Why turning off the lights is a waste of your time

[nth_degree]

Alright I’m hoping someone on this forum can set me straight on a contrarian opinion I’m forming to piss off my math professor roommate. Here is the problem;

My irritating AF roommate follows me around the house turning off the lights everywhere I go and I’m living in darkness. I’m all for saving energy (I replaced all the bulbs w LEDs last year) but what he’s doing IMO is a repetitive task for dopamine payoff and virtue signaling. Little different to the behaviors encouraged by many religions. I’m thinking rosary beads. Anyway

I don’t think what he’s doing either saves energy or money. For one thing if you turn off the lights while it may slow the meter, if that energy isn’t stored it will still go to waste. And how about this; even if we use the economy bulbs the cost in average purchase consumer quantity of 16 is $35, so say $2 a piece. The energy cost of 24/7 operation at 11W is 12.50 a year here in Berkeley at 0.13KWH. Each bulb has a quoted MTBF of 15,000 hours but I believe the manufacturers are stating the LED MTBF not the driver MTBF there. For the bulb as a unit it’s the lower of course but the difference is if you frequently turn the power on and off the driver will have a significantly reduced life and your 13 years of service for $2 just became 10 months of service. So you lose $1.85, per bulb. Furthermore there was an energy cost to manufacturing every component of the bulb so there go your energy savings as well, if there ever were any.

I think turning off the lights was a 60’s habit to save money when incandescent bulbs were 150W and the cost of energy was sky high. I don’t think it ever saved energy either except in the sense that if the power station saw lesser demand collectively it would reduce the quota for an area and waste less in that sense.

Please tell me why I’m wrong

[DrG]

By my analysis over the last few days, I have turned on my bathroom light 8 times and turned it off 11 times. I am surprised that the two numbers do not show greater agreement.

Could this be related to the pandemic culture war?

[wraper]

if that energy isn’t stored it will still go to waste.

Nothing will be lost since power generation is adjusted according to consumption.

For the bulb as a unit it’s the lower of course but the difference is if you frequently turn the power on and off the driver will have a significantly reduced life

Unless it's a badly designed bulb, it will not significantly lose it's lifetime from frequent switching. Heat is what wears them the most. And running for a long time increases the temperature bulb experiences.

MTBF of 15,000 hours

MTBF is not a lifetime. https://www.controleng.com/articles/learn-or-review-the-difference-between-mtbf-and-lifetime/

[Capernicus]

What about the amount of power the industry uses compared to the "public civilian sector"  I bet its more than 1000x more power usage,  but I'm only guessing.

[fordem]

For the bulb as a unit it’s the lower of course but the difference is if you frequently turn the power on and off the driver will have a significantly reduced life

Unless it's a badly designed bulb, it will not significantly lose it's lifetime from frequent switching. Heat is what wears them the most. And running for a long time increases the temperature bulb experiences.

Aren't you neglecting the impact of "inrush" current every time the lamp is powered on?  I switched to LED lighting around 2010/2011 and I've had about a half dozen or so bulbs fail, every one has been a driver failure, not the LEDs and it's on the LED end that the heat is being generated.

[nth_degree]

“Nothing will be lost since power generation is adjusted according to consumption.”

That’s simply not true in practice. If a bulb is on or off in my home the generation quota from the plant will be the same. Sure if our collective behavior of thousands of people creates enough reduction in demand for the station to reduce the quota power will be saved assuming those people have behavior that is consistent. In reality though if I turn off the light, the power being distributed in the moment just goes to ground and since people are unpredictable even as a group, the quota for a sector never changes.

[nth_degree]

“I've had about a half dozen or so bulbs fail”

LED bulbs at my home have a very short lifespan, so much so we’ve created an Amazon subscription. On average a bulb lasts 5 months in a recessed socket. I think heat is responsible, and the drivers are dying. I can’t imagine the LEDs can fail so quickly.

[rob77]

“Nothing will be lost since power generation is adjusted according to consumption.”

