Ban The Bulb : Dr Matt Prescott : www.banthebulb.org

China to phase out incandescent light bulbs in 5 years

2011-11-05T04:12:00.001-07:00

The Guardian newspaper is reporting that China has announced plans to phase out domestic incandescent light bulbs within the next 5 years. The NRDC has estimated that this measure will reduce China's CO2 emissions by 48 million tonnes per year...

The lights are going out for incandescent bulbs, as China pledges to replace the 1 billion it uses annually with more energy efficient models within five years.

Beijing's move is a major step in efforts to improve lighting efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Lighting accounts for 19% of electricity use worldwide, according to a 2007 estimate from the International Energy Agency, a figure that could drop to 7% if the rest of the world followed China's lead, the Global Environment Facility fund said.

The decision by the world's second largest economy to phase out incandescents follows in the footsteps of Australia, the European Union, Brazil and others.

But according to the Global Environment Facility, incandescents still make up 50-70% of worldwide sales and China's move forms a striking contrast to the US government's backsliding on the issue. This summer Republicans drove a bill through the House of Representatives stripping all funding for government enforcement of improved lighting efficiency standards, which come into force next year.

It is unclear whether China will totally phase out production of incandescents. A report from state news agency Xinhua said that "imports and sales" would be banned – seemingly implying that exports would still be allowed.

Campaigners hope China's plan will nonetheless encourage producers – who make 3.85 billion incandescent bulbs a year, an estimated 70% of the world's supply – to shift towards other products, in particular CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps) and LEDs. CFLs use around 75% less energy to produce an equivalent amount of light and last much longer.

The country has already become the largest producer of energy-efficient light bulbs, thanks in large part to sizable grants from international environmental agencies.

Experts predict that the shift in demand will also cut the cost of CFLs and increase the cost of incandescents globally.

Imports and sales of 100 watt and higher incandescent bulbs will be banned from October next year, Xie Ji, an official at the country's top economic planning body said, while those of 60 watts and above will be banned from October 2014.

The senior official added that incandescents of 15 watts or higher would be banned from 2016 if the scheme was a success.

The plan showed China's determination to save energy, cut costs and curb climate change, he went on, and would have a "significant impact" on global use.

Xie, who is deputy director of the environmental protection department with the National Development and Reform Commission, added that lighting accounts for 12% of China's total electricity use. The NDRC has estimated that the switch will save 48 billion kilowatt hours of power per year and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 48 million tonnes annually. China emitted 7,710 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2009.

Overall, China has pledged to cut energy consumption per unit of GDP by 16% and cut carbon emissions by 17% in the five years to 2015.

Yang Fuqiang, the senior advisor on climate change and energy at the US-based Natural Resources Defence Council, said the amount of electricity used by lighting in China at the moment was two or three times the generating capacity of the massive Three Gorges dam.

He added that while exports would still be legal, the plan should help companies produce more energy efficient bulbs, not least because China already had strong research and development and production capacity for energy efficient lighting.

The Global Environment Facility fund, which has invested millions of dollars in China to encourage the phase-out, says that moving to efficient lighting is one of the simplest ways for countries to cut carbon emissions.

Christophe Bahuet, the deputy country director of the United Nations Development Programme, said: "I think what's important for us is that China is joining an international trend. It also sends a signal that will inspire others."

But he cautioned that implementation would be key, warning: "It is a roadmap, but a lot will have to be done at provincial and local level to help explain why people should go for these plans."

Wang Jinsui, the president of the China Illuminating Engineering Society, told the China Daily newspaper earlier this year that it would take producers time to switch. He added that the government should consider subsidies because many families would not be able to afford the more expensive energy-efficient bulbs.

Liu Shengping, the secretary general of the China Association of Lighting Industry, told the newspaper that it was "unrealistic" to require energy efficient lights were used everywhere.

"As long as the demand exists, Chinese manufacturers can hardly pull the plug on the production line," he said.

• Additional research by Han Cheng

Water Bottle Light Bulbs Illuminate the Philippines

2011-09-12T14:04:00.000-07:00

This is one of the most inspiring light bulb stories Ban The Bulb has ever seen...

In the Philippines, social entrepreneurs have started inserting recycled water bottle light bulbs into the corrugated iron roofs of shacks in order to help families access free, clean and green light for the first time.

Worldwide, hundreds of millions of people don't have access to electric light bulbs and this clever, practical solution just goes to show what is possible when you apply some lateral thinking and imagination.

You can follow Ilac Diaz on Twitter here @IlacDiaz

Lights go out on 60W light bulbs in the UK

2011-08-22T08:51:00.000-07:00

On September 1 2011, 60 watt domestic incandescent light bulbs will begin to be phased out in UK shops.

Today, BBC Radio 4's "You & Yours" consumer affairs programme discussed the effects of this phase out with Mike Simpson of Philips and Dr Matt Prescott of Ban The Bulb.

Please click here and listen from 14 minutes into the programme to hear the discussion.

Wikipedia : Light-Emitting Diode (LED)

2011-08-22T00:59:00.000-07:00

Light emitting diodes (LEDs) use 90% less electricity than their domestic incandescent light bulb equivalents.

The prices of LEDs have fallen dramatically due to massive new production in China and their increased used in televisions, car headlights and other domestic appliances. LEDs are becoming far more widely available, and cheaper, but remain expensive as they are still not made in large quantities and require metal heat sinks, or fans, to assist with the shedding of the diodes' accumulated heat, which would otherwise reduce efficiency.

According to Treehugger, GE has recently developed LED alternatives to 60W, 75W and 100W domestic incandescent light bulbs.

The following Wikipedia entry for Light-Emitting Diodes (LEDs) is well worth reading if you would like to find out more.

A light-emitting diode (LED) is a semiconductor light source.[1] LEDs are used as indicator lamps in many devices and are increasingly used for other lighting. Introduced as a practical electronic component in 1962,[2] early LEDs emitted low-intensity red light, but modern versions are available across the visible, ultraviolet and infrared wavelengths, with very high brightness.

When a light-emitting diode is forward biased (switched on), electrons are able to recombine with electron holes within the device, releasing energy in the form of photons. This effect is called electroluminescence and the color of the light (corresponding to the energy of the photon) is determined by the energy gap of the semiconductor. LEDs are often small in area (less than 1 mm2), and integrated optical components may be used to shape its radiation pattern.[3] LEDs present many advantages over incandescent light sources including lower energy consumption, longer lifetime, improved robustness, smaller size, faster switching, and greater durability and reliability. LEDs powerful enough for room lighting are relatively expensive and require more precise current and heat management than compact fluorescent lamp sources of comparable output.

Light-emitting diodes are used in applications as diverse as replacements for aviation lighting, automotive lighting (particularly brake lamps, turn signals and indicators) as well as in traffic signals. The compact size, the possibility of narrow bandwidth, switching speed, and extreme reliability of LEDs has allowed new text and video displays and sensors to be developed, while their high switching rates are also useful in advanced communications technology. Infrared LEDs are also used in the remote control units of many commercial products including televisions, DVD players, and other domestic appliances.

Wikipedia : Compact Fluorescent Lamps

2011-08-22T00:41:00.000-07:00

Compact fluorescent lamps use 60% - 70% less electricity to produce the same amount of light as their incandescent light bulb equivalent and have improved significantly in their brightness, light quality (incl. daylight spectrum designs), price and mercury content since the Ban The Bulb energy efficiency campaign was founded over 5 years ago.

Work is still needed to develop minimum standards for CFLs, improve domestic recycling services (see Recolight) and subsidise their purchase prices (as nPower did with Tesco in 2010 e.g. 20p for a high quality 20W CFL instead of £2.00).

