4 ms·

Jevons Paradox describes the situation where a 10x efficiency increase results in a >10x deployment of lumens, such that the amount of energy consumed for light

Jevons Paradox describes the situation where a 10x efficiency increase results in a >10x deployment of lumens, such that the amount of energy consumed for lightning increases relative to when lighting was inefficient.

aurareturn 2y ago
Which has happened historically. Comparing this with the solid blue price line showing price indicates that the 100 fold fall in price per unit of light in the 20th century was due to increased efficiency, mainly as electricity replaced gas. Yet demand rose strongly over the period, increasing more than 100 fold. This challenges the view that increases in efficiency translate into reductions in demand, and thus emissions. https://onclimatechangepolicydotorg.wordpress.com/low-carbon-technologies-section-overview/long-term-trends-in-lighting-efficiency-and-consumption/ https://onclimatechangepolicydotorg.wordpress.com/low-carbon...
- mitthrowaway2 2y ago
  That's a good source, although that historical analysis extends to the year 2000 when even CFLs only had reached ~30% market share, and well before LED lighting hit mass adoption. It is only speculating about LEDs. There's no question that lighting demand has continued to grow but the efficiency increase has also been remarkable, so unless you know of another source that does the math, it's unclear to me to what extent it's ended up balancing out in this case. Another confounder to Jevons' paradox is that the price of the input (electricity) can also change, independent of changes in efficiency. If electricity prices were to go up ten-fold during the switch to LED lighting, then we wouldn't expect much change in illumination (probably a net decrease, as people would be hurting so much from other electricity expenditures that they'd be hunting for any savings on their energy bill). That's of course a fictional scenario, but in the case of GPUs, well, they have been getting quite expensive.

aurareturn 2y ago

Which has happened historically. Comparing this with the solid blue price line showing price indicates that the 100 fold fall in price per unit of light in the 20th century was due to increased efficiency, mainly as electricity replaced gas. Yet demand rose strongly over the period, increasing more than 100 fold. This challenges the view that increases in efficiency translate into reductions in demand, and thus emissions. https://onclimatechangepolicydotorg.wordpress.com/low-carbon-technologies-section-overview/long-term-trends-in-lighting-efficiency-and-consumption/ https://onclimatechangepolicydotorg.wordpress.com/low-carbon...

mitthrowaway2 2y ago
That's a good source, although that historical analysis extends to the year 2000 when even CFLs only had reached ~30% market share, and well before LED lighting hit mass adoption. It is only speculating about LEDs. There's no question that lighting demand has continued to grow but the efficiency increase has also been remarkable, so unless you know of another source that does the math, it's unclear to me to what extent it's ended up balancing out in this case. Another confounder to Jevons' paradox is that the price of the input (electricity) can also change, independent of changes in efficiency. If electricity prices were to go up ten-fold during the switch to LED lighting, then we wouldn't expect much change in illumination (probably a net decrease, as people would be hurting so much from other electricity expenditures that they'd be hunting for any savings on their energy bill). That's of course a fictional scenario, but in the case of GPUs, well, they have been getting quite expensive.