Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 343 posts

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

#21

Post by csomar »

HPsquared wrote: post #9
stuckinhell wrote: post #4

That's cool, but inflation is still hitting me harder than I expected at the grocery store with 3 hungry kids. This article and honestly a lot of articles by the WaPo seem tone deaf lately.

Inflation is the economics version of "software getting slower faster than hardware gets faster". In other words, the increased output is being diverted to areas that don't produce value.

I think people underestimated the value of Russia (they have a much lowe gdp, so they are small vs western countries) when in reality they do produce and provide a lot but at cut down prices because of corruption (or at the expense of their citizens)

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

#22

Post by wnc3141 »

wolfram74 wrote: post #2

The conversation about the grid being born and how rapidly early power systems paid themselves off made me think about how substantially easier it is to produce light now than over historical periods. I believe the economics term for this would be that photons are extremely deflationary relative to labor?

Innovation is the key factor of economic growth in industrialized economies. Innovation produces wealth , which in turn produces innovation sort of cycle. Light has in sorts been dematerialized, i.e we get more output per raw material of input (think of coal in a furnace vs. LEDs powered by a modern grid)

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

#23

Post by abakker »

mcv wrote: post #13
6DM wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a love hate relationship for led lights. They are more efficient, come in an array of colors for you to personalize your space. But I consider them expensive and a lot of them surprisingly don’t last that long, especially for their price. I’ve already replace two out of three led light fixtures that are supposed to last at least a decade and it hasn’t even been 5 years. I hope the quality improves or there’s s…

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.

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

#25

Post by nmz »

bombcar wrote: post #7
wolfram74 wrote: post #2

The conversation about the grid being born and how rapidly early power systems paid themselves off made me think about how substantially easier it is to produce light now than over historical periods. I believe the economics term for this would be that photons are extremely deflationary relative to labor?

We’ve turned what used to be an exceptionally precious commodity (light, especially after the sun set) into a pollutant. Go us.

I'm not going to blame pre BC humans for needing light, especially when nocturnal creatures existed. If anything this is an absolute win, we are still burning something in order to produce light, but what we burn is way less of a pollutant than wood.

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

#26

Post by bombcar »

nmz wrote: post #25
bombcar wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’ve turned what used to be an exceptionally precious commodity (light, especially after the sun set) into a pollutant. Go us.

I'm not going to blame pre BC humans for needing light, especially when nocturnal creatures existed. If anything this is an absolute win, we are still burning something in order to produce light, but what we burn is way less of a pollutant than wood.

I'm referring to light pollution, not the power source.

It used to be that if you saw light at night, you knew humans were there - now we light millions of uninhabited acres.

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

#27

Post by rqtwteye »

osigurdson wrote: post #19
USB5 wrote: post #17

American wages have been stagnated for over 30 years.

We’ve had many technological advancements, but few touch on concrete problems that actually save time or reduce costs for individuals. I suspect the next few decades will have more impact in this regard than the last 50 years. Full self driving might be an example in the near future that will measurably lift standards of living for many. More automation, AI and robotics are the key.

No tech will be available to lift the standard of living in the same way that a reliable health care and social system, affordable housing and reasonable work life balance can. Telling people “you can’t afford health care, housing or retirement but look at how great self driving cars and phones are” is just condescending talk by the upper class to distract from growing inequality.

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

#28

Post by aaron695 »

rsynnott wrote: post #8

Mildly weird piece, in that it's really measuring two things; lighting efficiency (and only at an extremely low resolution, implying a whole-system efficiency that doesn't change between the invention of the light bulb and the fluorescent light) and wage growth. 60 hours of work may have bought 72 hours of electric light in 1880, but rather more in 1990, say, for a combination of both reasons. That said, LED bulbs do…

[dead]

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

#30

Post by ketzu »

USB5 wrote: post #17

American wages have been stagnated for over 30 years.

Everything I ever saw points to rising real wages over spans larger than 20 years. e.g., https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N (there's quite the dip after 2008). Could you provide a source?
Post reply on HN