Ban The Bulb recommends that you buy the best quality CFLs you can afford as these generally offer better performance and have the lowest environmental impacts.

The light produced by most CFLs is more visible to spectrometers than to human eyes so we recommend that you use lamps that are a slightly higher wattage than the packaging generally suggests.

The following Wikipedia entry for Compact Fluorescent Lamps is well worth reading if you would like to find out more.

A compact fluorescent lamp (CFL; also called compact fluorescent light, energy-saving light, and compact fluorescent tube) is a fluorescent lamp designed to replace an incandescent lamp; some types fit into light fixtures formerly used for incandescent lamps.

Compared to general-service incandescent lamps giving the same amount of visible light, CFLs use less power (typically one fifth) and have a longer rated life (six to ten times average). In most countries, a CFL has a higher purchase price than an incandescent lamp, but can save over five times its purchase price in electricity costs over the lamp's lifetime.[2] Like all fluorescent lamps, CFLs contain mercury, which complicates their disposal. In many countries, governments have established recycling schemes for CFLs and glass generally.

CFLs radiate a light spectrum that is different from that of incandescent lamps. Improved phosphor formulations have improved the perceived colour of the light emitted by CFLs, such that some sources rate the best "soft white" CFLs as subjectively similar in colour to standard incandescent lamps.

Wikipedia : Incandescent Light Bulb

2011-08-22T00:36:00.000-07:00

The Wikipedia entry for "incandescent light bulb" has recently been updated and is extremely informative:

The incandescent light bulb, incandescent lamp or incandescent light globe makes light by heating a metal filament wire to a high temperature until it glows. The hot filament is protected from air by a glass bulb that is filled with inert gas or evacuated. In a halogen lamp, a chemical process returns metal to the filament, extending its life. The light bulb is supplied with electrical current by feed-through terminals or wires embedded in the glass. Most bulbs are used in a socket which supports the bulb mechanically and connects the current supply to the bulb's electrical terminals.

Incandescent bulbs are produced in a wide range of sizes, light output, and voltage ratings, from 1.5 volts to about 300 volts. They require no external regulating equipment and have a low manufacturing cost and work equally well on either alternating current or direct current. As a result, the incandescent lamp is widely used in household and commercial lighting, for portable lighting such as table lamps, car headlamps, and flashlights, and for decorative and advertising lighting.

Some applications of the incandescent bulb use the heat generated by the filament, such as incubators, brooding boxes for poultry, heat lights for reptile tanks,[1][2] infrared heating for industrial heating and drying processes, and the Easy-Bake Oven toy. This waste heat increases the energy required by a building's air conditioning system.

Incandescent light bulbs are gradually being replaced in many applications by other types of electric lights, such as fluorescent lamps, compact fluorescent lamps, cold cathode fluorescent lamps (CCFL), high-intensity discharge lamps, and light-emitting diodes (LEDs). These newer technologies improve the ratio of visible light to heat generation. Some jurisdictions, such as the European Union, are in the process of phasing out the use of incandescent light bulbs in favor of more energy-efficient lighting.

Read more here...

US incandescent light bulb ban imminent (2012)

2011-05-26T06:33:00.000-07:00

The phasing out of the most wasteful domestic incandescent light bulbs in the US is getting closer. The following EDN article offers a useful summary of the latest news and the LED alternatives that now look feasible for those wanting bright white light and to use dimmer switches, without wasting vast amounts of energy producing unnecessary heat.

Energy-efficient lights to gain from incandescent ban

At A Glance

- The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 dictates phasing out incandescent light bulbs starting in 2012.

- To satisfy consumer demands, energy-efficient lights must also be instant-on, work with currently installed light switches, deliver a warm- to bright-white light, cost-effectively save energy, and have a lifetime of more than 10,000 hours.

Margery Conner, Technical Editor -- EDN, May 26, 2011

The 100-year-long reign of the incandescent light bulb is about to end. Rather than bemoaning its death, lighting-circuit designers would do well to see the opportunity in offering a light with instant-on, that dims without flicker, and that is reliable and cost-effective.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 dictates the phase-out of the incandescent light bulb starting in 2012 (Reference 1). The bill does not specifically ban incandescent lights: You will still be able to buy any incandescent light that can meet the act’s efficacy specification of a 25% improvement in incandescent-light output. The lights are notoriously poor producers of usable light, however. They lose 96% of the power they use to heat; hence, Hasbro uses them as the heating element in the Easy-Bake toy oven. So far, no one has discovered a cost-effective way of coaxing more light and less heat from incandescent lights.

Nevertheless, both state and national governments, as well as consumers’ preference for saving money in the face of rising energy costs, are signaling the end of the line for common incandescent light bulbs. Herein lies an opportunity for engineers in creating lights that not only replace incandescents but also enhance the home or commercial environment through automatic energy savings and create a pleasant lighting environment.

Lighting technologies such as LED, fluorescent, and halogen are vying to become the new ubiquitous light source. The challenge in the near future is to provide a lighting experience that matches consumers’ expectations for how a light should work. Consumers don’t necessarily want incandescent lights but rather lighting “experiences” that match their expectations—lights that come on instantly; work with currently installed light switches, including TRIAC (triode-alternating-current)-based dimmers; deliver a warm- to bright-white light; cost-effectively save energy, and have lifetimes of more than 10,000 hours.

read more here...

Megaman CFLs do not use phenol in electric circuits

2011-05-26T06:18:00.000-07:00

Ban The Bulb has received the following press release from Megaman about the phenol controversy.

It is interesting to note that they do not use phenol in their electric circuits, although other manufacturers do, and that they are using shatter-proof silicone to help prevent their compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) from releasing mercury vapour, as a result of accidental breakages, in the home.

28 April 2011

To whom it may concern

MEGAMAN® ’s statement on recent press report about “Energy saving lamps (CFLs) can emit harmful substances”

Recently, a German magazine “Markt” (meaning Market) run by the NDR Television Channel conducted a laboratory test on energy saving lamps for emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Lamps from five brands were tested: Osram, Attralux, Rubin, Müller-Licht and IKEA. MEGAMAN® lamps were not tested. The laboratory test report claimed that during operation CFLs can emit harmful substances (e.g. phenol) known as VOCs.

We would like to state that MEGAMAN® uses water-based adhesive and water-based phosphor coating in the production of our CFLs. No phenol is used in our production
process. MEGAMAN® products are entirely safe to use in both domestic and commercial environments.

MEGAMAN® energy saving lamps meet all the legal requirements of the EU RoHS directive. And by using a safe amalgam instead of liquid mercury, all MEGAMAN® lamps are completely safe even if broken. Furthermore, the shatter-proof silicone coating on many models makes breakage quite difficult and provides an additional level of consumer safety.

The said laboratory tests were carried out in a small chamber, not in a real living room. The test results therefore do not reflect anything like a “Real Life” situation. This is supported by the German Federal Agency for the Environment (UBA).

“The concentrations of VOCs from energy-saving lamps, which we expect indoors, are very low,” the spokesman said, “We do not see any health risks through VOC-emissions of energy saving lamps.”

When asked to comment on the test report, the spokesman of UBA made the following statements.

“Because of the electronic and electrical equipment (e.g. TV, computer and mobile phones) in use today, VOC emissions are common and plentiful. Concentrations of up to 300µg/m³ are seen as normal and harmless in indoor air.”

