours that means 0.019 watts continuous power.

To get ~700 lumen light at 200 lumen/watt would require 3.5 watts of power, over 4 hours is 14 watt-hours or 3700 ft-lbs. Over 4 feet of fall that amounts to 925lbs. My goodness, that is a group effort.

It's sad news, but it is nonetheless the case. The inventor has admitted his mistake and offered the Greener Gadgets honor to the runner-up below him.

Really, this makes you appreciate how much work needs to be done even to power the lowest-wattage light bulbs. Sometimes, it's good to realize how really remarkable and efficient our current system is ... even if it comes at the cost of an idea that, at first glance, looked quite appealing.

Via Slashdot

Human powered light never burns out

Hank Green — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 23:58:22 PST

Want to turn on your desk lamp? Flip a switch, right?

Man, that is such pre-energy-crisis thinking! How about, instead, you lift a 50lb. brass weight a couple feet up. The weight then slowly falls back down toward your desk, producing enough energy to squeeze a few hundred lumens (as much as a 40-watt incandescent) over your workspace for the next few hours.

That, in a nutshell, is the idea behind the Gravia. Actually, the concept that won runner-up at the Greener Gadgets Conference actually is a floor lamp, and it requires quite a bit more lifting (about six feet) to power it for four hours.

Still, I rather like the idea. It's good to have an idea of where energy comes from, and it's even cooler to know that, if your light is out, you need to do more than just flip a switch.

Reports swarming the Internet that the lamp will stay lit for for 200 years are unfortunately erroneous (thanks for all the misleading headlines guys!). In fact, the lamp produces only four hours of light per lift, but the LEDs, according to the designers, will last for 200 years of use without needing to be replaced.

Now if only someone could guarantee me that these aren't just going to take a nose-dive into basements to collect dust like a crank-powered Billy the Big-Mouth Bass, then I'll be satisfied. As it is, I can see people getting pretty tired of lifting a 50lb. weight six feet in the air every four hours...

Dangerous CFLs? Don’t believe the hype

John Balbus — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:01:00 PST

This post is by John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Health Scientist at Environmental Defense.

On February 3, Parade published a misleading Medical Alert column with the headline "Bright Lights, Bad Headache?" by Dr. Isadore Rosenfeld. It starts with a list of unsubstantiated claims:

As energy-saving fluorescent lightbulbs become standard, new research suggests some dangers: Flickering bulbs have been reported to precipitate migraines or even seizures, though manufacturers say the new models have been improved. Fluorescent light also can aggravate skin rashes in people with lupus, eczema, dermatitis or porphyria.

Environmental Defense could find no published scientific studies demonstrating that compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) trigger migraines or seizures. And unlike older fluorescent tube lights, modern CFLs with electronic ballasts donât flicker.

Rosenfeldâs statement about fluorescent light harming people also is highly misleading. While there is a theoretical risk to people with severe photosensitive skin diseases from the small amount of ultraviolet light emitted by CFLs, most people with eczema -- a very common disease -- have no such photosensitivity.

People who are unable to tolerate any sunlight due to photosensitivity may be advised to avoid additional exposure to the small amount of ultraviolet light from CFLs, but this is only a subset of people with eczema and lupus.

The piece then mentions that CFLs contain mercury. This is true, but the amount of mercury in a typical CFL is very small, only 4 to 5 milligrams, and newer bulbs have even less. This is almost one thousand times less than what used to be in mercury thermometers.

While people certainly should avoid exposing themselves to the mercury from a CFL if it breaks (see my previous post for how to properly dispose of CFLs), the exposure from a single broken bulb is comparable to the mercury in a few cans of tuna, and would not be expected to cause ill effects.

Articles like "Bright Lights, Bad Headache?" that make serious claims of harm from CFLs need to substantiate those claims with solid science. Why? Because CFLs have the potential to dramatically reduce energy use, and coal-generated electricity releases much more mercury (and other toxic pollution) than CFLs.

Parade does a disservice to its readers and the environment by propagating inaccuracies, half-truths and misleading statements. Instead of a medical alert, it should be issuing a junk science alert and tracking down the facts.

