Recent letters to BTB...

The BTB campaign receives many letters.

I always try to reply to them, but I decided it was about time I posted a few of them so that you could also read a selection of the issues and ideas people send in.

Unsuprisingly, not everyone's a fan!

However, I think it's important to embrace disagreement and to try to find practical solutions which (i) allow meaningful change to be introduced (rather than perpetually postponed), (ii) address the limitations of the energy saving technologies and (iii) provide safeguards for the poor.

Please feel free to get in touch if you would like to bring anything to my attention.

Warmest regards,

Matt

Hello Matt,

Our council was still using a large number of 100 watt incandescent bulbs in the council house after months of me moaning at them and sending emails to the council leader. They kept saying they were on the case but nothing changed. I snapped and sent an enforcement notice to them. Although it is not legally enforceable it did get the bulbs changed within a week!

maybe we could do a generic blank template for others who spot old bulbs in council offices. We need to take out the bit about the swimming pool.

Enforcement Notice
to Nuneaton & Bedworth Borough Council, Town Hall, Coton Road, Nuneaton, CV11 5AA.
Important - This Communication Affects Your Property

This Notice is issued by the Keith Kondakor, a council tax payer of this borough, because it appears to me that there has been a failure to replace obsolete tungsten light bulbs with modern low energy compact florescent ones. Each of the 100 watt light bulbs is wasting the council about £10 of electric per year. Each of the bulbs is causing the release of 1/10th tonne of CO2 per year. A large number of bulbs are in use for a large part of the day. This means £1000s of pounds are being wasted each year and many tonnes of CO2 produced needlessly.

The bulbs are located in the landing and corridors on the first floor or the council house and the centre staircase. They may also be in the council chamber.

Reasons For Issuing This Notice
Officers and the Leader of the council have already been asked to rectify this problem over many months. This notice has been issued as the council is unable to change some light bulbs within a reasonable time. It is regrettable that action has not been taken in a timely fashion.

The council has a duty to spend the money provided to it via the council tax and government grant wisely. It also has duties to minimise it effect on the environment. While these light bulbs effect are small compered to the staggering 1.6 million kWh of electric used at the leisure centre, it does show a culture of inactivity from the council. A separate enforcement notice will be produced if action is not taken to reduce waste at other locations as the details become available.

What You Are Required To Do
Within the next 14 days you are expected to replace the light bulbs in question with energy efficient replacements. If you are unable to do this you need a produce evidence as to why this is not possible and a timetable of when it can be achieved.

What if you do not Comply
I will attend the Council House with low energy light bulbs, a ladder and any press that are interested and attempt to rectify the problem myself.

Your Right Of Appeal
I will operate a version of the councils own bureaucracy on any appeal you wish to make. Please make any appeal in writing within 7 days of this notice.

Yours

Keith Kondakor

Hi Matt,

Thank you for a thought-provoking website. I agree that CFLs must be the future of lighting, though sites advocating their use still advise them mainly for areas where they will be switched on for a reasonable length of time. My main problem with CFLs is the variation in performance between different manufacturer's products. A filament bulb tends to be a filament bulb, whoever makes it, but with CFLs there is a great variation in warm-up time, light output and colour temperature.

My first experience with CFLs was when a local energy company was handing them out for users to try. This experience nearly put me off them for life - very slow to reach maximum output, dim and a foul colour. I recently tried again when I realised my kitchen had 6 x 60W of R63 spotlights recessed in to the ceiling. My first choice of a low energy replacement was not very successful, but then I found the Megaman
range that changed my mind. Fairly rapid ramp up to max brightness and good colour rendering, though rather expensive.

I don't know how people can be advised on which brands to buy if, like me, they are put off by cheap, but unsatisfactory, products. Packaging that lists time to, say, time to 90% of full output, colour temperature, and output in lumens is not going to be meaningful to many potential customers.

While you are campaigning, is there any chance of banning the bayonet cap bulb holder? They are always fitted to pendants in houses, which, apart from them being poorly designed and dangerous when the bayonets dig into the bulb's solder and stop it rotating, means that I frequently have to keep two versions of the same bulb as spares. Also, it means there are several CFLs I cannot use as they are only available with ES caps. I did attempt to buy replacement ES bulb holders for some of my pendants, but the wholesale and trade companies I tried did not stock such exotic items.