“If we assume that a CFL is normally used in a small room (volume around 30m³) then we have to divide the measured test chamber concentration by at least 1000. The test results therefore indicate that the true concentration of VOCs in a room of that size would be around a few micrograms/m³ (1,9µg/m³ for a new and strongly emitting lamp). That means that the additional emissions caused by a CFL are just a tiny part of the normal concentration of VOCs common in interior rooms, and may safely be ignored.”

“We do not see any urgent need for action caused by the publication of these results. An exclusive evaluation of this matter will be presented within a month by the indoor air commission of the Federal Agency for the Environment.” (Source: Federal Agency for the Environment (UBA), Press Office)

Stiftung Warentest (German product test foundation) presents different results regarding indoor air pollution compared to the results of the NDR test. Stiftung Warentest regularly measures VOCs in its energy saving lamps tests. In its current energy saving lamps test 3/2011 no noticeable results were found regarding indoor pollutants. Both tested MEGAMAN® lamps were ranked “very good” regarding indoor pollutants. (See Attachment for Stiftung Warentest test report 3/2011)

Should you have any enquiries, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.

Yours sincerely,

Ms Sharon Pang
Senior Brand Manager
Neonlite Electronic & Lighting (HK) Ltd
Email: sharon@neonlite.com.hk

Ban The Bulb was also pleased to note the Megaman are working with the Migraine Association to test whether there is any link between CFLs and migraines.

Phenol scare story...

2011-04-20T05:33:00.000-07:00

A German TV programme called Markt has reported that energy saving compact fluorescent lamps (CFL) emit a chemical called phenol.

Their scientist has tested five makes of CFLs in sealed containers over 3 day periods and reported the detection of phenol. They have not reported the concentrations of phenol detected.

Further research is needed to verify and quantify what the issues really are.

All electronic circuits produce volatile organic compounds and it is not clear that CFLs produce anything different to TV, printers or other electrical devices.

The German and UK authorities have both said that CFLs are safe to use.

Fruit and cucumbers both produce phenol as they ripen so the detection of phenol in itself should not frighten anyone.

Energy saving light bulbs 'contain cancer causing chemicals' (Daily Telegraph, 20 April, 2011)

Fears have been reignited about the safety of energy saving light bulbs after a group of scientists warned that they contain cancer causing chemicals.

Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on.

Peter Braun, who carried out the tests at the Berlin's Alab Laboratory, said: “For such carcinogenic substances it is important they are kept as far away as possible from the human environment.”

The bulbs are already widely used in the UK following EU direction to phase out traditional incandescent lighting by the end of this year.

But the German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.

Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps.

“I, therefore, use them only very economically. They should not be used in unventilated areas and definitely not in the proximity of the head.”

British experts insisted that more research was needed and urged consumers not to panic.

Dr Michelle Bloor, senior lecturer in Environmental Science at Portsmouth University, told the Daily Express: “Further independent studies would need to be undertaken to back up the presented German research.”

The Department for the Environment insists the bulbs are safe, despite the fact that they contain small amounts of mercury which would leak out if the glass was broken.

Advice on its website states: “Energy efficient light bulbs are not a danger to the public.
“Although they contain mercury, limited at 5mg per lamp, it cannot escape from a lamp that is intact."

“In any case, the very small amount contained in an energy efficient bulb is unlikely to cause harm even if the lamp should be broken.”

The latest report follows claims by Abraham Haim, a professor of biology at Haifa University in Israel, that the bulbs could result in higher breast cancer rates if used late at night.

He said that the bluer light that CFLs emitted closely mimicked daylight, disrupting the body's production of the hormone melatonin more than older-style filament bulbs, which cast a yellower light.

The Migraine Action Association has warned that they could trigger migraines and skin care specialists have claimed that their intense light could exacerbate a range of existing skin problems.

Dr Matt Prescott discusses EU light bulb ban

2009-09-17T14:41:00.000-07:00

BBC Radio 4 : Today Programme : Lights go out on 100 watt bulbs

After 120 years, 100 watt bulbs are being phased out in favour of energy-saving ones. Matt Prescott, director of campaign group Ban the Bulb, examines new rules which means all traditional bulbs will be disappear by 2012.

BBC World Service : Newshour (Europe) : Old Style light bulbs banned in EU

The traditional incandescent light bulb, first put on the market by Thomas Edison in 1879, could be on its way out.

From today, the manufacture and import of 100 watt bulbs and all frosted bulbs will be banned in the European Union.

The new rules mean that consumers will be able to buy only the more efficient long life fluorescent or halogen lamps.

However, there has been something of a backlash against the ban.

In Britain, supermarkets reported a massive run on the traditional type, while one newspaper gave away 25,000 incandescent light bulbs in "outrage at further European intervention in British affairs".

The European Commission claims the ban on inefficient bulbs will save about 40 terawatt hours of energy a year, enough to power a small country.

Matt Prescott is the founder of the Ban the Bulb campaign.

EurActiv : Updates on lead up to EU 100W light bulb ban

2009-08-30T14:33:00.000-07:00

In October 2008, EU energy ministers invited the European Commission to draft a regulation to phase out the sale of all incandescent and poorly-performing light bulbs by 2010. This is to be done within the framework of the Eco-design Directive (see EurActiv LinksDossier), which provides performance requirements for energy-using products.

The European Parliament gave its green light to a phase-out of incandescent light bulbs on 17 February after an attempt by a group of MEPs to block the regulation was rejected (EurActiv 18/02/09).

The Commission officially adopted a regulation to improve the energy efficiency on non-directional household lamps on 19 March 2009 (EurActiv 19/03/09). The measure will gradually phase out all incandescent light bulbs and inefficient halogens by 2012 in favour of compact fluorescent lamps (CFL) or efficient halogens.

In March, the European Commission adopted a new regulation to gradually phase out all incandescent light bulbs and inefficient halogens between 1 September and 2012. The ban was intended to help in the EU’' fight against climate change as the EU executive estimates that a move to efficient halogens and compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) could slash the EU's CO2 emissions by about 15 million tons every year.

The beneficiary, so the Commission believes, will be the consumer as a household will "save easily" €50 (£40) a year due to lower electricity consumption and the longer lifetime of the new lamps that will compensate for the higher purchase price.

In anticipation of the new rules, the sales of traditional light bulbs fell by as much as 35% in many European countries in the first quarter of 2009, according to the market research company Gfk. At the same time, energy-saving light bulbs have steadily increased their market share. In the UK, for example, 12.3 million were sold in the last quarter of 2008 compared with 8.9 million in the same period a year earlier.

Osram, a leading lighting manufacturer, reported that green products now account for 65% of its sales and it hopes for a boost to 80% in the coming years.

"The big trend is energy efficiency" said Martin Goetzeler, CEO of Osram, adding that the EU decision would give a further boost to technological change.

Consumers argue that CFL bulbs cannot match the light quality of incandescent bulbs, saying that they are two dim and distort colours. Moreover, concerns have been raised that the flickering fluorescent light could trigger migraines or epilepsy seizures.

Some also question the greenness of CFLs, which contain mercury and require proper recycling facilities. However, as coal-fired stations emit mercury, incandescent light bulbs indirectly emit more mercury by using up larger amounts of electricity, experts noticed.

The economic and environmental argument against incandescent lights is nevertheless convincing as they convert only around 5% of the energy they use to light, wasting the rest as heat. Fluorescent lights use up to 75% less energy than incandescent lamps, while efficient halogens that match the light quality of conventional bulbs save somewhere between 25-50% of energy.

On 17 February MEPs backed European Commission proposals to extend the scope of the Eco-design Directive and the Ecolabel, but rejected proposals to include food products in the plans.

