Bottle light inventor proud to be poor
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
- Houses are juxtaposed to each other, there's no room for windows
- Roofs are corrugated, so you can't easily fit a top glass panel even if you have the money for one.
- There are transparent, fiber glass roofs, and some people use those, but often they don't get to choose the materials used to build the house, just use what is available.
So this is a quite nice hack that works for most houses.
But it's still not a substitute for a light bulb unless it works in the dark.
Of course it isn't, but it solves 50% of the problem.
I will say the article is good, just don't like the title.
Weird? It's one of the constant positions on poverty since the dawn of civilization -- from christianity and buddhism (the original, not the watered down California style) to bohemianism, communism and so on. Including the "proud, hardworking people" in most rural communities, etc.
But a lot of people had tons of money and got rid of them to be poor(er) and win some kind of freedom or normalcy that was important for them. Some did it directly, some did it through drugs, alcohol and extreme spending that showed that they didn't value the money at all.
I know a couple of people from rich families that ended up as austere monks, living in a monastery in my country. And people like Witgenstein (huge fortune, left it behind), Burroughs (of the "adding machine" family), etc.
Not paying taxes into NSA surveillance/military state or any whatever exploitive capitalism as other collared proles. Some people are far too busy than to concern themselves with financial vanity and the distractions that follow it.
Teeming masses of slum youth with linux netbooks must be high on the list of Fort Meade's threat matrix.
* You're free to do whatever you want, but I don't think that embracing poverty is a good solution to the NSA or the MIC. Mass poverty means that the government controls everybody's means of survival (foodstamps, healthcare, etc) which equals total political control. I think that creating business solutions and voluntary organizations that oppose these things is a more viable path, and having money helps with that. Start up a secure email webservice. Startup a charity organization that can help bring relief and attention to innocent civilians being bombed or harmed by governments.
* Your stance on capitalism being exploitative is a logical contradiction. A voluntary transaction can only occur in a market when both sides of a trade value what they are getting more than what they are giving up.
* What we have today as an economic system is not capitalism - governments dictate the winners and losers in the marketplace and those companies with the best lobbyists always win rather than the companies who create the most value for customers.
* You don't need to be a collared prole, to use your terminology. Software is all free and open source now. Start a business with some friends and live an alternative lifestyle to being a 9-5 corporate man. That's what a lot of people here currently do or are working towards.
* Not being poor doesn't automatically equate to financial vanity.
EDIT: I reread it twice and laughed each time. This is literally the funniest serious comment I've seen on Hacker News in weeks.
EDIT2: Yes, I thought it was funny enough to make this comment, and no I'm not being sarcastic at all.
I also dislike the idea of poking holes in my roof, for any reason.
I'm much more intersted in the gravity light which was featured here a few months ago.
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/gravitylight-lighting-for-...
Although the initial cost may be prohibitive for the poverty stricken, it may be well within the acceptable price range for many others, and the gravity light has the added bonus of not requiring any fuel, nor does it require punching holes in one's roof.
(I live in an upland rainforest)
The gravity light requires manual labor to produce light, has moving parts that are more likely to fail, is more costly, and produces less light.
The way I figure, people in need of one of these lights probably won't have windows to let light into their homes, so it makes a bit more sense for their application.
Just my .02
Or do you have any pictures you've shared or would like to share publicly?
For sewage most use cesspools dug a minimum of 12 feet deep by 6 feet wide capped with concrete & steel, although those with small lots are required to use septic tank systems.
For hot water I have a solar collector thermosiphon setup augmented by a propane tankless (on demand) water heater.
For electricity I use PV panels (8 Kyocera 135 W panels) going through an Outback charge controller and a Solar brand voltage inverter, with 6 Interstate 6 volt deep cycle batteries for storage. This is enough to run all of my light electronics, as well as a refrigerator/freezer and more.
For heavy electrical loads I have a backup gasoline generator, which I rarely use anymore.
Since my area has one of the highest electricity rates in the USA my system began paying for itself after less than three years.
My home has a lot of windows, which helps to provide airflow as well as making air conditioning unnecessary, thus I have no need for lighting during the day.
(I had some pictures on one of my phones, but am unable to locate them now...)