Five ways to bring back the night

Cher Seruto — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:12:26 PST

Cher Seruto is an analyst with the Built Environment Team at Rocky Mountain Institute.Â

They are magnificent, present yet untouchable, the object of much affection. No, I'm not talking about celebrities. I'm talking about stars in the night sky.Â

This year, I spent the winter holidays backcountry skiing from a small hut in the national forests of southwestern Colorado, and the abundance of stars reminded me that I miss their presence in my city.Â

"Where did the night sky go?" I wondered.Â

We city dwellers often don't see many stars because of light pollution. Much of this obtrusive light is caused by excessive interior and exterior lighting from advertising, commercial properties, offices, factories, streetlights, sporting venues, and our own homes.Â

The effects of light pollution
It's very clear how development and light pollution are linked. NASA's night image of Earth (below) is proof enough.Â

Back on the ground, light pollution is pretty easy to spot too.Â

If you ever have the opportunity to look at the night sky from outside a city, scan the horizon. You can often see the direct effects of excessive lighting as a halo in the night sky.Â

When I lived in Santa Barbara, I would often walk the beach at night and look across the ocean. Instead of stars, I would see light emanating from the Los Angeles Basin 100 miles away. And at the Grand Canyon, you can see a similar halo from Las Vegas, 175 miles away.Â

Besides marring the view, light pollution wastes energy. The International Dark-Sky Association estimates that every year the United States wastes 110 billion kilowatt-hours, or $10.4 billion, on "ill-conceived, ineffective, and inefficient lighting."Â

Generating all that unneeded electricity to power those lights results in more greenhouse gas emissions that increase the threat of global warming.Â

Simple steps to reduce light pollution
With so much at stake, I'm happy to report that there are simple solutions to drastically reduce light pollution and save energy.Â

First, start at home:Â

Light only what you need. Ask yourself whether your lights are located in the right places for your daily needs.Â
Light only when you need it. Use motion sensors to cut your electricity bill, and be diligent about turning off lights that are not in use.Â
Light where you need it. Make sure that outdoor fixtures don't emit light upwards or excessively outwards. Proper lighting does not shine into the night sky or across to a neighbor's property.Â
Light in the right quantity. Look at the effects of your outdoor lights. Are shadows created that actually obstruct vision? Lower the wattage and you may be able to see better due to the reduction of shadows. I recently installed a lower wattage motion detector light outside my back doorstep and was amazed at the increase in visibility.Â
Check placement, curtains, and window coverings to make sure your indoor lighting is not shining out and up at night.Â

Next, encourage your workplace and local government to standardize the use of lighting techniques that decrease or eliminate light pollution.Â

You can find more resources and tips on reducing light pollution from the International Dark-Sky Association.

LEDs improve

Heather McKee — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:48:06 PST

Compact fluorescents are the poster children for the energy efficiency movement. But in a not-so-far-away future, LEDs may give them a run for their money. We recently wrote about this in a surprisingly controversial, post.

LED bulbs are longer-lived and consume less energy than compact fluorescents, and they do not contain mercury. So why arenât we using them already? There are two main complaints with LEDs: They are way too expensive, and they have an impractical spotlight type quality. But the University of Glasgow has a new process that they believe addresses both of these complaints.

Researchers have developed a more efficient (and thereby more economical) nano-imprint lithography process to pit the surface of the LED bulb with microscopic holes. These holes allow more light to escape from the bulb â for the same amount of energy. The light will also be more diffuse and less spotlight-like.

Before anyone sniffs at the triviality of light bulb research, it should be reported that the Department of Energy estimates that 22% of electricity generated in the United States is used for lighting.

Via U of Glasgow and Metaefficient

How to pick a better bulb

Sheryl Canter — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:59:55 PST

This post is by Sheryl Canter, an Online Writer and Editorial Manager at Environmental Defense.

The New York Times recently ran this story about light bulbs. If you only read the beginning of the article, you might think it was saying that compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) have poor-quality light. But in fact, its conclusion -- after testing a wide array of bulbs -- was that some are better than others.

