Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

LED Instead!

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The University of Virginia will install a light-emitting diode pedestrian crosswalk at the intersection of University Avenue and Culbreth Road. According to the Daily Progress, the LED crosswalk will be similar to one installed previously on Emmett Street near Alumni Hall.

This blurb of a story strikes me as highly significant. It opens up a whole line of questions. Why aren’t more Virginia municipalities installing more LED lighting?

In crosswalks LED lights decrease the risk of pedestrian accidents. In all public lighting applications, LED technology is highly energy efficient.

To quote Wikipedia: “LEDs are currently more expensive, price per lumen, on an initial capital cost basis, than more conventional lighting technologies. The additional expense partially stems from the relatively low lumen output and the drive circuitry and power supplies needed. However, when considering the total cost of ownership (including energy and maintenance costs), LEDs far surpass incandescent or halogen sources and begin to threaten compact fluorescent lamps.” (My italics.)

According to Treehugger.com, the City of Ann Arbor, Michigan, is installing more than 1,000 LED streetlights beginning next month. The city anticipates a 3.8-year payback on its initial investment. The LED lights typically burn five times longer than the bulbs they replace and require less than half the energy.

LEDs can be used not only in crosswalks but traffic signals, road signs and, most importantly from a public policy perspective, street lights. Virginia municipalities need to explore this money-saving, greenhouse gas-reducing option more aggressively.

(Image cutline: Treehugger.com.)

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. Bob Avatar
    Bob

    “Why aren’t more Virginia municipalities installing more LED lighting?”

    Probably for the same reason you don’t have them in your own home. $130 bulbs (you need two to equal a real 150w light bulb), the price is still awfully steep.

    Where they make economic sense is anywhere the cost of getting union goons to change the bulb is high. That’s why pretty much every intersection in NOVA has them. As a side benefit, LEDs are significantly faster than incandescent bulbs, so yellow lights change even more quickly. Combine that with the return of red light cameras: Ka-CHING.

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    When ideas like this an a few dozen other easy fixes bring us to our energy conservation goals, what is the next crisis that the professional Chickens Little will devise….?

  3. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    The folks who sign up for those Smart Meters? .. they get FREE LEDs…

  4. Danny L. Newton Avatar
    Danny L. Newton

    LED’s make more sense when they are in areas that do not have electrical infrastructure and there is a solar chaging option like airport lights in Iraq, particularly runway lights. Traffic lights have special long lasting filiments that are designed to absorb the wear and tear of cycling them on and off. The State of Tennessee has had before the legislature for more than two years a bill to make traffic lights work off of the LED bulb but has not passed yet. Outdoors and when subject to lightning, neither bulb survives the near hit. LED’s make more sense when they are in areas that do not have electrical infrastructure and there is a solar changing option like airport lights in Iraq, particularly runway lights. Traffic lights have special long lasting filaments that are designed to absorb the wear and tear of cycling them on and off. The State of Tennessee has had before the legislature for more than two years a bill to make traffic lights work off of the LED bulb but has not passed yet. Outdoors and when subject to lightning, neither bulb survives the near hit.
    It is more importatnt to save money than energy because wasted money drives out the possibility of other good choices that could also save energy.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “It is more importatnt to save money than energy because wasted money drives out the possibility of other good choices that could also save energy.”

    Bingo.

    And if it costs more money, it probably uses more resources, even if they don’t happen to include elctricity.

    RH

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Who is going to pay for the FREE LED’s?

    RH

  7. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I thought you’d never ask.

    the people who pay more for peak power, of course.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Wait a minute.

    The poeple who pay more for peak power, are paying their fair share for peak power.

    They are not paying for supposedly free LED’s.

    This argument sounds strangely like the one where users pay “their fair share” in additional tolls so we can give away free transit rides.

    RH

    RH

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Larry

    What part of the second law of thermodynamics is it that you don’t understand?

    Is it the part where energy is connected to the economy?

    RH

  10. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    actually, it’s perfect symmetry.

    by doing that, the peak hour buyers are reducing their own rates.

    how’s that for thermodynamic bullfeathers?

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Even if it was true that they are reducing their rates, the rates they pay would still be paying for their own costs for electricity, not someone else’s “free” LED’s.

    So, to recap, these guys are goin to pay for a smart meter and then pay higher rates during peak hours, but they will actually save money overall because the base rate will go down. The base rate will be lower because then we won’t need to use all those peaking power plants we already built, which will spend more time idle.

    RH

  12. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    close but not quite…

    .. won’t have to build NEW plants which will raise everybody’s costs…

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    New plant’s don’t raise everybody’s cost, unless they sit idle. Presumably, new costs would be paid in farir proportion by the users of electricity. That includes the “opportunity costs” for having the opportunity to make power during peak periods if someone shold actually want it during peak period.

    But that still only covers the fair cost of electricity: who is going to pay for the “free” LED’s?

    RH

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “New plant’s don’t raise everybody’s cost,”

    have you been reading the news lately?

    “The SCC approved a rate increase to finance the construction of the new plant,”

    http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?Feed=AP&Date=20080401&ID=8419711&Symbol=D

Leave a Reply

Read More