Regards,

Mike Ratcliff

Dear Matt,

Whilst I acknowledge that CFL's make sense in the majority of cases, there are still some legitimate uses for the incandescent bulb. These include locations (such as in a loft or cupboard) where the light is only required for a small proportion of time. In such cases, the additional energy required in the manufacture of the CFL is unlikely to be recouped in the lower running costs. Also, the warm up time (especially in a well insulated loft) can be problematic, even with modern CFLs. (I know, as I have tried it). Have you replaced the light in your 'fridge with a CFL?

Also, the blanket statement that the heat generated by the bulb is wasted is not true. If it is cold enough to run the heating (no firm figures, but I guess 50% of the time in the UK) then the heat from the bulb is replacing heat that would otherwise have been generated by the heating system. I agree that using electricity is not the most efficient way to heat a home, but it is not wasted.

Finally, there is the issue of aesthetics. CFLs look pretty stupid in a cut crystal chandelier and they do not provide the point source required to generate the sparkle. Even pearl bulbs do not work in a chandelier for this reason.

I do not expect to see any of these arguments in favour of the old bulb on your website, as you are obviously on a crusade and they do not suit your argument. However, I am always more likely to believe someone who puts both sides of the argument.

Regards,


Paul Carlier, FIEE

E-petition on the No. 10 Downing Street website

Francis Irving has set up a petition on the 10 Downing Street website saying:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to levy a tax on energy inefficient light bulbs so that their long term financial and environmental cost is visible in their retail price.

Please visit the petition website if you would like to add your name.

EDM: Cross-party support for the Ban The Bulb campaign

The Early Day Motion which my local Member of Parliament, Dr Evan Harris, proposed in support of the Ban The Bulb campaign has now been signed by 42 MPs from 7 political parties.

At present the EDM's signatories include:

Conservative Party: Derek Conway, Bob Spink + Edward Vaizey

Democratic Unionist Party: Dr William McCrea, Iris Robinson + David Simpson

Labour Party: Martin Caton, Jeremy Corbyn, Ann Cryer, Janet Dean, David Drew, Jeff Ennis, Bill Etherington, Paul Flynn, Kelvin Hopkins, Brian Jenkins, Lynne Jones, John McDonnell, Jim McGovern, Martin Salter, Alan Simpson, Rudi Vis + Betty Williams

Liberal Democrats: Tom Brake, Colin Breed, Annette Brooke, Edward Davey, Timothy Farron, Lynne Featherstone, Evan Harris, John Hemming, Paul Holmes, Paul Keetch, John Leech, Paul Rowen, Andrew Stunell, Mark Williams, Stephen Williams + Phil Willis

Plaid Cymru: Hywel Williams

Scottish National Party: Mike Weir and

Social Democratic + Labour Party: Mark Durkan.

Please use the They Work For You website if you would like to write to your MP in order to thank them for supporting this campaign or to encourage them to add their name to this list of supporters.

This story has been reported in The Daily Mail, The Mirror + The Oxford Mail.

EDM 2656: That this House notes the problems caused by increasing energy demands, including rising energy costs, reduced energy security and climate change; recognises that improved energy efficiency is the cheapest way for the UK to reduce energy demand and carbon dioxide emissions; welcomes the Ban the Bulb campaign, which aims to increase the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs; and calls on the Government to help main-stream energy efficient lifestyles by granting energy saving goods and services the same 5 per cent. VAT rate as condoms, strengthening UK building regulations and making energy efficiency a key criteria in all Government procurement.

Update: 13 Nov : Two more MPs have signed up!

Liberal Democrats: Martin Horwood + Greg Mulholland

Hansard: a written answer on merits of banning bulbs

The MP for Dundee West, Jim McGovern has asked Ian Pearson MP, the UK Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, if he would assess the merits of a ban on incandescent light bulbs. Jim has now received the following written answer:

Light Bulbs

Mr. McGovern: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will assess the merits of instituting a ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs. [92383]

Ian Pearson: The Government are committed to using all suitable policy instruments to remove the least efficient products from UK markets. Our current assessment is that, by removing ordinary incandescent light bulbs (GLS bulbs) from the UK market and encouraging sales of the most efficient alternatives, we could avoid approximately one million tonnes of carbon emissions per year by 2020.