The European Parliament's environment committee voted on a report to cover all products with an impact on energy use, such as windows, insulation materials and water-using devices, in the EU's Eco-design Directive (EurActiv 24/10/08). Currently, only devices that directly use energy are part of the scheme.

MEPs, however, rejected a proposal from the rapporteur, Romanian MEP Magor Imre Csibi (ALDE), to go as far as including all products except means of transport. This would have effectively mandated the Commission to set minimum energy requirements for food and clothes, for example.

The committee consequently requested the Commission to come up with a proposal by 2012, extending the scope only to "non-energy-related products" with "significant potential for reducing their environmental impacts throughout their whole life-cycle".

Backing on traditional light bulb ban

At the same time, MEPs also voted on whether to block the Commission's implementing measure to phase out incandescent and inefficient halogen light bulbs by 2012. The EU executive proposed the measure under the Eco-design Directive in December 2008 (EurActiv 09/12/08).

German MEPs Holger Krahmer (ALDE) and Anja Weisgerber (EPP-ED) had drafted a resolution arguing that the regulatory committee's procedure, which excludes the Parliament from decision-making, was not justified for the banning of a product like light bulbs. An overwhelming majority of MEPs nevertheless voted against it, effectively endorsing the Commission's proposal.

Energy Saving Day (E-Day) 2009 : Isles of Scilly

2009-08-30T14:27:00.000-07:00

E-Day 2009 : Isles of Scilly (Tues 6 Oct, 2009)

Energy Saving Day (E-Day) 2009 will be staged on the Isles of Scilly, approximately 30 miles out to sea from the tip of Land's End, on Tuesday 6th October, 2009.

This island community achieved the biggest reduction in electricity demand measured anywhere in the UK during last year's E-Day (http://www.e-day.org.uk).

With the help of the local school, radio station, council, wildlife trust, transition town group and many others, E-Day 2009 aims to build on the success of last year's grassroots effort.

Isles of Scilly Earth Summit (Sat 3 - Sun 4 Oct, 2009)

During the build up to E-Day, the Isles of Scilly Earth Summit will be staged in the Town Hall of the Isles of Scilly's main island, St Mary's, between Saturday 3 October and Sunday 4 October.

At this event, international, UK and local islanders will describe how their islands are already feeling the impacts of climate change, as well as their hopes and fears for the future.

World class speakers have been confirmed from Papua New Guinea, Samoa, The Galapagos, Madagascar and others have been invited to speak about a variety of other fascinating, yet overlooked, islands.

Educational and Creative Resources (Online)

A wide range of educational and creative activities are being specially developed for this year's E-Day and should be of particular use to schools and families.

Please join the Twitter feed (see below) if you would like to follow E-Day's progress, to support E-Day in any way or to join in nearer the time.

The new E-Day website (http://www.e-day.org.uk) will be launched in early September 2009.

The new E-Day website will be launched in approximately one week's time...

See Jon Plowman's (the former Head of BBC Comedy) Review of Energy Saving Displays for E-Day here:

Part 1 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u8MiIeIZhU

Part 2 : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_10fai33rlY

Many thanks

Matt

http://www.twitter.com/energysavingday

http://www.youtube.com/energysavingday

Ceravision : Using microwaves to produce light

2009-08-12T10:41:00.000-07:00

BAN THE BULB : WORLD EXCLUSIVE!

Earlier this week Ban The Bulb visited an innovation centre at Bletchley Park to meet the team behind a company called Ceravision that has developed a revolutionary lighting technology, which could replace traditional incandescents light bulbs, halogens, fluorescents, high intensity discharge lamps and LEDs over the years ahead.

Their ingenious electrodeless, plasma lamp technology uses carefully contained and focused microwaves to heat special blends of gas in a way that efficiently produces a full spectrum of bright and controllable light (equivalent to 70W - 5000 W incandescents) without producing excess heat or using mercury.

Ceravision's technology consists of the following components:

a magnetron which emits microwave energy,

a transparent quartz resonator which concentrates the microwave energy in a small volume,

a plasma space (molded within the one-piece resonator) which contains a mixture of gas and metal halides.

an antenna which delivers the microwave energy into the resonator, causing an electric field to ionise the gas plasma, which vaporises and combines with the metal halides to produce light.

In the past, people have tried using microwaves to heat gases in large glass bulbs. However, this technology is different, and represents a major step forward, because it uses a solid block, known as resonator, to shorten the wavelengths of the radio frequencies and heat gases within a far smaller volume.

Initially, Ceravision used opaque discs of ceramic to focus microwaves on a small glass bulb containing gas embedded within the ceramic disc. This approach succeeded in providing a bright point source of light, but the opaque block of ceramic prevented most of the light produced by the glass bulb, embedded within the resonator, from being emitted.

Ceravision have therefore changed their original design by patenting the use of a transparent quartz resonator, which allows more of the light produced by the glass bulb to be emitted.

Fortunately, the microwaves needed to make this device work are safely trapped within the resonator by a simple metal mesh, which acts as a Faraday Cage.

As a result of this well understood containment process, the microwaves are radiated into the bulb via the antenna, which lies next to the glass bulb at the centre of the resonator, and can be used to create an illuminating gas plasma inside the glass bulb.

Using this technology it is already possible to replace High Intensity Discharge (HID) lamps and new small source lamps (such as car headlights and projector lamps), UV lamps and domestic lamps are under development - with new designs that are 2+ x more energy efficient, 2x - 25x longer lived and affordable.

Ceravision's electrodeless microwave driven lamp system is extremely exciting because it offers better colour rendering and dimming than both compact flourescent lamps and high intensity discharge lamps, and has fewer problems with excess heat production than incandescents and LEDs.

It simply remains to be seen how well the energy performance and purchase price of domestic versions of Ceravision's technology will compare to the competing technologies, but it is definitely a very positive development that the EU's ban of traditional incandescents has allowed radically new lighting technologies, such as this, to come to market.

Microwave energy at a frequency of 2.4 GHz is focused into a small transparent glass ampoule (called a Burner) containing a noble gas at low pressure and microgramme quantities of selected metal halide salts. The microwave energy focused into the waveguide containing the burner forms an electric field ionizing the noble gas molecules to rapidly form a gas plasma within the glass ampoule, the plasma begins to vaporize the metal halide salts present. The plasma and metal halide salts combine to emit light, this technique provides the ability to produce a broad spectral emission using simple chemical compounds. This molecular excitation is a unique feature of the technology and allows Ceravision to deliver the world's first mercury-free High Intensity Discharge lamp that can deliver white light of exceptional purity (a Colour Rendering Index (CRI) measurement of 97 being achievable), and which also meets all current and projected regulations for control of radio frequency emission from any part of the system.

The burner is made of low hydroxyl quartz glass and contains no metal wires or metal electrodes. This allows the light formation from the plasma process to continue without contamination of the burner contents by metal wires or electrodes modifying the internal chemistry. This simplicity of construction maintains an unprecedented purity of materials within the burner during its continuing operation and allows the lighting platform to offer designers excellent colour constancy and lumen maintenance over an extended operating lifetime.

The Guardian : Article on A-G Energy Labels

2009-03-02T16:49:00.000-08:00

This article by Ban The Bulb's founder Dr Matt Prescott was published in The Guardian on Friday 27 February 2009.

Imagine living in a world where every single in the top 40 made it to number one and every child was awarded straight As in their exams?

Although superficially attractive, it's pretty obvious that making everyone a winner would discourage hard work and stifle competition. It would also make it more difficult for music fans to find the best songs and for employers to recruit the best staff, producing many losers.