I've been interested in going off-grid for a while, but never could find the appropriate time (or the location, since land here is pricey as well). If you do find those pictures, I'd love to see how you've setup everything. There's a big demand these days for off-grid and sustainable living so if you happen to document your experiences, a la blog or similar, that could be invaluable for a lot of folks. Nothing really beats getting the details from someone who actually walks the walk.
How do you like living off-grid? I imagine you've had more than your fair share of hiccups on the way.
While the initial expenses related to going off-grid may be exorbitant (to some) the resulting savings more than makes up for it, and you can always incrementally add to your system as finances permit.
I have had damage due to electrical storm, but placing a TV antenna higher than the panels has worked for the past 10 years or so.
Another concern is equipment replacement, with batteries being replaced at about a five year interval, depending on usage and maintenance. Most of the newer panels are warranted for 25 to 30 years at 90% of rated output but the panels will continue to produce power for many years afterward.
You'll learn to be frugal if you begin with a small setup, as I did, but that's what we're trying to to so I've adjusted well.
My electronics are definitely better off as a result of cleaner power from my pure sine wave inverter, which produces much better electricity and no voltage sags or spikes unlike our local municipal power monopoly.
I'm definitely a believer in alternate energy.
Yes, I thought the first things to go would have been excess luxury. An annual budget for maintenance, I think, actually wouldn't be too hard to setup if the rest of your expenses are proportionally lowered.
I've been told that metal roofs are a better fit with solar panels, but that's an additional cost. Hopefully that will pay off in longevity.
I hadn't thought about expanding incrementally. I can see how that will significantly make things easier as upfront costs won't be as far out. Also, efficiencies are better with newer models so you actually end up paying somewhat less per watt.
Frugality is something I've had some (involuntary) experience with in the past. ;) I don't think it'll be too hard to return to some of that. Also it's better for all of us in the end.
A tin sheet is cheap. You dig a hole, however long, wide, and deep. Then, you can get in the hole and plant whatever in there. Once done, you can cover it up with the sheet (or wood or whatever) and put the bottle-lights inside.
That way, you keep the pests out of your new garden.
Very few economically important plants will thrive in anything less than full sunlight. This makes sense because most plants become economically important because they are productive (good at turning sunlight into something we want like calories or wood).
The exceptions are plants that are grown for some valuable quality which is only needed in scarce quantities, like some spices or flowers.
I live in an area with extensive 4 legged rodents called deer. They will come up to your front porch and eat everything they can bite.
Having a vegetable garden like this would keep pests like that away.
Well,that and growing weed.
The main difference here is that deck prisms are flat on top, which limits the amount of light entering the prism. The water in the bottles is filled to the top, creating a dome shaped concentrator. Since water has a refractive index close to glass (~1.3 vs ~1.5) the bottom of the bottle has a similar effect to the deck prism, except with slightly more light.
Of course the real problem is they are measuring the light in terms of incandescent bulb power draw, rather than something useful like lumens or candela, but due to a century of ubiquitous light bulbs, we've been rating light in the wrong units.
So a bottle that's composed of a clear plastic that naturally resists ultraviolet degradation (there are several) should be capped by a more rigid plastic (to maintain its shape). So the cap needs to be black (or at least a dark color).
A reflective cap would work just as well at first, but plastics are made reflective by being painted, and the paint soon falls off, because of ... wait for it ... ultraviolet exposure.
Black plastic lasts longer because 1) the UV is absorbed by the pigment, not the polymer and 2) the pigment limits UV penetration to the surface.
Here is a good doc on UV weathering of plastics and materials (such as carbon black) to absorb UV. http://www.cabot-corp.com/wcm/download/en-us/sb/UV%20WEATHER...
The point about a black piece of plastic is that the energy is absorbed at the surface -- it can't penetrate the plastic to any significant depth. That means the majority of the plastic is protected from the ultraviolet wavelengths that would destroy it.
That's true, but it's also true that all objects eventually reach thermal equilibrium with their surroundings. Were this not the case, it would violate the law of energy conservation, and that's a law that's never broken.
