Technocrats and Glowing Panties (lighting regulation)
Posted on February 3, 2007
Filed Under Public Policy |
Virginia Postrel hits the proverbial nail on the head with regard to the latest attempt by technocrats to tell us what is good for us.
The dirty secret is that this is really an aesthetic battle. It’s the latest version of the old American conflict between pleasure and Puritanism (the triumph of the latter led to the current smoking ban in Dallas restaurants (Jeff: I support smoking bans and don’t agree with Postrel on this point)). Efficiency-minded engineers regard anything more than simple illumination as waste. Environmental activists are repulsed by “unnecessary” consumption. The boards that set energy codes and evaluate their effectiveness include engineers and environmentalists. They don’t include artists or designers, much less lingerie shoppers.
You see this attitude in the Valley on a constant basis given how engineering centric the culture is. How many times have you heard either of these phrases:
1) It doesn’t need to look good if it works well (I give you craigslist).
2) It’s more logical to organize/build/design it this way, when users learn how to use it then they will agree.
In researching this post I found this hilarious, but very serious article about coin systems (as in loose change type of coins). The computer scientist quoted says “what the U.S. needs is an 18 cent piece” based on the analysis that:
“The combination of 1 cent, 5 cents, 18 cents, and 25 cents requires only 3.89 coins in change per transaction (versus the current 4.7 coins), as does the combination of 1 cent, 5 cents, 18 cents, and 29 cents.”
Quick, how much is in your pocket if you have three 18 cents coins and one 29 cents piece? But hey, it’s 17 percent more efficient even though most people couldn’t figure out how much is in their pocket. Typical.
Here’s one area where I greatly admire the Europeans, by and large their cultures appreciate the design of products (and their money for that matter) as much as the utility.
The other charge leveled at the lowly incandescent light bulb is that it’s 125 years old so it’s only logical that it’s can’t have any value in today’s world… so switch to CFLs because they are better technology even though they look like crap in anything but purely utilitarian situations (I have one at the the front door of my house, just fine there). This attitude introduces a degree of tunnel vision that obscures the reality that new technology has to provide at least the same emotional experience as the thing it is replacing before the benefits can be realized.
BTW, lest anyone think this is simply a defense of incandescent light bulbs, which in itself would be rather neurotic, consider that I have been a big proponent of OLED technology and believe that when the manufacturing costs are reduced these will be an ideal replacement for incandescent light bulbs, and provide significantly environmental benefits as well. LED lighting technology has already made a big impact in the automotive world providing significant safety benefits while at the same time reducing the baseline power draw, which means less power robbing generation systems and a small amount of fuel economy as a result.
Postrel makes obvious a very good point that is lost in the debate, namely that a market based mechanism for achieving environmental goals is always going to be more effective and less disruptive than government agencies creating new and increasingly complex regulations.
“If clean air were really the goal, the law would attack pollution directly. It would go after car exhausts and power-plant emissions, not incandescent spotlights. If energy conservation were the goal, the law would reward using less energy. Or it would raise the price of electricity to encourage people to use less. It would focus on how much energy people use, not how they get to that total. It wouldn’t tell retailers what light fixtures to buy.”
Comments
-
About
My name is Jeff Nolan and I write Venture Chronicles. These are my thoughts on technology, innovation, management, public policy and pretty much anything else that I find interesting.
-
Links
Get My Feed!