The UK cannot unilaterally ban or prevent the free trade in products such as incandescent light bulbs on the basis of their energy efficiency. However, the Government are pressing the European Commission to make light-bulbs a priority for regulatory action under the recently agreed Eco-Design for Energy Using Products (EUP) framework directive. We are also discussing with retailers and manufacturers how we can remove inefficient lighting products from UK shelves in advance of regulations.

Ban The Bulb hopes that the UK government will not wait for the agreement of 25 EU nations before annoucing plans to phase out incandescents over the next 5 years (and save 1 million tonnes of carbon emissions per year = 3.67 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year).

This issue is so important that we should not allow an unspecified trade rule to block rapid progress on this simple, painless and effective step.

The Stern Review highlighted the massive scale of the challenge posed by the climate change and emphasised the need for governments to introduce policies of an equivalent scale, on an urgent basis.

If we cannot make progress with light bulbs, how are we going to make the bigger and harder choices that will inevitably be required of us?

There will always be excuses for inaction or delay, but far more could be done.

When I launched this campaign it was said that VAT rates could not be reduced on energy saving goods and services because this would re-open complex EU negotiations, yet the Chancellor reduced the rate of VAT on condoms from 17.5% to 5% in the last budget...

Clearly our politicians can make a big difference when they want to show leadership.

Reader : tax based on wattage x life time of product

Eduard has been in touch from Spain to suggest a fair and logical way of calculating the appropriate level of tax which should be applied to any energy using products, based on the wattage and expected lifetime of the product in question...

Dear Matt,

I've been thinking about the fact that the problem to be tackled is an "up-front cost" one. From that side, the only way to smooth the up-front cost of a CFL versus an incandescent bulb is by incorporating the full-life cycle cost in the price. At present we have a good example of market failure.

I think it would be more equitable to calculate the appropriate level of tax that should imposed on an electricity using product according to all of the carbon emissions generated by a device during its life-cycle. That is,

bulb estimated life : 1000h
consumption : 100W
makes 100kWh.

CFL estimated life : 6000h
consumption : 20W
makes 120kWh.

Considering the fact that you'll need 6 incandescent bulbs, over time that adds 600 vs 120. This plays against taxing just for the sake of it.

I've recently read the following Market Transformation Programme article (http://www.mtprog.com/SelectProductStrategy.aspx?intSelection=4&intSector=4).

The scenarios remain crystal clear albeit the taxation appears to me a bit arbitrary. Why 50p, and not 30p? or 72p?

The mechanism I have suggested based on lifetime emissions would drive people to get the least consuming device they needed.

It could also be applied to some sort of mathematics linked to the price of the emission of CO2. Therefore, the measure could be more easily "translated to average Joe".

It could be tricky if every product had to have a different tax rate, but perhaps bands could be created with tax deductions being made for the more energy efficient products... BTB is already advocating that energy saving goods and services should have a reduced level of VAT, similar to the 5% granted to condoms in the last budget.

Reader: Why not make city councils produce energy audits?

Keith Kondakor from Green Nuneaton has been in touch to suggest that city councils should be made to provide annual audited energy accounts, which the public could then scrutinise. He has also given away 240 CFLs to his friends and family. Both great ideas... Please keep your suggestions coming!

Hi Matt.

I have been promoting low energy light bulbs here in Nuneaton.

I started at home, where I also work.

I have cut my electric usage form 8 KWhr a day to 6 KWhr [a 25% saving].

Last year I bought 240 low energy light bulbs at trade price and sold, gave or forced them on to any one I knew.

This year I am doing it again with another 200 bulbs and have just getting going. I have been mainly pushing small 9W spiral bulbs which have smaller savings but tend to the the ones that people find hard to buy.

I am now taking on our town council. Using the Freedom of Information Act I obtained the meter readings for their main buildings.

I was shocked to find that their leisure centre uses 4200 units per day.

Even if I can get them to save 0.16% of the use there it will be more than all the electric that me and my wife use. The leisure centre is only 3 years old and should be as good as it gets. What has happened is that they use massive flood lights over the pools and have thousands of low energy bulbs coving the roofs in other parts.

What I would like to see is some form of energy audit required when these things are built. I would also like to get every council to report its energy used.

We could do this the hard way and send out 430+ Freedom of information requests. Better would be to get the government to add this to the list of best value information it requires councils to report. My aim is to have a giant effect on the CO2 footprints of councils.