That’s simply not true in practice. If a bulb is on or off in my home the generation quota from the plant will be the same. Sure if our collective behavior of thousands of people creates enough reduction in demand for the station to reduce the quota power will be saved assuming those people have behavior that is consistent. In reality though if I turn off the light, the power being distributed in the moment just goes to ground and since people are unpredictable even as a group, the quota for a sector never changes.

you're sooo wrong at many levels...

the generator at the power plant generates only the amount it's loaded with.. and loads the mechanical input the same amount + loses. your light bulb will be a miniscule change in the load but it's there...
just do an experiment with a petrol power generator - load it with a single light bulb.. and listen to the sound of the engine.. then connect a big load (e.g. heater) and listen to the sound.. you will hear the change because the load changed... you will clearly hear the engine will go at higher power... when you disconnect the big  load the engine will go back to the previous state.

regarding the grid... if there is less demand the load goes down on generators hence mechanical load goes down on the input (water turbine, steam turbine) and they start spin faster... that's why the frequency of the grid goes up when the load is lower and opposite way goes down when the load is higher because it loads down the generators and their mechanical inputs slowing them down. no energy "goes to ground" if it's not "used".

[wraper]

“Nothing will be lost since power generation is adjusted according to consumption.”

That’s simply not true in practice. If a bulb is on or off in my home the generation quota from the plant will be the same. Sure if our collective behavior of thousands of people creates enough reduction in demand for the station to reduce the quota power will be saved assuming those people have behavior that is consistent. In reality though if I turn off the light, the power being distributed in the moment just goes to ground and since people are unpredictable even as a group, the quota for a sector never changes.

Electric generation is done not according to quota but according to what the grid needs at the moment, otherwise voltage/frequency will go out of spec. Too much generation is not good for the grid. So even though your contribution is tiny, it's what impacts the power output needed.

[wraper]

LED bulbs at my home have a very short lifespan, so much so we’ve created an Amazon subscription. On average a bulb lasts 5 months in a recessed socket.

Don't buy garbage. Instead buy something decent which will last many times longer. $2 a piece certainly sounds like a bottom of the barrel junk. Lumens is what matters, not Watts. And cheap bulbs are less efficient, therefore generate more heat for the same amount of power consumed.

On average a bulb lasts 5 months in a recessed socket.

It's part of the answer why they don't last long.

I think heat is responsible, and the drivers are dying. I can’t imagine the LEDs can fail so quickly.

They certainly can. Since in the cheaper bulbs LEDs are driven to the brink. And poor cooling only makes it worse.

[nth_degree]

“ regarding the grid... if there is less demand the load goes down on generators hence mechanical load goes down on the input (water turbine, steam turbine) and they start spin faster... that's why the frequency of the grid goes up when the load is lower and opposite way goes down when the load is higher because it loads down the generators and their mechanical inputs slowing them down”

The load may go down for the turbines of the generators but the source of energy they use is heat from fission or combustion, and so the energy is still lost, and the act of unloading the turbine has no meaning.

[rob77]

“ regarding the grid... if there is less demand the load goes down on generators hence mechanical load goes down on the input (water turbine, steam turbine) and they start spin faster... that's why the frequency of the grid goes up when the load is lower and opposite way goes down when the load is higher because it loads down the generators and their mechanical inputs slowing them down”

The load may go down for the turbines of the generators but the source of energy they use is heat from fission or combustion, and so the energy is still lost, and the act of unloading the turbine has no meaning.

apparently we have another "i'll talk bullshit till the end and never admit i was wrong" dude here 

[MK14]

my math professor roommate

The thing is, many people, have little/no idea on how electronics/Physics works. They are just black boxes, which do some secret source/magic, and simply just work. This can lead to such people believing that devices which don't really use much electricity (as a percentage of the overall electricity bill), being major consumers of it, even if they aren't.
On the other hand (as others, are mentioning in this thread). You seem to have your own, possible misunderstandings. Such as how electric power generation really works, and what determines the lifetime of LED lighting.

[nth_degree]

“i'll talk bullshit till the end and never admit i was wrong"

Not really, I just want it explained what exactly it is I’m missing in my understanding. Better yet if you can spell out how energy is saved when I turn off a bulb, that would be great. Better still would be if you could give me an argument my roommate can’t shoot down so I can annoy him by leaving the lights on all the time

[wraper]

The load may go down for the turbines of the generators but the source of energy they use is heat from fission or combustion, and so the energy is still lost, and the act of unloading the turbine has no meaning.