Sadly, in the world of household products and their multi-coloured A-G energy labels you do not need to imagine almost every refrigerator, freezer, washing machine, tumble drier and dishwasher being given an A-rating for its energy performance. This is the reality. Roughly 95% of dishwashers and 98% of washing machines.

The existing A-G scale for energy labels was set up 12 years ago and designed to include products developed over 30 years ago.

Today, an A-rated fridge currently uses 100 kWh/y of electricity per 100 litres of volume. This sounds good when you know that a fridge made in 1980 would have used 386 kWh/y to chill the same volume, but much less impressive when you know the best designs are now capable of using three times less electricity than an A-rated fridge.

Rather than recalibrate the A-G scale at regular intervals, every improvement in technology has been accommodated, on an ad hoc basis, by the addition of A+ and A++ categories to the top of the scale.

And because it is not unusual for 90% of a product's lifetime costs to be associated with running costs, rather than the purchase price, allowing mediocre products to sound better than is really merited invisibly costs Europe's 500 million consumers many billions of pounds in higher energy bills each year.

Depressingly, lobbying by the manufacturers seems likely to succeed in replacing the temporary A+ and A++ system with even more ambiguous A1, A2 and A3 categories above A. This insidious and confusing grade inflation appeals to manufacturers, as it allows even fourth division products to be called A-rated, rather than D-rated.

Now that there are so few products in the B, C, D, E, F and G categories, my preferred solution would be to recalibrate the clear and simple A-G scale based on the best and worst products on sale right now.

Thailand has recently rescaled its A-G categories for fridges and air conditioners and I feel that this approach makes a lot more sense than allowing manufacturers to continue comparing today's products with those they were making 10-30 years ago.

I would also like to see no more than 10%–20% of the products in each class of goods being A-rated and the best commercial products being used to define the new A-rating.

A tough A-rating standard would also mean that the remaining 80%–90% of products had to work for their market share and that every manufacturer had an incentive to adopt the most energy efficient technologies.

The trend for massive plasma screen TVs throws up another important issue.

Plasma screens use 2–3 times more energy than the traditional televisions they have replaced, yet are still being given A-ratings.

Sure, they use less energy per unit area, but this overlooks the crucial fact that their sheer size is pushing up each device's total energy use.

Significantly, a recent report by McKinsey has highlighted energy efficiency as the single most cost-effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, yet we continue to find endless excuses for doing the very opposite or nothing.

A small think tank called Europe, Planet Earth has been trying to propose sensible legislative reform in Brussels, before some important votes take place in March, but they need far more support from the big consumer organisations and environmental groups if they are to be heard in the corridors of power.

If we cannot make energy labels simple and effective without tying ourselves up in knots, how are we going to do all of the more complicated and expensive things we love to talk about?

Just as Eurovision contestants are not entitled to chart success, the manufacturers of our household products are not entitled to have their products given top marks.

We need to stop asking manufacturers what they want to do and to start telling them what we want achieved.

Dr Matt Prescott is director of Ban the Bulb

EU-wide light bulb ban passed : 44 votes v 14 votes

2009-02-17T06:05:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb is pleased to be able to inform you that the European Union's Environment Committee has officially voted (with 44 votes for and 14 votes against) to phase out domestic incandescent light bulbs.

This officially means that, across the EU's 27 member nations, 100W light bulbs will now be phased out as of September 2009.

In December 2008, The European Commission's Regulatory Committee voted to recommend a ban, but this latest vote, by the EU's Environment Committee consisting of MEPs, means that the ban will definitely become law.

As far as Ban The Bulb knows, this is the first law to phase out domestic incandescent light bulbs to be passed anywhere in the world...

The Ban The Bulb campaign was set up 4 years ago, and spent a long time campaigning on this issue alone, so is obviously delighted to see this turn of events.

Ban The Bulb would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the significant help that it, and the goal of a highly energy efficient Europe, have recently received from Germana Canzi, Edouard Toulouse and Stephan Scheuer; who have all played an important part in ensuring that during the EU's consultation process was more thorough and transparent than might otherwise have been the case.

Update : EurActive.Com : Parliament paves way for wider eco-design product list

Eco-St : Light Bulb Library : Review

2009-01-23T06:48:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb has borrowed a low energy "light bulb library" from Matt Lane of Eco-St and been trying out some of the 40 different designs of high-quality energy saving light bulb that have been gathered together for this loanable library.

Visually impaired

The most suitable energy saving light bulb, for those that are visually impaired, has proven to be the 25W Pro-Lite Daylite.

This lamp quickly produces a very bright light which covers a full "daylight" spectrum and is equivalent to a 125W incandescent light bulb.

It costs about £9 to buy, lasts for 8000 hours (approx. 8 years) and uses 6 times less electricity to produce the same amount of light as the traditional alternative.

It has been calculated that this energy saving lamp uses £12 less electricity each year or £96 over its lifetime.

100W equivalent : 20W Soft tone

Many people find the light produced by the stick and spiral designs of energy saving light bulb too harsh.

As a result, several of the manufacturers have started to encapsulate the familiar energy saving spirals or sticks inside glass globes which are tinted to produce a warmer or softer tone of light.

Ban The Bulb would recommend that you used these encapsulated designs in living space and the stick designs for areas such as stairs and hallways where the tone of light matters less.

The Philips 20W Softone energy saving light bulb produces a good brightness within 1-2 seconds and full brightness within about a minute.

It costs £4.99 to buy one of these lamps and saves roughly £10 per year on electricity bills. With an 8000 hour (approx 8 year) lifetime this amounts to an £80 saving on bills.

75W equivalent : 16W Softone

The Philips 16W Softone is an encapsulated design of energy saving light bulb, which produces a mellow light and reaches a good brightness within 3 seconds and full brightness within 30 seconds - 1 minute.

It costs £4.99 and saves roughly £9 per year (£72 over life time) on electricity bills when compared to a 75W incandescent equivalent.

General Advice

Use the higher wattages of energy saving bulb

In general, BTB recommends that you avoid the lower wattages of energy saving light bulb as there do seem to be issues with the conversion of watts (the unit of electricity) and lumens (the unit of light) and it seems best to err on the side of caution; by buying a slightly higher wattage of energy saver that you might expect.

You can also check the lumen levels on the box and this is a good idea if you have time.

You get what you pay for

Millions of energy saving light bulbs have been given away free but these tend to be relatively poorly made and to be produced by little known brands or obscure Chinese companies.

BTB therefore recommends that you buy energy savers that have been produced by well-known brands. Even if the cost a bit more to purchase, they will almost certainly do a better job and help you to avoid disappointment.

As with other household goods, you tend to get what you pay for, and both the quality of light and lifetimes seem to be more satisfactory from the bigger brands.

All energy saving light bulbs are not equal

Although I haven't had time to undertake a thorough review of all of the light bulbs in the library, you might like to know that:

Osram / GE seem to make some of the best compact "stick" designs,

Pro-Lite seen to make the brightest energy savers with the widest light spectrum,

Philips seem to make the best soft tone and "encapsulated" globe designs and,

Pro-Lite and Megaman seem to make the best candle shaped compacts.

BTB hasn't found any dimmable CFLs that it is happy to endorse and would recommend that you waited for LEDs, such as those made by Sharp / EcoLED to get cheaper and more widely available.

Visit a specialist lighting shop + try before you buy

Please have a look at the numerous light bulb suppliers in the links on the left if you want to compare prices and look at a wider range of light bulbs.

It is also a good idea to visit specialist lighting shops such as Ryness and Eco-St, so that you can ask them to demonstrate different light bulbs before you buy.

Thanks to Matt Lane for allowing me borrow his excellent light bulb library.