Making the switch...

Ban The Bulb would like to encourage a debate which explored how a large share of the public could be encouraged to stop using old, familiar technologies (which use energy in a profligate fashion) and to start using newer, more efficient technologies which have never been used in large numbers and thereby become cheap to buy.

Will McNeill has been in touch with an idea which takes advantage of the cheaper running costs ofCFLs and LED light bulbs...

His idea would be for all electricity providers to be required to send each household 10 energy saving light bulbs.

The electricity providers could claim back the costs of providing these bulbs over the course of 12 months, as an appendage to the household's bill. The yearly costs to the household, however, wouldn't rise because they would be using less electricity.

Over the coming years the household would save money, and reduce the carbon emissions.

The scheme could be either'opt-in' (weak) or 'opt-out' (strong).

It would have the following benefits:

(1) Lower the costs of CFLs due to the huge buying power of the electricity providers.
(2) Lower the inertia level of switching to CFLs
(3) Reduce the difficulties of moving to the new technology for those onlower incomes

The problem with 'stick' methods (taxing incandescents, for instance) is precisely the fact it puts a basic need further out of reach of those leastable to pay for it.

House of Commons : Early Day Motion

Ban The Bulb's local MP, Dr Evan Harris, has kindly tabled the following Early Day Motion on behalf of the BTB campaign.

Please ask your MP to give their support to this EDM ("petition" for MPs).

You can find your local MP's contact details by visiting the Write to Them website.

EDM 2656:

That this House notes the problems raised by increasing energy demands, including rising energy costs, reduced energy security and climate change; recognises that improved energy efficiency is the cheapest way for the UK to reduce energy demand + carbon dioxide emissions; welcomes the Ban the Bulb campaign, which aims to increase the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs; and calls on the Government to help main-stream energy efficient lifestyles by

(i) granting energy saving goods + services the same 5% VAT rate as condoms,

(ii) strengthening UK building regulations and

(iii) making energy efficiency a key criteria in all Government procurement.

It took the signatures of 69 MPs to reduce the VAT rate on condoms to the minumum rate permitted by EU rules...

UPDATE: In an interview with Roger Harrabin following the publication of the UK's Energy Review of the Energy White Paper originally published in 2003, Tony Blair said that he would be asking the EU to consider an EU-wide ban of domestic incandescent light bulbs.

Ban The Bulb: Campaign Aims...

This campaign aims:

1. To increase the use of energy-efficient light bulbs.

2. To encourage the taxing and phasing out of incandescent light bulbs.

3. To propose a time limit for the replacement of light fittings requiring the use of incandescent light bulbs and for altering the shopping habits of consumers.

4. To include environmental costs in the prices consumers pay for their light bulbs and to reward those who switch to using less polluting light bulbs.

In 2001, lighting accounted for 101 billion kWh (8.8%) of U.S. household electricity use. Incandescent lamps, which are commonly found in households, are highly inefficient sources of light because about 90% of the energy used is lost as heat. For that reason, lighting has been one focus of efforts to increase the efficiency of household electricity consumption.

Energy-efficient light bulbs use up to 67% less energy that traditional light bulbs, with no loss in light. They also last 8 to 10 times longer, delivering up to seven years of light.

This campaign has been established in order to illustrate that it is possible to tackle our energy and climate problems by using technological solutions which already exist, work well + save money.

However, in order to kick-start this change we must begin to turn fine words and good intentions into action. Hinting at possible solutions, but not being prepared to introduce the new laws and taxes or the binding targets necessary to guarantee the delivery of far greater energy-efficiency, has not worked.

Switching to energy-efficient light bulbs is something that we could all do, quickly and simply, without any serious loss in our quality of life. We would also save ourselves approximately £7 per bulb per year!

An average American home has about 30 light bulbs, 3 of them burning for 5 hours or more per day. If all American homes replaced just 3 of these bulbs with long-lasting bulbs, Americans could save electricity equivalent to the output of 11 fossil-fuel-fired power plants. In turn they would eliminate about 23 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year - and save about $1,800,000,000.
ref: Natural Capitalism by Hawken, Lovins and Lovins.

The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution has recommended that the UK should aim to reduce it's greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050. In order to achieve this we will need to make cuts wherever and whenever they are possible. Making sure that we all start making use of evergy saving light bulbs would be a good place to start...