Electric grid consists from slow and fast response power stations. Fast response stations react to sudden power demand changes. Also your blabbering about you being a special snowflake is simply lame. If everyone thinks that your "Why turning off the lights is a waste of your time" is true and acts accordingly, total impact on the grid will be huge. Lame the same way as claiming that your individual vote does not matter during elections.

[Nusa]

Alright I’m hoping someone on this forum can set me straight on a contrarian opinion I’m forming to piss off my math professor roommate. Here is the problem;

My irritating AF roommate follows me around the house turning off the lights everywhere I go and I’m living in darkness. I’m all for saving energy (I replaced all the bulbs w LEDs last year) but what he’s doing IMO is a repetitive task for dopamine payoff and virtue signaling. Little different to the behaviors encouraged by many religions. I’m thinking rosary beads. Anyway

I don’t think what he’s doing either saves energy or money. For one thing if you turn off the lights while it may slow the meter, if that energy isn’t stored it will still go to waste. And how about this; even if we use the economy bulbs the cost in average purchase consumer quantity of 16 is $35, so say $2 a piece. The energy cost of 24/7 operation at 11W is 12.50 a year here in Berkeley at 0.13KWH. Each bulb has a quoted MTBF of 15,000 hours but I believe the manufacturers are stating the LED MTBF not the driver MTBF there. For the bulb as a unit it’s the lower of course but the difference is if you frequently turn the power on and off the driver will have a significantly reduced life and your 13 years of service for $2 just became 10 months of service. So you lose $1.85, per bulb. Furthermore there was an energy cost to manufacturing every component of the bulb so there go your energy savings as well, if there ever were any.

I think turning off the lights was a 60’s habit to save money when incandescent bulbs were 150W and the cost of energy was sky high. I don’t think it ever saved energy either except in the sense that if the power station saw lesser demand collectively it would reduce the quota for an area and waste less in that sense.

Please tell me why I’m wrong

Well, if your goal is to piss off your roommate, then you might as well forget this thread and anything we say. We won't be helping your argument.

I suggest you offer to pay the entire electric bill for a couple months if he'll let you do it your way and you truly believe it doesn't matter. That will give you an empirical test of cost differences when the bills come.

Let's assume your costs math is correct (doing the reality check isn't the point here), and the 24/7 cost is 12.5/12=$1.04/month. That's PER BULB, so multiply it by how many you want to leave on. 12 bulbs, and it's $12.50/month.

Electricity wasn't terribly expensive in the 1960's, even adjusted for inflation. Sure you could get 150W bulbs, but 100W and 60W were much more common. You're right that people used incandescent bulbs, so yes the cost of operating a light was higher, and the cost of buying that bulb was WAY lower. Also in the 70's, 80's, 90's, 2000's, and some are still in use today (in my case closets still have 100W bulbs in them, and the bathroom mirror fixture still has 6x40W globes). (Source: I've been around that long, no research necessary.)

Note: Fluorescents were a different story. The energy cost of starting them is much higher than the cost of running them, so there was a legitimate energy argument for not turning them on and off too frequently. They're obsolete technology now. Those still in use will be replaced as they fail, if not sooner.

[nth_degree]

Ah I’m blabbering, and here I was thinking I had an opinion! Here in Berkeley we have a vocal minority who believe controlling the behavior of the group is key to a better world. Swaying group opinion is their highest priority and no tactic is underhanded enough. They are as corrupt as any cult ever was and yet have no clue.

Then there are others that believe a better way can be engineered into product. I’m with them. Because I don’t want to live in darkness for the greater good.

[Siwastaja]

The difference is small because LED lights are so damn efficient anyway.

It's still important to avoid unnecessary waste. Amount of wasted energy is of course 10x less than with incandescent bulbs, but not insignificant nevertheless.

The idea of "excess production" going to waste if not used by you in your bulbs is just ridiculous and has not even a grain of truth in it, totally made up bogus argument "to win". But you know what, the only thing that counts is truth. Mental dishonesty sucks, don't be one of those guys.