In that sense, most objects, solids and plasmas in particular, are reasonable black bodies once they achieve equilibrium. Some of them show spectral lines -- emission, absorption or both -- but in most cases those lines appear on top of a blackbody curve. The sun, for example -- perhaps surprisingly, it exhibits a classic blackbody spectrum appropriate to its surface temperature, with many spectral lines contributed primarily by its comparatively low-pressure atmosphere (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_Spectrum.png).
The state of matter least like a black body is a low-pressure molecular cloud in space, which often shows only emission and absorption lines, no classic blackbody curve. The lowest pressure gases show the narrowest spectral lines, which is how we can estimate the pressure of a remote cloud of gas illuminated by distant energy sources.
From my own experience, in lame terms, if you use non-black caps, for arguments sake let's say you use a red cap from a coca-cola bottle, that red cap will reflect some light as well as the water. And inside the room the bottle will not "shine" as bright as it could and depending on the Sun's position the room will have red'ish rays - like a rainbow.
So using any colour cap and covering the bottle cap with old photographic film containers like this one http://www.kveller.com/images/Article_images/film-canister.j... will prevent the non-black cap from stealing sun rays from the water.
Also, you could use a cup and a rubber-band to cover it if you needed darkness mid-day.
It's not a new idea in any way, and was certainly invented more than once. Yet, it was this guy that (by luck) made the life of several people better by communicating it.
Weird.
In terms of light, a single bottle is insufficient, but ten are enough to light up a mud block-walled, corrugate metal-roofed schoolroom. Since there's virtually zero monitoring of kids' eye health and ability, that can mean the difference between learning to read and learning to look like you're paying attention for young students.
A few things to address:
Night: these things don't produce any light on their own (they're essentially low-cost deck prisms). A lot of people in-country at the time I helped promote these were excited at the possibility that a full moon might produce sufficient light to see, but it's just not enough. You need to supplement these things once the sun's down.
Windows: most of the buildings in rural West Africa are build of mud block, which isn't the most stable or solid of construction materials. It's cheap and readily available, but needs to be built thick and without large windows, or with significant reinforcement to any large windows, or else it crumbles. That means there's very little light coming into these rooms, even in the most sun-kissed of places. Bottle bulbs are an order of magnitude cheaper than installing iron-reinforced windows.
Transparent/translucent roofing: when this stuff is available at all, it's questionable whether it will fit the corrugate pattern of an extant roof, and the quality of the translucent roofing plastics we saw in The Gambia and Senegal was quite low; it would go milky and then opaque over just a year or two, and cost more than replacing a bottle bulb would. By contrast, you can purchase corrugated tin roofing and roofing caulk in just about any West African city, and relatively affordably at that. The bottles themselves can be found cheaply or free anywhere that tourists or aid workers spend time.
Black caps: it's not the color that matters, it's covering the original cap with something more durable. Once you've assured that there's no leaks in the bottle-corrugate metal interface, the cap is the most likely point of failure on these bulbs. The sun is STRONG in these places, which is a lot of stress on opaque plastics; once weakened, a small crack is enough to emit water vapor, and so a bottle bulb's contents would evaporate, requiring replacement.
The real tricks involved are getting a good seal between the bottle and the corrugate tin (we used roof caulking), and making the whole process relatively efficient (it can take a while to punch these out). Once you've got that down, the production and installation process can be taught to locals, who in turn can turn a profit with their labors. I worked with one carpenter for about a year before returning to the states, and he's since picked up a few contracts with the local ministry of education and a few individual customers to install bottle lighting systems.
I would be happy to go on about these things for HOURS (and have, in the past)! They're a niche solution, but they fit their niche extremely well.
"So how does it work? Simple refraction of sunlight, explains Moser, as he fills an empty two-litre plastic bottle."
I agree that it does involve poking a hole through the ceiling, but the thing's simplicity belies its utility and what may seem "obvious" after the fact doesn't make it any less significant an invention.
That's why I felt it was misleading. Looking at the article again, though, it's probably clearer than I originally thought it was.
>Did someone told him about « windows » ?
From the article... "Most homes and businesses in the slums of Dhaka have no
power and no windows, so 80-90% of them hook up to
electricity lines illegally - and fall back on candles or
kerosene lamps during regular blackouts."