A dim glow from before the lightbulb Conspiracy

There's a story here about a lightbulb that's been going for over a hundred years. It was made before the lightbulb consortium got together and demanded that lightbulbs have a limited lifetime, to guarantee their ongoing sales. 

It's something of a miracle that LEDs have seen light in the market. A victory of technology over control capitalism. A victory for the consumers over the manufacturers. Perhaps a victory for the energy conservationists over generators, but that may depend on the Jevons paradox.

You can listen on 99% invisible.

Lithium

I'm sure you've seen it on the periodic table, way up at the top, straight after hydrogen and helium. The most minimal of metals. There's also a lump in your phone.

And I have several cells charging the thermometer data loggers in my house. When I saw that these rechargeable batteries were cheaper than the disposal ones from the local electric shop, I pounced on them. What did I have to lose?

I despaired a little at the first two I got when they didn't seem to work at all. They came together with a charger, and I since bought several Ultrafire batteries, which seem to work OK. Then I realised I hadn't unpacked the first batteries, and they were still shrunk wrapped in clear plastic. They worked fine after that. In fact they were ready-charged. All rechargeable batteries should be ready-charged, and now many are. All batteries should probably be rechargeable, but that's another story.

I have 16 data loggers in the house, and the first set of batteries I got were only available with the charger. I only needed one charger, so I would have got the Ultrafire anyway.

So a couple of months later the new batteries start to need replacing. I find this out when I do the monthly download of data from each logger to the recorder. When it announces a communication error I know that the battery is flat, so I replace it. I've then been recharging the batteries that come out, and trying to put them in another data logger the next time a battery runs out.

And sometimes they don't work.

My initial reaction, of course, is that I now have an explanation for the price being lower than the disposable batteries.

Then I started investigating the charging technique of lithium ion batteries. Here's a good website called batteryuniversity.com on how to prolong them, from which I stole this graph demonstating the loss in capacity as their life goes on.

There seems to be a two- or three-step process: applying a high voltage, then balancing the voltage, then applying the target voltage.

Now that I've started watching the charger charge, I notice it goes from a red light when you put the battery in, to a flashing red light an hour later, presumably when it's balancing, to a flashing green light when it's ready.

The charger has two slots, and I've been charging batteries in pairs. This seems an obvious thing to do, and is sensible when the batteries are new and empty, or if the batteries had been together in the same appliance, discharging their power in lock-step.

As it is they have been on their own, discharging at slighly different rates over slightly different periods. We usually think of batteries being full or empty, as if they are tanks of fuel, but actually they don't work that way. As they lose charge their voltage gradually falls. If it's a battery connected to a bulb, then the current will keep flowing as the voltage gets lower until there is no current left. If they are driving something electronic, At some point the voltage will drop below a useful level for those transistors. The device will notice this and start taking action, primarily giving an alert that the battery needs charging, and switching off non-essential activities that use a lot of power. Like transmittting a couple of months of data. The data loggers will keep logging data for a while after telling us that the battery is fading, and I think only once or twice in two years have I lost data from a battery going below a level at which it can log data. 

So I need to recharge the batteries separately, or the charging cycle will start balancing before the batteries are ready, or after it's too late, and perhaps neither battery will be fully charged.

I should have done so from the very beginning, but since I got the rechargeables, I've started writing a note of when I changed the battery on each data logger. Perhaps I should be writing on each battery though.

When to switch it off

The best way of reducing the energy consumption of a device is to switch it off.

Pretty obvious, but the marketing people won't tell you this. Car adverts will show vehicles cruising wilderness or open road, boasting the high efficiency. They won't show them parked in the garage when their miles per gallon are up at infinity.

In fact, not buying the device in the first place is better still, but it's usually too late for that.

We switched off our electric radiator at the end of February, and until then it was running on a timer so it would only come on around six in the morning.

We also switched off the underfloor heating at the end of February, and as far as heating goes winter was over. Of course the story outside was somewhat different, and there was still snow and plenty of cold nights, but not in the same league as January and February.

Also, even though we stopped using our hot water for heating the house, it didn't make a major dint in our electricity consumption for another week. This is presumably the wisdom of the Eco Cute, which decides how much heat to generate depending on the maximum usage over the past week. Also, the fact that the energy it uses depends more on how cold it is outside and how hot you want the water to be in the tank, rather than how much heat you use. As the night goes on and the tank gets hotter and the air outside gets colder, the heat pump gets less and less efficient as it has a higher gap to lift the heat over.

Anyway, it's likely that at least some of the heat ended up in the house, since that's where the hot water tank is, and it was not all being poured down the drain as hot water, which is one of the less-advertised habits of these eco-wonder. Even if the heat went into the house, it willl have been heating the air rather the foundation, much less efficiently.  So the heating didn't fully switch off until the second week of March.

Confounded by car culture

We got a new car. It's a bit of a digression from house building, but relevant to the larger narrative of conservation at the mercy of consumerism.