Now the game changes if you have direct electric heating, and it's heating season. Then additional heat production by the lights will be sensed by the thermostats and the end-result is the same.

[rob77]

“i'll talk bullshit till the end and never admit i was wrong"

Not really, I just want it explained what exactly it is I’m missing in my understanding. Better yet if you can spell out how energy is saved when I turn off a bulb, that would be great. Better still would be if you could give me an argument my roommate can’t shoot down so I can annoy him by leaving the lights on all the time

ok so let me try to explain then

when you unload the generator mechanical input starts turning faster.. so we need to slow it down to not raise the grid frequency.

1. hydroelectric plant. water inlet is chocked so less water goes to turbine and slows it down to the correct speed needed at the moment.
2. coal or gas fired plat - steam is choked a bit so the steam turbine is slowed down to correct speed, that raises the temperature in the steam generator/boiler (because less steam is consumed) so the furnace regulation lowers the fuel input (chokes down the gas input or slows down the conveyor belt with coal.. or whatever else is burned there).
3. thermonuclear : can't be regulated easily so it's mainly used to power the constant load on the grid. it can be regulated to some degree but it's mainly used as a constant output.
4. renewables : solar is great for compensating day peaks - production coincides with those peaks. wind is a unpredictable source so it's used when it blows but the turbines might be mechanically braked to slower rotation or even halted if the grid frequency is high.

no energy is wasted.. hydro will accumulate the water in the dam to be used later , coal/gas will lower the fuel input.

[Capernicus]

If you power your house pneumatically, and use sun heat for your water heating, you dont even get light in your house at night, cause u dont have any electricity anyway.
Problem solved.

[Nusa]

Ah I’m blabbering, and here I was thinking I had an opinion! Here in Berkeley we have a vocal minority who believe controlling the behavior of the group is key to a better world. Swaying group opinion is their highest priority and no tactic is underhanded enough. They are as corrupt as any cult ever was and yet have no clue.

That's called power politics. Truth and reality take a backseat to the exercise of power. I could say more, but actual politics doesn't belong in this forum.

[SpecialK]

With the efficiency of LED bulbs, this conservation effect will probably not really be reflected in your electricity bill.  My utility company has other line items on it that are likely to be larger like "debt repayment".  Figure that one out.

[Siwastaja]

Ah I’m blabbering, and here I was thinking I had an opinion!

Oh, don't mix up opinions and facts. They both have their places.

How electricity generation and distribution works is not a matter of your opinion, it's a fact. You sound like myself when 13 years old during some heated discussion with friends. I'm so great and usually right that I can just make up arguments, maybe they'll believe me!? But in long run, this attitude doesn't help you, so I suggest you just grow up.

Now, there is room for opinions in your debate: the relative importance of the undeniable energy saving. Being a purist and going to extremes is not helpful, in big picture. Thanks to the high efficiency of LED lights, you can forgive yourself (and your roommate can forgive you) if you sometimes forget to turn the lights off. It isn't that important.

Then again, keeping all lights on just to "make a point", and coming up with made-up arguments to support that is just childish. Let them turn off unused lights, and do that yourself whenever you remember, without stressing about it - then what's the problem? The only problem I see is you have already made it a debate, and matter of personal pride. Avoid escalating things in the future before you actually learn about the stuff, and you'll do fine. Best of luck.

[rpiloverbd]

Well..... use motion-controlled switches instead. Happy roommate, happy you.

[Jester]

“Nothing will be lost since power generation is adjusted according to consumption.”

That’s simply not true in practice. If a bulb is on or off in my home the generation quota from the plant will be the same. Sure if our collective behavior of thousands of people creates enough reduction in demand for the station to reduce the quota power will be saved assuming those people have behavior that is consistent. In reality though if I turn off the light, the power being distributed in the moment just goes to ground and since people are unpredictable even as a group, the quota for a sector never changes.

Incorrect, that’s not how the power system operates, power in = power out + losses, if you turn off one lightbulb the power in at the source goes down by approximately that amount. The power is not shunted to ground, the voltage and frequency goes up ever so so slightly.