A video comparison on LEDs, CFLs + incandescents

2009-01-13T04:02:00.000-08:00

Hank Green, The Editor of EcoGeek, has produced a useful video which shows off some of the latest domestic LEDs and compares them with traditional incandescents.

In Ban The Bulb's opinion LEDs are definitely an important part of the future and should provide the new minimum energy performance standard for 100W and 60W light bulbs within 3-5 years.

Last week, Ban The Bulb demonstrated the comparable performance of the 4W EcoLED to a 40W domestic incandescent on BBC Breakfast TV.

Thanks to Greenpeace UK for finding Hank's demonstration.

Useful links:

4W EcoLED

8W EcoLED : with cooling metal plates

7W Earth LED : ZetaLux : with cooling metal plates

13 W Earth LED : EvoLux : with cooling fan!

Last week's media interest in light bulbs, triggered by the Daily Mail (see: a, b, c, d, e, f, g) has generated some interesting correspondence from a lighting company that uses ceramics (excited by radio frequencies) to produce light, which should be able to beat the energy performance and illumination of domestic LEDs within 2 years!

I'll let you know more once I've visited their factory at the end of the month.

Phase out of 100W light bulbs begins in the UK

2009-01-02T03:05:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, 1 Jan 2009, a voluntary agreement between the UK government and the country's retailers came into force, which will see 100W (<60W) domestic incandescent light bulbs being phased out by many of the UK's biggest shops, as suppliers cease to replace their stock of inefficient light bulbs.

Once the existing stock has been used up incandescent light bulbs will be replaced by halogen lamps (which use 25% less electricity) and compact fluorescent lamps (which use 65-80% less electricity to produce an equivalent amount of light).

Although the making of this agreement was little noticed it has already resulted in 150W (<100W) light bulbs being phased out and will be extended to include 60W (<40W) light bulbs next year...

In addition, a legally binding EU-wide ban on 100W light bulbs will also come into force in September 2009 and a similar ban is due to come into force in Australia in Nov 2009 (although BTB has been unable to find any of the relevant legislation from Australia online yet).

In a recent review of the performance of compact fluorescent lamps, which the Ban The Bulb campaign conducted for The Guardian newspaper, Tesco (81p), GE (£4 each) and Philips (£4 each) were found to offer the best energy saving alternatives to 100W incandescents.

Following recent improvements in LEDs, Ban The Bulb campaign believes that before long incandescents, halogen lamps and CFLs will all be replaced by domestic LEDs, which offer 90% energy savings and 25x -50x longer lifetimes are the future.

This campaign is certainly very pleased with the performance of the domestic table lamp 4W LED substitute for 40W incandescents made by ECOLED.

Apart from offering massive energy savings and much longer lifetimes, LEDs offer instant full brightness, dimmability and zero mercury content.

LEDs are still rather expensive to buy, so Ban The Bulb would like to see governments taking rapid and firm measures to ensure that this functional and available technology is brought to the mass market as quickly as possible, so that it can benefit from the economies of scale.

Making full use of LEDs would help consumers to save money on their energy bills, help energy companies to build fewer power stations and enable the environment to benefit from significantly fewer lighting associated carbon emissions than is currently the case (if the whole of the EU used CFLs instead of incandescents this would save 23 - 53 Million tonnes of CO2 per annum across Europe or put another way 10 power station's worth of electricity).

Anyway, the Ban The Bulb campaign is glad with the progress that has been made since it was set up in Feb 2005, and invited to write an article for BBC News Online in Feb 2006, so let's see whether LEDs can be made the new target within 2009!

NZ fails to Ban The Bulb

2008-12-20T05:17:00.000-08:00

Over the last few years, the phasing out and banning of domestic incandescent light bulbs has been the recipient of more that it's fair share of gesture politics and the latest news from New Zealand shows the danger of politicians not having the courage of their convictions and setting deadlines for action which exceed their tenure in power.

In New Zealand, the new energy and resources minister, Gerry Brownlee, has said that his government will not be honouring the pledge of the previous Labour government and phasing out the use of wasteful incandescent light bulbs.

Unfortunately, while arguing in favour of "consumer choice" Gerry Brownlee does not explain how every consumer is supposed to become sufficiently informed about the cost of wasting energy on the national economy, national security and global carbon emissions or how every individual can be expected to to accurately assess all of the costs and benefits to New Zealand of using more efficient technologies... or not.

In Ban The Bulb's opinion this government's populist defence of "consumer choice" really amounts to a massive failure to defend the national economy and the global environment.

Incandescent light bulbs have been reprieved.

Energy and Resources Minister Gerry Brownlee told Parliament yesterday he would not be going ahead with the previous Labour-led Government's plan to phase them out.

He said he was "lifting the ban" on traditional light bulbs, but Labour MPs said there had never been a ban and the intention had been to gradually replace them with new energy-efficient bulbs.

Mr Brownlee said the Government had "real concerns about telling people they have to move to energy-efficient light bulbs by decree.

"We are committed to energy efficiency in the home, and efficient lighting has an important role to play in helping us reduce the amount of energy we use.

"But this Government believes it is a matter of consumer choice."

Mr Brownlee said people needed good, credible information about different lighting options. Then they could decide for themselves what they wanted.

"Lifting the previous Government's ban on incandescent light bulbs simply means we are allowing their continued sale and I am confident the consumer trend to energy-efficient bulbs will continue," he said.

National used the light bulb issue during the election campaign as an example of Labour's "nanny state" mentality.

Free bulbs switch on Ethiopians

2008-12-18T13:44:00.000-08:00

Many developing countries cannot afford to build new power stations and Ethiopia has just copied the free hand out of energy saving light bulbs originally done in countries such as Cuba (May 06) and Venezuela (Nov 06).

Ethopians are rushing to get their hands on free energy saving light bulbs which are being handed out by a utility to stop power cuts.

Four million low-energy light bulbs are being given away in exchange for old-style incandescent ones by the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation. Nearly all Ethiopia's electricity comes from hydro-power. But without rain the dams cannot fill and the lights go out.

The new bulbs will cut peoples' power bills and are supposed to last longer. The BBC's Elizabeth Blunt says the light bulb swap was in full swing when she visited the utility's offices in the capital Addis Ababa. But our correspondent says the snag is that when the new bulbs wear out, customers will find they cost about six times as much as the old ones to replace.

Disappointingly weak EU light bulb ban

2008-12-08T11:44:00.000-08:00

Although it is good news that the EU will be banning the sale of 100W incandescent light bulbs by September 2009, it is very disappointing that the new minimum energy performance standard for domestic light bulbs has been set at a very low level and will also take many years to achieve the levels of energy saving that are already possible with compact fluorescent lamps (65-80%)and LEDs (90%).

Under the terms that have been agreed today, it seems that the EU's light bulb manufacturers will be given until 2016 to phase out incandescent light bulbs using halogens elements, which offer only a 25% improvement on the energy performance of traditional light bulbs.

Ban The Bulb believes that the EU's governments should significantly improve on this deal and that far more should be done to bring LEDs into cheap and widespread use within 5 years.

EU negotiations... the latest news

2008-12-08T06:35:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb has spoken to it's contact in Brussels and found out that the EU's Energy Commissioner, Andris Pielbalgs, should be holding a press conference at about 5pm local time, in order to outline the improvements in the energy performance of light bulbs that have been agreed by the EU's 27 nations.

This decision is subject to a qualified majority vote and will be revised within 5 years, so it is critically important that a clear signal is sent to the lighting industry that it needs to do more to phase out both incandescent light bulbs and halogens, and to bring LEDs to market.