Itâs true: Some are better than others. For information on CFLs and how they differ, check out our online guide, How to Pick a Better Bulb.

Everything you ever wanted to know about CFLs but were afraid to ask

Trystan L. Bass — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:20:21 PST

OK, maybe not everything, but we're here to point you to many experts around the Web who have the hard facts about compact fluorescent light bulbs.

Maybe you've heard some troubling things about them (Oh no, mercury!). Maybe you think you already know it all. Or maybe you're totally new to the swirly bulbs.

No matter where you stand, you and I can always learn a few more things. So here goes.Â

Why CFLs?

Simply put, these bulbs use less energy than regular old incandescent lights. Energy Star-qualified CFLs use 75% less energy.

In addition, Consumer Reports found that CFLs last 3,000 hours before wearing out, compared to only 1,000 hours for a standard bulb.

Since the bulbs draw less power, each one you install will save you $30 or more in electricity costs over its lifetime, according to Energy Star.

Bottom line: CFLs cost a bit more than incandescents in the first place, but you save in the long run because you won't spend as much on your utility bill each month or buy as many replacement bulbs.

One last bonus: CFLs create 75% less heat, so they're safer and don't heat up your house.

Where can I use CFLs?

Most lighting fixtures that accept standard incandescent bulbs will also take CFLs. Just look for the right size and similar wattage, which will be noted on the CFL package.

Lights with dimmer switches or three-way switches need CFLs specifically designed for dimmers. Read the label for this info too.

CFLs are not well-suited for recessed lights, and you may want to get a specially rated CFL for a ceiling fan fixture because of the extra vibrations. Otherwise, most places work.

GE Lighting has a comprehensive list of frequently asked questions about using CFLs, and while it recommends GE products, the info. is still useful.Â

Don't CFLs give off a nasty, harsh light?

People have their own tastes and perceptions of light, so ultimately, you'll have to test out different CFLs to see what works best for you. Broadly speaking, the early CFLs were harsher and the cheapest ones still are. Avoid the bargain bin for better quality light.

Popular Mechanics has a detailed comparison of eight commonly available brands. The reviewers gave high marks to several bulbs, but the N:Vision Soft White CFL got the highest grade for "reading and illuminating faces."

Grist also reviewed several CFLs and found the Philips Soft-White was the best of the bunch, providing a " nice warm glow." In general, Grist says to pick bulbs described as "soft white" instead of ones labeled "daylight or bright white."

A friend said his CFLs burned out fast...

Every new technology has horror stories and "I got a bum deal" tales. Sometimes, this is frankly due to user-error, but it can also be that the product simply wasn't suited to the application.

CFLs work better in lamps and fixtures with a bit of space around them, as opposed to recessed lighting, which can trap heat and cause premature burn-out according to National Geographic's Green Guide.

Also, don't flick the switch! Turning a CFL fixture on and off quickly also can shorten the bulb's life. Energy Star recommends using CFLs in fixtures that are generally left on for at least 15 minutes each use.

Using regular CFLs in light fixtures with a dimmer switch will shorten their life dramatically. Use only CFLs clearly labeled as "dimmable" for this purpose.

Energy Star-qualified CFLs automatically come with a two-year warranty, so you should be able to get a replacement or refund from the manufacturer if this kind of bulb burns out unexpectedly.

How can I dispose of CFLs? What about the mercury?

Yes, there is a trace amount of mercury in CFLs. But it averages only 5 milligrams â for comparison, a home thermometer has 500 milligrams. So you'd have to break 100 CFLs to expose yourself to the same mercury as in one thermometer, according to the Energy Star fact sheet (PDF).

Still, light bulbs do break. The EPA has detailed instructions on how to clean it up, and the method isn't hard. Open a window, and much of the potential harm will dissipate in about an hour.

You shouldn't toss old, unbroken CFLs in the trash because of that tiny bit of mercury. Instead, look for a recycling center in your area:

EPA's CFL recycling programs by state

Earth911's CFL recycling database -- click "More" next to the search box, enter your ZIP code, and then click "Go" to get a personalized list.

IKEA â every store has a free "Take Back" CFL recycle bin.

