I'm surprised to read in an age of LEDs lightning is supposed to use more electricity than computers. I'm not even sure that on average the motor uses that much more energy than all the other appliances in an electrical car.
Even LED lights have a typical efficiency of only 10-20%. Low pressure sodium lamps (many yellow street lights) can reach 30% efficiency. But in general, lighting is far from being a solved problem even if you assume everyone is using state-of-the art lighting solutions.
Yes, but that doesn't explain why all the computing we are doing should spend less electricity than light. I bet I can run all the light in my apartment for 24 hours and don't use as much energy as when I'm playing a AAA 3D computer game for an hour.
If you play your AAA game on a PS4, that's about 120W [1].
Assuming you have three 60W-equivalent light bulbs on in your appartment, using halogen lamps your lights use as much power as the PS4. If you still use incandescent lamps, that's 180W, about as much as much as the PS4 and a 55" LED TV. With 7W LED bulbs you need 5 hours of lighting to match the PS4, or 8 hours to match PS4+TV.
Of course you might have a computer that uses significantly more power. But the best current-get Intel i7 still has a TDP of only 112W (165W for i9). Add to that a GeForce GTX 1080 TI with a TDP of 250W. Even during gameplay both will on average use less power than their TDP. Without going with dual-GPU configurations you can't build a reasonable current-gen computer that matches the 500Wh that our three 7W LED use over 24h. And I suspect you actually have more than three light bulbs.
1hp is ~700W. In an electric car, the big competitors with the engine are AC and heating (since you can't get that one as a side effect of the ICE's thermal waste). The rest is minor at best, leds are sub-watt.