Our old car was one of the most environment friendly in the city, but not because of high efficiency or low emmission technology. It was twenty years old and did 7 or 8 km to the litre, which car dealers call 10 km to the litre. I'm not sure what that is miles per gallon, and I'm not sure of the units of fuel efficiency in the UK where people buy litres and drive miles.

We took it to get a shaken, the two-yearly test the car must go through to be allowed on the road, much of which seems to function as a tax on old cars, and an incentive to get a new one and keep the wheels of the motor industry turning. I was expecting this would cost around one hundred thousand yen, but after taking it to the garage they said it would probably be two or three. They spent a day or two looking at what needed to be done on it, and found a dodgy brake cable and a leaking fuel pump, as well as the erratic speedometer that goes up to 60 when you turn on the engine. We then had to decide whether to get a new car, or fork out for the shaken.

After looking at the cost of a new car and the cost of shaken, as well as house-related costs over the next year, we decided to go for the shaken. This would have lasted another two years over which time we could look for a new car. Also this would give us time to build a car port to put it under.

As we arrived at the garage with our decision, the guy rushed out to tell us that the problematic part was not available. Toyota had stopped making that fuel pump and they couldn't source any. I suspect if we had gone through a smaller garage they would have been able to get some pump to work on it, but the place we went to was part of a chain and bound by insurance policies to only fit parts from the original manufacturers. But we didn't have the time and energy to go around looking for another place, and the car is being scrapped. Cut down in its prime at the age of 20, only around 90,000 km on the clock. Or perhaps sense will intervene and someone will fix the pump and drive it into a new future. Another dawn rather than a sunset.

Another option was to do without a car, using taxis or rentacars when we need one. This would probably work out cheaper long term, after considering the price of the car, insurance, tax and shaken. It would certainly have been the cheapest option short-term. The garage would have charged us for scrapping the car, but included it in the price if we got a new one. This influenced our decision to get a new car, even though the saving in the grand scheme of things was tiny. It's ironic that false economies like this are keeping the economy going.

The main reason for deciding against going car-free was that this would probably be very limiting on our freedom and convenience. It's certainly possible in theory to get taxis and rentacars, but probably not in practice. I'm not sure whether this would really be a bad thing as freedom is a fluid and flexible concept. We went for luxury and convenience anyway.

While we were talking about new cars I asked about hybrids, and told them that I'd hoped the next car I got would be electric. They seemed to think that these are way off, although I'm not so sure. Apparently there are EVs with a 300 km range, but if you're driving them in the winter the range drops to about 100 km if you use the heater. Electric motors are more efficient than combustion engines, so they put out much less heat. A hundred km is barely enough to get to a ski resort and back, which is one of the things we'd use our car for. In fact the main reasons we have a car - going camping in the summer and skiing in the winter - are the most challenging types of journey for electrical vehicles. If we wanted to ride around town and go shopping, they would be perfect.

When I say a new car it's not brand new, just new to us. Four years old actually. Belonged to an elderly couple. It looks new.

The worst thing was that we'd just put new tyres on the old car. It had only done a hundred km on them. I asked them to give me back the tyres when we scrapped the car, so I could try to sell them. It turns out that when you scrap a car, it needs to have wheels on, so I took in the winter tyres, and asked them to change them, then give me back the summer tyres. This seemed OK, but in the process of changing the tyres and the guy I was dealing with taking the day off, my tyres vanished somewhere. He told me he could give us a discount when we go to buy winter tyres off them. I suppose we need winter tyres. Actually I wonder whether we really need summer tyres or whether we could use our studless winter tyres all year round. That's a whole other issue.

The insurance man came since and the premium has gone up by 1500 yen a month, just to give another tug on those suspicions that we made the wrong decision, and make me feel that everything that is happening is primarily to get more money flowing out of my pocket.

The best thing is the number plate. I hadn't really looked at it until we got home and my wife asked me whether I'd chosen it specially. I thought perhaps it was one of our birthdays. I looked at the number and it seemed a little familiar. It's our wedding anniversary!

Sparks start to fly

The electrician turned up at the building site on Friday. I asked about getting the solar panels connected to the power conditioners so that it would be possible to use the free electricity I've paid a lot to get, rather than the builders having to pay for electricity brought to the site. He proceeded to give reasons why this was not a good idea, which mostly annoyed rather than illuminated. I'm already more or less resigned to the fact that the panels will be sat on the roof soaking up a whole summer's sun from the beginning of June, and I won't be able to sell any to the electricity company until I move in and start a contract with them in October.

Actually, first I asked what would happen in the event of a power cut, and he said that, in the case of an earthquake or disaster, a signal would be sent from the electricity company to switch off the power conditioners. This was also a bit of shock (though fortunately not an electric shock) but seems sensible as there may be a loose wire somewhere after an earthquake and it's best to shut off the power. A plug is available on each power conditioner for emergency use.  

Anyway, the first reason he gave for not connecting the panels was that it would be dangerous. Apparently there's a lot of electricity in those wires, and it would be dangerous to connect them. Somebody might die. The panels are there soaking up sunlight now, sending frustrated electrons and holes in opposite directions, but destined never to meet on the other side of a circuit. So, I asked, if the wires are going to be connected to a power conditioner, then what's the difference? 