The three main issues at the EU negotiations appear to be:

1) The time allowed to phase out incandescents. At the moment incandescents look doomed, but as though some of them will be allowed on the market until 2012. This is a rather leisurely deadline, and one which could almost certainly be tightened.

2) Nordic nations (including Finland and Denmark) are concerned that the timing and level of ambition for the phase out non-clear (frosted) glass light bulbs is tougher than for clear glass light bulbs because frosted bulbs can already be perfectly replaced by highly efficiently compact fluorescent lamps.

Apparently, the majority of nordic lamps are frosted and this might mean that Finland and Denmark want longer to make changes. This could result in the postponement of non-clear incandescent lamps being phased out.

3) The final date for standard halogens to be phased out. Halogens only offer a 25% improvement on the energy performance of traditional incandescent designs, but are currently not scheduled to be phased out before 2016.

This could mean that typical household lamps will still only need to be 25% more efficient than today in 8 years time, rather than the 90% more efficient that would be possible if CFLs and LEDs formed the new energy performance standard.

In general, it sounds as though the lighting industry is happy with the European Commissions proposals and this suggests to Ban The Bulb that the politicians are not being nearly tough enough on the industry.

As things stand, the lighting industry could flood the market with cheap halogens and kill off other more efficient alternatives, such as LEDs, if it wanted to; simply because this suited the industry's existing manufacturing capacity and business plans.

The industry could also re-open the standards in 5 years and lobby to keep them soft, thereby postponing the uptake of LEDs yet again and keeping consumer's energy bills unnecessarily high well into the future.

Ban The Bulb feels it is extremely important that within 5 years the new energy performance standard for domestic lights is set by LEDs, which offer a 90% energy saving, rather than by halogens which offer only a 25% improvement in energy performance.

If the EU doesn't want to show leadership and caves in to industry lobbying, perhaps President-Elect Obama will be stronger and force this necessary change.

Otherwise all of the grandiose statements about wanting to cut carbon emissions and energy use by 20% by 2020 or 80% by 2050 are nothing more than hot air.

With thanks to Edouard Toulouse and Germana Canzi for their help in the preparation of this update.

GE stops incandescent development, LEDs the future

2008-12-08T04:28:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb's advocacy seems to have had a significant effect with GE announcing that they will end their development of incandescent light bulbs (in particular so-called "high efficiency incandescents") and will instead concentrate on LEDs.

This is a major breakthrough for the Ban The Bulb campaign.

Exactly what has gone on behind the scenes is pretty opaque, but there has been a large amount of manoeuvring by the lighting industry recently.

This article suggests that GE was the odd one out, but Ban The Bulb's memory is that Philips was the company that went it's own way and tried to frame the measures they wanted to see in Australia (announced by Malcolm Turnbull in Feb 2007).

There were definitely differences in the responses of the different manufacturers when this campaign published an article on the BBC News website in Feb 2006 and Australia later announced that it would be banning incandescent light bulbs by 2010.

I'm sure they'll all claim to have always wanted LEDs before too long...

EU light bulb ban imminent... but how ambitious?

2008-12-07T14:51:00.000-08:00

After years of talking about phasing out light bulbs we will finally get a chance to see how ambitious our politicians will be when it comes for taking concrete action.

Tomorrow in Brussels senior representatives of the EU's 27 nations will vote on measures which will result in 100W and 60W incandescent light bulbs being phased out across the EU between 2011 and 2013.

The lighting industry is advocating a new type of incandescent light bulb which will use 25% less electricity than today's incandescents by 2013.

The Ban The Bulb energy efficiency campaign feels that this level of ambition is totally inadequate, given that substitute compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) using 65-80% less electricity and light emitting diodes (LEDs) using 90% less electricity (to produce the same amount of light) are already available.

LEDs are definitely the technology we should be aiming for, within 5 years, as they offer instant brightness, dimmability and contain no mercury.

LED alternatives to 40W, 60W and 100W floor and table lamp incandescent lights bulbs are already on sale and simply need to be made cheaper and more readily available as quickly as possible.

High quality CFLs used to cost approximately £5 when this campaign was set up in 2005, but Tesco now sells excellent designs of CFL for as little as 81p. The same economies of scale need to be applied to LEDs without delay and excuses.

If we cannot be ambitious with light bulbs how on earth are we going to make much more difficult items such as our cars and homes significantly more energy efficient.

President-Elect Obama has recent said that he is going to be tough on the US auto industry and demand improved energy efficiency.

The EU needs to be similarly tough on the world's existing light bulb manufacturers, which have patents, factories, profits and shareholders to protect and do not need to pay the electricity bills of the EU's 500 million consumers or to finance the 10 extra power stations needed to keep the EU's lights on if their preferred technology is used to define the energy performance standards for domestic lighting.

Please see the following documents for more detail:

Dr Matt Prescott's recent articles for BBC News Online

No time to dim efficiency ambitions (Nov 2008)

Shedding light on call to ban bulb (Apr 2006)

Light bulbs not such a good idea (Feb 2006)

Technical references:

Discussion paper on domestic lighting products Ecodesign for CF (Oct 08)

Working document on draft regulation on non-directional household lamps (Oct 08)

Position from Ban The Bulb (Oct 08) - sent to DEFRA, BERR, DECC, MTP and the EU's Energy Commissioner

Position from ECOS, EEB, ZMWG, CAN-Europe, INFORSE-Europe, Greenpeace and WWF (Mar 08)

Make the Switch : European Lamp Companies Federation (Nov 07)

Important political milestones for BTB campaign...

Energy efficiency high on Obama stimulus plan (Dec 08)

Brown and Cameron battle over green air travel and phasing out old-style light bulbs (Mar 07) - Gordon Brown

EU switches off our old lightbulbs (Mar 07) - Angela Merkel

Australia pulls plug on old bulbs (Feb 2007) - Malcolm Turnbull

How many legislators does it take to change a lightbulb? (Jan 2007) - Lloyd Levine

UK asks the EU to consider an EU-wide light bulb ban (July 2006) - Tony Blair

Campaign archive: 2005 - present

With thanks to Germana Canzi and Edouard Toulouse

LED replacements for long fluorescent tubes

2008-11-18T08:24:00.000-08:00

A company called Illume is making LED tubes which are suitable as replacements for the long fluorescent tubes commonly used in shops and industrial locations.

They come in a range of lengths and brightnesses [including 600mm (6 watts), 1200mm (12 watts), 1200mm (15 watts) and 1200mm (18 watts)], cost from £32 - £79 and can produce either "cold white" or "warm white" light.

Traditional fluorescent tubes use approximately 45-70 watts of electricity and last around 20,000 hours, whilst the latest designs of LED tube are estimated to have lifetimes of 50,000 hours and use between 5-18 watts. The financial savings associated with using these lights therefore come from reducing electricity use by more than half and offering more than double the expected lifetime of an equivalent fluorescent tube.

Please see the Digital Display Systems website to find out more.

These LEDs allow businesses to qualify for the UK government's Enhanced Capital Allowance Scheme, which enables a business to claim 100% first-year capital allowances on qualifying plant and machinery (energy saving).

Businesses can write off the whole of the capital cost of their investment in these technologies against their taxable profits of the period during which they make the investment.

No time to dim efficiency ambitions

2008-11-12T01:58:00.000-08:00

BBC News Online : "Green Room" article, 11 Nov 2008

Leaders of EU nations will vote in December on measures to phase out the use of traditional incandescent light bulbs, explains Matt Prescott. But, in this week's Green Room, he says lobbying by the lighting industry could result in the 27-nation bloc dimming its ambitions on energy efficiency.