Ban The Bulb: Campaign Proposals...

1. To use the tax system to discourage wasteful energy use.

A £1 tax on every incandescent light bulb would help to increase the uptake of environmentally friendly technologies, and allow light bulb prices to include more of the environmental costs associated with wasting energy and burning fossil fuels.

Waiving this tax on energy-efficient lightbulbs would also encourage the uptake of existing technologies and drive further innovation.

Should a single-rate tax on all incandescent bulbs not be possible, one alternative might be to charge a tax of 1p on each watt of light. Under such a scheme a 20W bulb would incur a 20p charge on top of it's sales price, a 40W bulb would incur a 40p charge and a 100W bulb would cost an extra £1.

This pence-per-watt scheme would have the advantage that it proportionately charged those who used the most energy and discouraged the use of lots of short-lived light bulbs, but the disadvantage that it charged less to those who used halogen bulbs (which generally have a low wattage).

2.To support the use of energy-efficient light bulbs.

Any revenue generated by taxing wasteful light bulbs should be put towards subsidising the price of energy-efficient light bulbs, and supporting other energy saving programmes.

3. Phase out and ban incandescent light bulbs

To promote the phasing out and banning of 60W, 100W as an easy first steps, with other designs being phased out as appropriate alternative designs become available.

See the full list of campaign goals on the homepage.

What you can do!

1. Ask your local shops to stock energy-efficient light bulbs.

2. Try an energy-efficient light bulb the next time you buy a bulb.

3. Support the phasing out, and eventual banning, of wasteful incandescent light bulbs!

4. Write to your member of parliament/congress and ask for energy efficiency to be given a greater priority.

Suppliers of cheap CFLs

Ban The Bulb hopes that readers will find it useful to know that Light Bulbs Direct offer a wide range of CFLs for 99p each, that Asda stores offer Philips Genie bulbs for 47p each, and that Morrisons have recently had a 99p BOGOF deal. (Andrew)

ScrewFix have a very impressive range of energy saving bulbs, designed to fit many different light fittings and all budgets. (Derek)

B&Q currently offer a pack containing two 20w plus four 11w fluorescent bulbs (spiral design) for £8. (Simon)

IKEA have a good range of bulbs, sold in pairs, which are available for £5.99. IKEA will also take back your old light bulbs, so that the trace amounts of mercury in them (4mg per bulb) can be disposed of responsibly. (Joan + Nick).

Most CFLs are not designed to be used with dimmer switches. Special adaptors are available for larger bulbs and General Electric make Soft White dimmables which are available in the US but not the EU. LEDs might be the best bet if this issue affects you...

It has been projected that 10-watt Light Emitting Diodes units will soon be available with efficiencies of 60 lumens per watt. These devices will produce about as much light as a common 50-watt incandescent bulb, and will facilitate the use of LEDs for general illumination. At present, LED Online offer lights from £6.49 to £20.99. (John)

LEDs use 90% less electricity than traditional light bulbs, but are not quite ready to revolutionise domestic lighting in the way that they have already revolutionised traffic lights. At present, LEDs are most suitable as "night lights" or as replacements for halogen spot lights.

If you sign up to London Energy Green Tariff you get two energy saving bulbs for free. (Jessica)

Kennet district council can have two free low-energy light bulbs if local residents fill out one of their home energy checks. (Peter)

BTB has been told by a lighting expert at the UK's Building Research Establish that the mercury emitted by a coal-fired power station whilst illuminating an incandescent light bulb is likely to exceed the amount of mercury inside a CFL. CFLs have the distinct advantage that they can be disposed of safely.

I am also looking into the comparative levels of embodied energy in CFL and incandescent light bulbs. For the time being, I will point out that, over its lifetime, each CFL is likely to replace 6-7 incandescent bulbs, and that this comparison is not as simple as it may appear. The relevant facts and figures are proving rather difficult to obtain, but I will post more on this issue as soon as possible.

Please get in touch if you know of any suppliers who can match or beat the above offers.

My thanks to the readers who have provided this information.

This campaign does not endorse any company or guarantee availability.

Further reading:

DEFRA - Market Transformation Programme
> Domestic Lighting reports
> Variation of the Rate of VAT on Lamps

Oxford University - Environmental Change Istitue
> 40% House report