Hardware stores â chains like Ace and True Value are starting to collect CFLs.

Is there a connection between CFLs and migraines?

This question began popping up in early 2008 after an item in U.K Daily Mail presented questions asked by the Migraine Action Association as a statement of fact. No science has been offered to substantiate the suggestion that CFLs cause migraines.

The flip side of the same coin is that there are relatively few online resources refuting the claim.

EcoGeek came down hard on the subject, calling it a "crazy wildfire" of a rumor. TheDailyGreen.com also weighed in, quoting a representative from the migraine association as describing the connection between CFLs and migraines as "anecdotal." To date, no substantial research has been done on the subject that anyone's aware â or at least, that anyone has published online.

So there you have it. Compact fluorescent light bulbs save energy and money. Not great for dimmer switches and recessed lights, but the mercury won't kill you either. And you can try taking CFLs to the hardware store to recycle when they finally burn out after a long, bright life in your living room.

Green light is a go

Vera H-C Chan — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:12:59 PST

When daylight becomes scarce, human tradition has been to keep a light burning to ward off spirits. Our modernized Yuletide take (PDF) has gone from electrifying the Douglas fir to stringing together light displays that an incoming airplane could use as a navigational guide.

The renewed environmental consciousness means a closer scrutiny of this festive illumination. One calcuation estimates a string of incandescent holiday lights puts out nearly 300 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions in one month.

Typical for the season, online searches for "christmas lights," "outdoor christmas lights," and "christmas light displays" have surged nearly 200% in the past 30 days. But fortunately for the planet, glowing green alternatives have also spiked -- "led christmas lights" are up, and "solar christmas lights peaked over 500%."

LEDs (or Light-Emitting Diodes, if you want to sound sexy when talking energy) have became the must-have lumen. They've been draped around the Toledo Zoo, Times Square, and the National Christmas Tree. New York City's Rockefeller Center not only has LED lights on the tree, but solar panels on top of the building to power the decorations.

In the "nice try" category, even fake trees come with LED lights. Might want to think twice about that one.

The Star Tribune breaks down the LED positives (energy savings, environmental friendliness, safety) and the relative negatives (brightness, faceted vs. smooth surfaces). As TreeHugger notes, affordability had dampened LEDs' green allure, but prices are dropping. Given one estimate that holiday lights will cost Americans about $43 billion this season, some folks may be willing to spring for the extra bucks: savvy shoppers have already been looking for "costco led christmas lights."

Recouping the costs may come faster, depending on rebates and where you live: Consumer Reports says that the cost of electricity saved may take a couple seasons to pay itself back, but Pacific Gas & Electric in California calculated a whopping $496.60 savings in one year alone. Besides, who skimps on a gift for Mother Earth?

Tips for a green Hanukkah

Trystan L. Bass — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 23:20:09 PST

Hanukkah starts on Tuesday. Have you stocked up on fair-trade and organic chocolate gelt yet?

What about natural ways to light the menorah?

Making the eight nights a little more eco-friendly is easy and traditional. Here's how.

The Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life reminds Jews that this annual ceremony of rededication is a good time to rededicate yourself, your family, and your community to helping the planet. The 8 Actions in 8 Days tipsheet has simple things everyone can do to conserve energy, not just at Hanukkah, but year-round.

A kosher Hanukkah is a little more green than newer trends. For example, a classic oil-burning menorah uses pure olive oil and cotton wicks. This is better than common paraffin wax candles, an oil-based product.

Also, while American-made candles no longer have lead in the wicks, candles made in other countries may. Many candles sold for Hanukkah are made in Israel and Asia, so the lead content can be unclear.

If you don't want to mess with oil in your menorah, look for pure beeswax candles. These burn cleanly, use no petroleum materials, and fulfill the mitzvah.

If you're crafty or want to get the kids involved, try making a menorah out of everyday items like potatoes, ornaments, magnets, or pastry tips. That's a clever way to recycle and also personalize the holiday.

Of course, everyone loves a latke. Fried foods and dairy are classic Hanukkah foods.

