Live data from Hacker News

Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

washingtonpost.com

61–70 of 343 posts

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#61
post #60

Wow, I had to check the math and with my assumptions it does in fact take >2 hours of minimum wage labor to power a CFL for 1 year ($7.25/hr, 0.14$ KWh). It's much higher than I expected. I had the notion that turning off CFLs was hardly worth my time but that's not entirely true.

That is entirely dependent on one's financial condition.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#62
post #23
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They last a lot longer than incandescent bulbs, though. In fact, I've been using LED lights for about 15 years now, and I'm not sure I've ever replaced one. Even the cheap ones. By comparison, incandescent bulbs had to be replaced all the time in my experience. My parents had a supply of them ready. Phosphorescent bulbs were a bit in between. They don't break, but they get dimmer and need more time to get to full bri…

You are lucky. I’ve personally had a lot of failures. I like that they don’t make heat and are brighter. (And I also like how they can be packed more densely on dedicated lighting circuits than traditional fixtures), but they are definitely prone to early failures.

>You are lucky. I’ve personally had a lot of failures.

Or perhaps you're unlucky. LEDs on the whole have longer lives than incandescent bulbs do.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#63
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

Blaming immigration on how much we aren’t building is a mental gymnastic I haven’t seen before. Besides, those immigrants are the ones building those houses.

Not only they build those houses. They don't get to own them. Hard to imagine an undocumented immigrant having spare 250k cash for a downpayment. OP comment is a joke.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#64
post #35

Considering that the amount of computing that could be rented for the price of a house every month could now be bought for $20, this isn't surprising. What's surprising is that with all these resources made available to the world, we still have systems that allow hoarding of wealth to such a degree that most people can't afford to own a home and many can barely afford rent and food.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

> supply is limited by the surface area of the earth

But US is not a small country, how can there be not enough land?

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#65
post #35

Considering that the amount of computing that could be rented for the price of a house every month could now be bought for $20, this isn't surprising. What's surprising is that with all these resources made available to the world, we still have systems that allow hoarding of wealth to such a degree that most people can't afford to own a home and many can barely afford rent and food.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

Do you think two working parents factors into this? My coworker's families have annual income over $1m/yr, b/c both mom and dad work.

In previous generations, with only one parent working, it is almost impossible to compete.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#66
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

Blaming immigration on how much we aren’t building is a mental gymnastic I haven’t seen before. Besides, those immigrants are the ones building those houses.

If immigration is an order of magnitude higher than natality, it's fair to say it's a relevant factor. I don't think that's shifting blame, only pointing out that without immigration, there might be more homes built than new people born.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#67
post #35

Considering that the amount of computing that could be rented for the price of a house every month could now be bought for $20, this isn't surprising. What's surprising is that with all these resources made available to the world, we still have systems that allow hoarding of wealth to such a degree that most people can't afford to own a home and many can barely afford rent and food.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

> There were 2.7 million illegal border crossings in FY 2022: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna53517

> It’s unsustainable and people think you’re a racist for bringing it up so it never gets talked about.

Not to mention 3.7M live births in the US last year - and I know for a fact not a single one of those freeloaders has a job.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#68

Considering that the amount of computing that could be rented for the price of a house every month could now be bought for $20, this isn't surprising. What's surprising is that with all these resources made available to the world, we still have systems that allow hoarding of wealth to such a degree that most people can't afford to own a home and many can barely afford rent and food.

This. A cheap lamp on a table does little good when I can afford neither the table, the roof above it, nor the food to serve at that table.

Each time people start asking pointed questions about wealth distribution and the economic system you can almost count down the hours until one of these newspapers makes a "oh, look how much more of x you can get now than before". And I get it.

It's great that everyone can have a TV for 1/100 of what it cost in 1950 or whatever, but it does not solve the very obvious issues. People have problems paying rent, they have problems paying groceries. They see that they have to work more and more just to make the next month. And no cheap TV will help them do that, no matter how many "oh, but all is so much better now" articles are written.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#69
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Land/space are limited. I live where most on HN would consider very rural - the closest town is 600 people and a town of 20,000 is about 30 minutes from me. Even when I was buying a home back in 2011 there were basically no good plots of land for sale. What was there was about $10,000 an acre. I eventually got my house for $180,000 and it’s on 15 acres, meaning my 3,000 square foot house was basically only $30,000 wh…

> supply is limited by the surface area of the earth But US is not a small country, how can there be not enough land?

There is plenty of land, but not where most people want to live.

Re: Amount of work that once bought an hour of light now buys 51 years of it (2017)

#70
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, LEDs being so efficient means I need to use the central heating more often. My CFL TV used to provide some respite, not now I have an OLED.

I hope your heating is more energy efficient than heating with electric light bulbs though! (And it should be - worst comes to worst basic electrical heating can be effectively 100% efficient, and heat pumps can do better)

Light bulbs are also nearly 100% efficient, minus whatever fraction of light seeps out through windows or similar. As is just about anything else electric. Unfortunately that heat is usually suboptimally distributed, and pales in comparison to the heat pump effective efficiency which as you mentioned can go well above 100%.
Post reply on HN