But somebody might cut the wires. 

Well, surely there's a lot of electricity in the wires now anyway, and somebody might cut the wires now? 

Next, he seemed to think there wouldn't be enough electricity. It's rated at over 9 kilowatts. If it's running at half power, that's still over 4 kilowatts. At 100 volts, that's 40 amps. I know they're running a workshop, but that seems like quite a lot of electricity. As long as there's more coming into the power conditioner than going out, it shouldn't cause a problem. Well, electricians like to work at night time. 

Couldn't they bring a torch?

This makes me wonder how much the idea of a low-energy house has got through to the people making it. 

By the way, he told me, it didn't make any difference to the electricity bill how much they used. There was a standard rate, paid regardless of how much power was used.

But, actually, really, the main reason for not connecting the power conditioners was that they didn't want to start using the them as they will start wearing out. They want to hand everything over in pristine order. Also, they didn't want the power conditioner to get damaged. If they put it in place, there's a chance that it'll be damaged by the workmen. 

In and among, they were talking about new government plans for houseowners with solar panels to be able to sell all the electricity they produce, at the premium rate, and buy all the electricity they use at lower rates. One argument they had against this was that it would not encourage people to save electricity. The current system means that you're much better off selling your electricity than using it, so people will generally try to switch things off, especially during the day when electricity demand is higher. 

I may be over sensitive or paranoid, but I can't help feeling from their general tone that they think all this energy saving and solar power is complete nonsense, and they may of course be right, but more about that another day. 

I was looking, later, at the 230 watt incandescent bulb that the carpenter has brought to illuminate the workspace. Just wondering what that was doing in a house that's trying to reduce carbon emissions. This one bulb will probably use more electricity than all the lights in the completed house. It would be a great heater on cold winter nights. I'm sure the carpenter has heard of low energy lighting, but it comes down to economics. This kind of bulb is cheaper to buy, and he doesn't have to pay for the electricity. The builders pay for the electricity and the carpenter is just their subcontractor. In fact not even the builders really pay for the electricity, because there's a flat rate regardless of how much is used. 

Energy efficiency is not just a question of technology. Energy efficient technology must be used. In fact, that may not lead to energy efficiency; the important thing is that energy-inefficient technology is not used. Even energy efficient technology should be used as little as possible. These are not questions of technology but of design, economics and politics. The technology is actually not so difficult! Anyway, it may be a little optimistic to think that energy efficiency is going to reduce energy consumption.

No LEDs on display, but what is on display is being lit by LED...

We went to a few showrooms the other day to look at stuff for the house. We're interested in LEDs, for reasons explained here. One problem is knowing how bright the LEDs will actually be. Everybody used to know what a 60 Watt bulb was like, but to compare incandescents, fluorescents and LEDs, wattage has little meaning, and it's not so helpful to compare different LEDs. Light manufacturers have now started putting lumen values on their products, rather than just wattage, so there is some way of comparing, but the angle at which the light comes out can also be an issue in terms of how bright it is. 

We saw lots of LEDs in the Bathroom shop, Takara, where they have recently changed all their display lights into 60-watt halogen-style bulbs (around 7 watts) in lighting rails for the displays. They even have extra LED spotlights inside the bathrooms on display, to supplement the standard light fittings inside their bathrooms, which puts aside previous concerns that LEDs aren't bright enough.

We asked them to switch off the fitted lights in one bathroom, and just switch on the two LED spotlights to get an idea of how bright they were. They were certainly bright enough, especially under the relatively large area under the spot, but it was definitely less bright on the ceiling and higher up on the walls. Not very good, for example, if we invite a vampire round for a bath, and they turn into a bat and hang from the ceiling. Or perhaps they would prefer to be in the dark, and even for our vampire friends LEDs may be better. Anyway, as a whole the room seemed less bright, as it contained darkness, but it was bright enough where needed.

They are putting LEDs in one of their display bathrooms next week, and the bathroom we're getting has LED downlights as an option to the standard bracket-lights. This will cost us 39,000 yen extra. Obviously they're charging over the odds for this, but the design is superior, with down-lights rather than bracket lights, and it will claw back some of the cost in electricity bills in the next few decades, and should reduce some extra heat in the summer. It's best to write it off as an early adopter tax. 

In the tile shop they had several larger LED display units on the ceiling, like these from Toshiba. Much bigger units.

We asked about LEDs in the home fittings showroom of Panasonic, the electrical manufacturer, and got a rather blank look. They were using some for lighting their own displays of other fixed furnishings, but it obviously hasn't seriously crossed their minds to try to get people to put them in new houses. 

It seems in these, and many other shops that putting LEDs in makes a great deal of financial sense as they can get the same light output for a lower running cost, both in terms of electricity and bulb replacement. There seems to be much less effort getting them into new builds, although they are probably still working on the loss-leader concept that Gillette developed with their razor blades. Buy an LED fitting and you will have light for the rest of your life.  Buy a normal fitting and you'll be buying light bulbs for the rest of your life. Why get people to buy one thing when you can get them to buy two?