The Future of Lighting?

A couple of interesting articles recently about the future of lighting. First, CNN examines the virtues and drawbacks of compact fluorescent lightbulbs (CFLs). The mercury used by fluorescent bulbs has been a known problem for some time, and the article discusses ways of properly disposing of the bulbs.

The article features an interview with Ron Hui, who is chairman of the electronic engineering department at the City University of Hong Kong. Hui points out that not all CFLs are created equal, and highlights the differences between electronic CFLs (eCFLs, which are fairly common, and which I have throughout my house) and magnetic CFLs (mCFLs, which I'd never heard of before this article). The lifespan of an eCFL is 7,000-to-10,000 hours of usage, so if you left them on all the time you'd get roughly a year's worth of usage. If you average a few hours a day, they'll last somewhat longer. mCFLs, on the other hand, often have an operating lifespan of 15-30 years. So while they contain the same amount of mercury, you would use far fewer of them over time and thus generate less mercury waste.

The New York Times, meanwhile, has an article about light bulbs utilizing light-emitting diodes (LEDs). LED bulbs have several advantages over CFLs, including the fact that they do not contain mercury, they use even less energy and CFLs, and they are adjustable (including both dimming and changing colors). However, LED light bulbs are pretty new and, as a result, are rather expensive at the moment.

The article mentions that Philips Electronics will be launching its first LED replacement for a standard light bulb in a couple of months. Called the Ledino, the bulbs—equivalent to a standard 60-watt incandescent bulb—are expected to cost $107 per bulb. That's pretty expensive, so I don't think I'll be running out to replace all of my CFLs just yet. However, a quick search online shows that there are other manufacturers already selling LED bulbs for considerably less money.

Of course, if you are technically inclined and have the time, you can also make your own LED light bulbs if you want.

McCain Proposes $300 Million Prize for Better Auto Batteries

UPDATE: Alan Boyle has more information.

John McCain wants the government to offer a $300 million prize to whoever can develop an automotive battery that far surpasses existing technology. His goals for the battery include delivering power for 30 percent of the current cost with better size, capacity, cost, and power. Doing so, he says, will help propel plug-in hybrid or fully-electric autos.

For a price of $1 for each man, woman, and child in the U.S., this project could propel us toward an economy in which petroleum-based fuels are a thing of the past. Prize-based competitions such as this (and the X Prize) generally produce gains far outstripping their costs, because a large number of competitors vie for the prizes, but only one wins. And in the case of the Ansari X Prize, the winning team at Scaled Composites spent approximately $30 million on R&D before winning the $10 million prize. And that doesn't include what other teams spent. And that $10 million helped launch the sub-orbital tourism flight industry.

In addition to getting better auto batteries for consumers, the prize money will allow the winning company to make presumably massive amounts of money either selling their new batteries the world over or licensing the technology to other battery companies. Either way, that money will provide industrial growth within the U.S. and create American jobs and American wealth. Jobs will be lost in the oil industry, sure, but the U.S. economy will be better off, and so will the environment.

The Fight Against Global Warming Will Be Expensive

Fighting global warming is going to be expensive. I think we all knew that, but now a new study from the International Energy Association illustrates just exactly how expensive.

In order to reduce green house gases in the atmosphere fifty percent by 2050, the world needs to invest some $45 trillion, build 1400 nuclear power plants, and vastly expand wind power initiatives. The report outlines two scenarios: one that reduces greenhouse gases to the same levels as 2005 and one that reduces them to half that level. The results also assume an average 3.3% global economic growth rate through 2050.

The second scenario, trying to reach half the levels of 2005, would require that 35 coal-fired and 20 gas-fired power plants be fitted with carbon capture and storage technology every year between 2010 and 2050. In addition, to keep up with increasing demand, the world would have to construct 32 new nuclear power plants and 17,000 new wind turbines every year during the same period. We'd also have to find a way to reduce the carbon intensity—the amount of carbon needed to produce a unit of energy—of our transportation sectors.

Failure to act, the IEA says, will result in doubling of energy demand and a 130% increase in CO₂ emissions by 2050.

Cold Fusion on the Comeback Trail?

Cold Fusion (in physics, not in web development) became a taboo expression nineteen years ago after Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons were unable to replicate their experiment that supposedly produced fusion in a glass jar at room temperature. And, since nobody else was able to duplicate the results, cold fusion has since become a synonym for pseudo-science. But that may be about to change.

Jon Cartwright of the physicsworld blog reports that Yoshiaki Arata, a retired physics professor at Osaka University and his partner, Yue-Chang Zhang, have demonstrated what appears to be a repeatable experiment that involves forcing deuterium into an evacuated cell containing a sample of palladium dispersed in zirconium oxide. According to Arata, the deuterium is absorbed by the sample in large enough amounts to force the deuterium nuclei to become close enough to fuse.

It's way, way too early to say whether or not these results have any validity, as (like with Fleischmann and Pons) they will need to be replicated by several other teams and the results fully understood. Additionally, the temperature of the sample only rose to about 70°C. While that is significant and notable, it is not enough to produce steam to turn a turbine, so more work would need to be done.

Also, there appears to be some debate as to whether the heating was actually caused by fusion or whether it was purely chemical. However, if deuterium is fed into the sample and helium comes out, I don't see any other process that could explain that. But more research will reveal the truth.

TVA Facilities Vulnerable to Cyber Attacks

CNN reported yesterday afternoon about a new study conducted by the GAO that shows that the TVA is inadequately protected from cyber attacks. The TVA operates 52 power plants in the southeastern U.S., including nuclear, hydropower, and coal facilities.

The GAO found that:

• The TVA's firewalls have been bypassed or are inadequately configured
• Passwords in use by TVA personnel are not effective
• Servers and work stations lack key patches and effective virus protection
• Intrusion-detection systems used by the TVA are not adequate
• Some locations lack enough physical security around control systems

Rep. James Langevin, a Rhode Island Democrat, is chairing an Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology subcommittee hearing Wednesday afternoon. Representatives of the TVA, the GAO, the federal commission and the electric reliability corporation are to appear before the subcommittee.

I find these results to be a little disturbing, but not terribly surprising. Information Systems security is a massively complex field, and changes on a daily basis. I also find it a little disturbing that we publish results detailing the exact vulnerabilities, almost as though we were trying to provide detailed attack plans to terrorists.