Cheap light transformed civilization
bigthink.com
bigthink.com
It’s amusing how often these sorts of exposés start off with this “the transformation that the world forgot” meme. There are enough writers out there who are making ends meet writing boring articles for publications like BT instead that, in all honesty, not enough time passes from one article to another on the same subject that gives enough time to forget. We constantly have to be reminded of some absolutely astonishing fact. Perpetually. I suppose this defines the 24-hour news cycle as applied to the internet.
The actual article itself is empty on juicy content and shills a book instead. Skip. Maybe the author forgot what good article writing is like, but that fact certainly won’t be lost on civilization as a whole.
There's too many people doing bullshit jobs like this, creating useless content, when they should be doing something more productive instead, like cleaning public bathrooms or picking crops.
It's a poor history of lighting. They missed the incandescent lamp mantle, the limelight, and the arc light. That's when light output finally got serious. Gas lamps were dim, and generated more heat than light. You need more than just a flame. You need to get up to incandescence temperature.
The arc light changed cities from dark to bright.[1] Suddenly, for the first time in history, major city streets were brilliantly lit. If someone had been able to see the earth from space, for the first time there would be lights at night.
Arc street lights worked fine. Way too much light for your house, of course. Arc lights remain a thing, but today the arc is run in xenon or sodium vapor rather than air.
Incandescent lamps came later.
The Manifesto of the Futurist Painters specifically cited cars and industrialization among its main inspirations, and both Mussolini and Hitler largely garnered public support from their opposition to Communism. Communism was profoundly a response to industrialization. Moreover, the kind of state regimentation that was central to authoritarianism of all kinds, including Fascism, would have been impossible without cars and impossible without industrialization.
Fascism without cars or industrialization would have had nothing in common with the Fascism we actually got.
One accessible example is that Federal power in the US really took off post-Civil War. Part of this story is that the war had greatly expanded the size and power of the Federal government, as well as weakening the old slaveocracy, but another is that centralized control of a territory as vast as the US basically requires telegraphs and railroads. Even if there were a political appetite for centralization in 1810s America, it just wasn't possible except where existing lines of communication were already adequate (coastal cities and those on major navigable waterways or canals).
Today that metric might look 10x better, around 4 cents per lux
Assuming perfect efficiency, that would use 5 kWh of electricity, which is $0.40 total if you pay $0.08/kWh.
I believe that works out to .00000004 cents per lux.
This reliance on electrical power leaves us vulnerable to solar events, particularly coronal mass ejections (CMEs). These massive bursts from the sun can disrupt electrical grids, satellite communications, and even the internet, yet many remain unaware of the potential consequences of a grid collapse.
The Carrington Event of 1859 serves as a historical warning; it caused significant disruptions to telegraph systems, highlighting our susceptibility to solar storms. Today, as our technology becomes increasingly dependent on electricity, the risks associated with a large-scale CME grow. Experts suggest that significant solar events occur every 100 years or so, making the possibility of another Carrington-like incident a real and pressing concern.
Despite this knowledge, many remain oblivious to the implications of a potential grid failure. Such an event could lead to widespread blackouts, crippling essential services and throwing modern society into disarray. Our ability to predict and mitigate these solar threats is limited, and the sun’s unpredictable behavior adds layers of uncertainty.
In an era where attention is scarce, it is critical to focus on the serious risks posed by our electrical dependence. The stakes are incredibly high—food and water supplies, emergency services, and national security could all be compromised by a severe CME. Acknowledging our vulnerability to these solar events is essential for developing resilience strategies and investing in infrastructure that can withstand such threats. Our civilization’s fate may very well rest in the hands of the sun, and we must prepare for that possibility.
Also, distributed generation, like we get with photovoltaics only improves the situation.
Anyway, we could still have large scale blackouts and localized equipment loss due to those. That's true. We should be able to protect ourselves, we know how and it's something perfectly practical; besides, we will have about a half-year of warning. But it's unclear if we will.
Modern lines are almost insulated enough for it not to be a problem. But there's some extra work needed.
Many movies also show kerosene lamps in eras where they weren't even invented. The worst thing I've seen is a korean movie, set in the 16th century, showing an Aladdin mantle lamp (without the mantle, and grossly misadjusted). Those things were invented in the 1920s, and became popular in the 1930s.
Come on, guys. You have internet. Getting it right just consts you one Google search.
All 18th and 19th novels I recall were mentioning them. Before that, honestly don't know and you are probably right. But yes poorer went to sleep with sun going down, unless there was active fire going on for warmth. Not something poor londoner can pay for regularly, but where I come from forests and mountains were endless sources of fuel.
Self-trimming candle wicks were invented in 1825. Before that people had to regularly trim the wicks of candles (there were special scissors made for this) or the candle would produce huge quantities of smoke when the exposed wick got too long.
Paraffin wax was invented in 1830. Before that candles were made of tallow, which smelled bad and made a lot of smoke, or bee's wax, which was very expensive.
Curiously the 2015 horror movie "The Witch", which takes place on and around a 17th century New England farming community, was supposedly filmed entirely using natural light and lighting appropriate to what was available at the time. You can see everyone's face and gestures.
Watch a 90s movie that shows "night" and you'll easily notice how everything is under strong, but blue, lighting.
I think individuals sensitivity to artificial light varies a lot, but for many people - including me- it can basically destroy your ability to sleep, and as a result your overall health and quality of life.
Mostly it works great, but can be awkward spending time with friends and family whose schedules may be as much as 6 hours later than ours.
* https://lucept.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/william-nordha...
* https://econlife.com/2018/10/the-light-side-of-economic-grow...
* https://www.bbc.com/news/business-38650976
He also co-authored the influential textbook Economics with Samuelson, and did important work on the economics of climate change:
If you want to learn more check Steve Keen's substack.
For anyone that wants to remember, spend time in remote African villages. You go to bed when the sun does, and you get up when it does. It’s really nice, I was better rested after 3 years there than ever in my life.
Cheap Light Transformed Civilisation
How cheap light transformed civilisation
The second sounds like an article; the first sounds like a chant you might hear shouted at some kind of protest.
However, I think it's actually more the capitalisation in this example that somehow offends me. It took my brain an extra few seconds to parse it.
I'm not sure you're right in thinking that such titles are so new; there've been standard wordings for titles since the dawn of books. Just think of the number of old treatises starting with 'on...' or 'concerning...', for example. Are they 'clickbait'?
The clickbaitiest application of the pattern prepends a “how” or “why” and accompanies and article that doesn’t actually address the how or why, which is why they’re clickbait titles. This one at least arguably does address it, sort-of, even if that’s not quite its main focus.