Another great example are WiFi routers. They use a tiny amount of electricity but are everywhere. In the NYC subway there are multiple routers at every station. On the street NYC placed LCD signage called linkNYC. It will give you alerts about buses and trains but also has a wifi router. Those are at every other block by major streets. Every office building, private residence and store has multiple routers. And the crazy thing they are never turned off. We have blanketed the environment with routers and in the end the tiny amount of energy becomes huge. And the WiFi router is redundant since the environment is already blanketed by cellular towers. Both are transmitting the same internet.
• As you report, the sphere uses 0.078 Terrawatt-Hours, per year according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
• That means that the US would need to build at least 872 Spheres to offset the annual efficiency savings in residential lighting that we've realized just recently, and that doesn't even account for the lighting efficiency savings in non-residential sectors.
The Sphere is a huge energy waste, but it does not prove that there's an LED efficiency backfire at work or, honestly, that we should be spending our time and energy on the Jevons Paradox. The Sphere is a weird, wasteful outlier that is dwarfed by the lighting efficiency gains that we're seeing in millions and millions of homes across the US. Should we decry its waste and conspicuous consumption? Absolutely! But is the "Jevons Paradox" undermining LEDs as a powerful tool to reduce overall energy consumption? No, at least certainly not based on the numbers above.
The reason I find the Jevons Paradox narrative so frustrating is that, in my view:
(a) It falsely leads people to think that efficiency backfires, like your paraphrased quote of Jevons: "It is wholly a confusion to suppose that more efficient lighting leads to diminished consumption. The very contrary is the truth." This statement seems wholly incorrect. Yes, the Sphere is ridiculous, and you could argue that its overconsumption is an efficiency "rebound" where efficiency gains of LED technology are wasted. But the scale really matters here. Even the Sphere's outrageous consumption PALES in comparison to the "diminished consumption" that LED lighting has brought to buildings across the US. Will there be more Spheres or Sphere equivalents? Probably a few. Not 872.
(b) Once you've waded through the "backfire" myth/misunderstanding we're left with this banal insight: "efficiency isn't perfect". Well, of course not! This Energy Journal survey of the literature found a 10-30% rebound in the residential and transportation sectors and a 0-20% rebound in the industrial sector: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421500000215
So, energy efficiency ain't perfect at reducing energy consumption, but it's damned good at it.
Who ever expected any given climate solution to be perfect in the first place? At this point, solutions that get us headed in the right direction with velocity are a good start. As Hannah Ritchie states in "Why Climate Tribalism Only Helps the Deniers", let's be "directionalists" rather than "destinationalists":
My partner and I went to the Sphere in December to see U2 for our 10th anniversary. It was indeed a spectacle and unlike any other show we have been to (we are concert people). My partner and I have long discussed trying to write a paper investigating traffic accidents as a result of LED billboards. They're cropping up more and more. While we were waiting for the show to begin, I did turn to him and ask if he was going to shield his eyes from the LEDs during the show like he does during drives that have LED billboards.
Another great example are WiFi routers. They use a tiny amount of electricity but are everywhere. In the NYC subway there are multiple routers at every station. On the street NYC placed LCD signage called linkNYC. It will give you alerts about buses and trains but also has a wifi router. Those are at every other block by major streets. Every office building, private residence and store has multiple routers. And the crazy thing they are never turned off. We have blanketed the environment with routers and in the end the tiny amount of energy becomes huge. And the WiFi router is redundant since the environment is already blanketed by cellular towers. Both are transmitting the same internet.
Hi Lloyd - the debate continues!
According to the US Energy Information Agency:
• US energy use for residential lighting has plummeted from 130 Terrawatt-Hours per year in 2015 to 62 TWh per year in 2023. That's an LED-propelled energy efficiency savings of 68 TWh per year. (SOURCE: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-07/the-incredible-shrinking-energy-use-of-a-light-bulb)
• As you report, the sphere uses 0.078 Terrawatt-Hours, per year according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
• That means that the US would need to build at least 872 Spheres to offset the annual efficiency savings in residential lighting that we've realized just recently, and that doesn't even account for the lighting efficiency savings in non-residential sectors.
The Sphere is a huge energy waste, but it does not prove that there's an LED efficiency backfire at work or, honestly, that we should be spending our time and energy on the Jevons Paradox. The Sphere is a weird, wasteful outlier that is dwarfed by the lighting efficiency gains that we're seeing in millions and millions of homes across the US. Should we decry its waste and conspicuous consumption? Absolutely! But is the "Jevons Paradox" undermining LEDs as a powerful tool to reduce overall energy consumption? No, at least certainly not based on the numbers above.
The reason I find the Jevons Paradox narrative so frustrating is that, in my view:
(a) It falsely leads people to think that efficiency backfires, like your paraphrased quote of Jevons: "It is wholly a confusion to suppose that more efficient lighting leads to diminished consumption. The very contrary is the truth." This statement seems wholly incorrect. Yes, the Sphere is ridiculous, and you could argue that its overconsumption is an efficiency "rebound" where efficiency gains of LED technology are wasted. But the scale really matters here. Even the Sphere's outrageous consumption PALES in comparison to the "diminished consumption" that LED lighting has brought to buildings across the US. Will there be more Spheres or Sphere equivalents? Probably a few. Not 872.
(b) Once you've waded through the "backfire" myth/misunderstanding we're left with this banal insight: "efficiency isn't perfect". Well, of course not! This Energy Journal survey of the literature found a 10-30% rebound in the residential and transportation sectors and a 0-20% rebound in the industrial sector: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421500000215
So, energy efficiency ain't perfect at reducing energy consumption, but it's damned good at it.
Who ever expected any given climate solution to be perfect in the first place? At this point, solutions that get us headed in the right direction with velocity are a good start. As Hannah Ritchie states in "Why Climate Tribalism Only Helps the Deniers", let's be "directionalists" rather than "destinationalists":
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/jul/10/the-big-idea-why-climate-tribalism-only-helps-the-deniers
How do we create the conditions needed to support a cultural social shift to sufficiency?
A substack suggestion for you, if you don't already read it.
https://open.substack.com/pub/hannahritchie?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=7ov7m
My partner and I went to the Sphere in December to see U2 for our 10th anniversary. It was indeed a spectacle and unlike any other show we have been to (we are concert people). My partner and I have long discussed trying to write a paper investigating traffic accidents as a result of LED billboards. They're cropping up more and more. While we were waiting for the show to begin, I did turn to him and ask if he was going to shield his eyes from the LEDs during the show like he does during drives that have LED billboards.
the Luddites were right!