You can give them a green spin by shopping for locally grown and organic potatoes, cheeses, and other ingredients to make treats for the eight nights. Search on Local Harvest for sources of sustainably grown food in your area.

Wishing you a bright and eco-friendly Diwali

Trystan L. Bass — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 15:34:25 PST

November 9 is the start of Hinduism's six-day Festival of Lights, Diwali. This joyous fall celebration signifies the victory of light over dark and is dedicated to the gods Vishnu and Ganesh and the goddess Lakshimi. Diwail is the traditional peak of the calendar year, and it's always a family favorite.

Being the Festival of Light, however, means this isn't always the greenest event. Homes and businesses are decorated in electric lights, and tons of fireworks are set off. Last year, one newspaper reported that people were "choking" in Mumbai from smoke leftover after Diwali fireworks.

Some Indians are pushing for a less polluting holiday. DiwaliFestival.org outlines the three problem areas with current festival customs: air pollution from firecrackers, excessive consumerism, high energy consumption.

Clean India's 'No Crackers on Diwali' page reminds Indians that firecrackers didn't exist in any of the great works of Hindu literature that Diwali is based on. So why use explosives on the holiday?

A charming story on a Mumbai woman's blog suggests ways to turn Diwali from a showy party back into a holiday about giving and sharing, all with minimal impact on the planet.

Seems like no matter the culture, consumerism is creeping into its holidays and junking up our earth. But the trend is reversible. If we make conscious choices about celebrations and purchases, we can limit the amount of garbage and pollution we create.

And that definitely calls for a glass of good cheer.

Does saving daylight save energy?

Trystan L. Bass — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:57:08 PDT

My Palm Pilot has been flashing at me since October 28. See, it believes Daylight Saving Time (DST) should have started already. Yeah, this isn't the latest model, so my Palm hasn't heard that the U.S. Congress changed when DST starts and stops.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 went into effect this year, so DST began three weeks earlier and ends one week later than before. The new "fall back" date is November 4, 2007.

The reason behind the change is energy savings. Previous DST adjustments during the 1970s oil embargo estimated that the U.S. saved the equivalent of 10,000 barrels of oil each day thanks to DST. And the California Energy Commission calculated an energy savings of about one percent per day.

More recent studies about the energy savings of DST haven't been so positive, however. An Australian experiment around the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games suggested that electricity savings was 'significantly overstated.'

A 2007 report by the California Energy Commission contradicts its earlier findings and suggests that DST saves maybe one half of one percent, at most.

Can we really save energy when we save daylight? Hard to say. Maybe if we don't turn on a bunch of lights when the sun is still shining. And don't charge that Palm Pilot during the extra hour either.

Lights out in San Francisco, L.A. on Saturday

Trystan L. Bass — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:48:53 PDT

Mom always told me to turn off the lights when I left the room. Don't know if she was being environmentally conscious or didn't want a fat electric bill. Either way, the habit stuck.

This weekend, San Francisco aims to do one better than my mom and turn off all the lights in the city, for one hour at least.

Lights Out SF is "a citywide energy conservation event" on Saturday, during which the city's 700,000 residents are encouraged to turn off their lights between 8 and 9 p.m.

The group estimates that just one dark hour could cut about 15 percent of the energy used on a typical Saturday night.

Further down the coast, Los Angeles is encouraging the Hollywood glitterati to chill their shine this weekend. Lights Out LA also is scheduled for Saturday from 8 to 9 p.m. The same supporters are behind the coordinated efforts.

These actions are inspired by Sydney, Australia's Earth Hour. From 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on March 31, 2007, more than 2 million Aussies turned off their lights. That caused a 10.2 percent drop in energy use.

The Down-Under results were pretty impressive. Businesses joined in the act too, and 90 McDonalds shut off their usually golden arches around town. Even the iconic Sydney Harbor Bridge had its lights out for an hour.

Some critique these efforts as just stunts, not sustainable habits. But like mom nagging me to turn off the light when I left a room, maybe seeing big cities go dark for an hour will remind us to turn off non-essential appliances and swap out old bulbs for efficient compact fluorescents ongoing.

Mom will be proud!