Allowing the lighting industry to decide how much they should improve the energy performance of their products is extremely unwise, bordering on scandalous
When I first set up the Ban The Bulb energy efficiency campaign and proposed the phased banning of traditional incandescent light bulbs, even my friends thought I was crazy.

Now, almost four years later, 30 countries have announced plans to phase out the use of these old fashioned appliances; China has announced plans to phase out the production of most of the world's incandescent light bulbs, and the major light bulb manufacturers have accepted that change is inevitable.

However, behind the scenes, the details associated with these public pronouncements remain to be converted into legally binding action, and a lot hinges on the votes that European governments will cast in Brussels on 8 December.

The lighting industry has said that it wants to be allowed to sell improved incandescent light bulbs, which use 25% less electricity than their traditional equivalents and would cut Europe's annual electricity use by the equivalent of two-and-a-half large power stations.

In my view, allowing the lighting industry to decide how much they should improve the energy performance of their products is extremely unwise, bordering on scandalous. It is akin to asking the world's banks to regulate themselves.

Manufacturers have patents, factories, markets and profits to protect and cannot be expected to decide, in an impartial fashion, what is technologically feasible or economically justifiable for the EU's 27 member countries and 500 million citizens.

It is therefore essential that our leaders protect the interests of society and the environment by deciding where they want us to be in five years time and what is possible, rather than settling for what suits the short-term, narrow interests of big business.

Shining examples

Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) already offer energy savings of between 65% and 80%, and the best designs, in my opinion, need to form the basis for any minimum energy performance standard within the next three to five years for the majority of domestic light bulbs sold in the EU.

CFLs could save the EU up to 10 power stations' worth of electricity

Using the best designs of CFLs available today would allow the EU to cut its annual electricity use by an amount equivalent to 10 large power stations.

By contrast, allowing the use of improved incandescent light bulbs being promoted by the manufacturers would result in the Europe's carbon dioxide emissions being up to 53 million tonnes higher each year than if the CFL benchmark was adopted.

Based on the recent price for carbon emissions, this outcome would impose an unnecessary annual emissions cost of one billion euros (£800m) on the continent's electricity bills.

Using wasteful light bulbs also requires countries to pay for large coal imports and to have extra power stations available to provide electricity during periods of peak electricity demand.

At the household level, energy saving light bulbs can help to slash electricity bills. It now costs about one euro (£0.80) to buy a good quality CFL in the UK.

On average, this can be expected to use 15 euros (£12) less electricity each year for its lifetime of six or more years.

Feeling the heat

During its manufacture, each CFL does require about four times as much energy as a single incandescent lamp.

However, it then lasts six times longer and uses 65% - 80% less electricity throughout its 6,000-hour lifetime.

As a result, the manufacturing, replacement, running and carbon costs accumulated over the lifetime of a single CFL are all significantly lower than those associated with using many shorter-lived incandescent light bulbs.

On the down side, each CFL contains about 4-6mg of mercury. However, this mercury content can be safely and fully recycled, and there is no need for energy saving lamps to pose a risk to health or the environment.

By comparison, burning the extra coal needed to keep an incandescent light bulb working releases roughly three times more mercury directly into the atmosphere and poses a genuine risk wherever it ends up.

My preferred solution would be for the mercury content of CFLs to be reduced to 1-2mg and for every EU nation to introduce robust methods for recycling all of the hazardous substances found in homes.

Torch bearing

I also feel that EU governments should introduce minimum performance standards for the illumination produced by CFLs and ensure that only the best designs, which produce a warm, bright light within five seconds and emit no ultraviolet light, are allowed on the market.

I hope that our politicians will find the courage to do everything they can to bring into cheap and widespread use the high end of the energy efficient products

For the small proportion of household lamps that need to be used with dimmers, I would like to see light emitting diodes (LEDs) being brought into widespread and affordable use within five years.

LEDs offer energy savings of 90% and produce an instant bright illumination, contain no mercury and can be fully dimmed.

They also last for up to 50,000 hours, so do not need to be replaced for many, many years. Perhaps this is why there is reluctance among manufacturers to sell them.

I have not endorsed LEDs before, but they are now available as table and floor lamp substitutes for 40W, 60W and 100W incandescent bulbs, and I firmly believe that national governments should do everything in their power to create a massive market for LEDs.

Overall, I am delighted that EU leaders have decided to phase out traditional incandescent light bulbs.

However, I hope that our politicians will find the courage to do everything they can to bring into use the high end of the energy efficient products that are already available.

I am confident that much greater energy efficiency offers the most cost effective way to bring about a positive step change in our energy bills, carbon emissions and energy security.

Dr Matt Prescott is an environmental consultant and director of banthebulb.org, an online campaign encouraging greater energy efficiency, and founding co-ordinator of Energy Saving Day

The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website

European Commission : Position from Ban The Bulb

2008-11-09T04:09:00.000-08:00

Summary

Ban The Bulb welcomes the efforts of the European Commission to improve the energy efficiency of the domestic lighting sector and believes that the implementation of ambitious energy efficiency standards will allow the EU to lead the world in efforts to tackle climate change.

Ban The Bulb wishes to propose the following measures, which have been designed to encourage the rapid refinement and uptake of the most energy efficient light bulb designs currently available:

Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs) already offer energy savings of 65% - 80% and the best designs of CFL should form the basis for any minimum energy performance standard within the next 3-5 years for the majority of domestic light bulbs sold in the EU27.

LEDs already offer energy savings of 90%, instant bright light of a good quality and dimmability. The minimum energy performance standard for all domestic light bulbs should match and/or exceed LEDs within 5 years.

Exemptions to these minimum energy performance standards should only be made when an overwhelmingly strong technical, medical, practical or financial case has been made in an open, transparent and evidence-based fashion.

An ambitious energy performance standards for domestic lighting could save 86TWh of electricity per annum by 2020 whilst the least ambitious standards, supported by the lighting industry, equates to only 22TWh of electricity being saved by 2020.

If all of the excess electricity needed to power less efficient light bulbs were produced using coal-fired powered stations this would mean the annual release of an additional 53 million tonnes in CO2 emissions (830,000 tonnes CO2 per TWh x 64TWh).

Based on the present price of carbon dioxide per tonne (€20) on the EUETS this would equate to an annual opportunity cost of approximately €1 billion.

1. Incandescent light bulbs

Domestic incandescent light bulbs have a number of significant disadvantages.

These include:

(i) Very short lifetimes (1000 hours)
(ii) High replacement rates (6 – 15 units over the lifetime of a single CFL)
(iii) High embedded energy and resource costs over the lifetime of a single CFL
(iv) Domestic running costs 60% higher than CFLs (approx €15 each per annum)
(v) Higher carbon emissions via power stations
(vi) Mercury emissions, into the atmosphere, via coal power stations (3x higher)
(vii) An added burden to the electricity system during periods of peak demand
(viii) Requirement for greater installed capacity across the EU
(ix) Hot incandescent light bulbs can cause homes to catch fire

The lighting manufacturers have a vested interest in protecting their existing technologies, factories, market shares and profits at the expense of the energy bills of EU voters, EU-wide energy security and global impacts on the environment.

2. Energy performance criteria

Ban The Bulb would like to see energy performance standards determined in an open and transparent fashion. In particular, clarity is required in the following areas:

(i) The levels of energy performance that are to be achieved over x, y and z years
(ii) The domestic lighting technologies that will be phased out first (e.g. 60W and 100W screw and bayonet) and over time
(iii) The timescales required for supplies to meet demand for new products
(iv) The medical exemptions required for those that suffer from light sensitivity conditions such as lupus and how these exemptions should be implemented (e.g. via retailers or doctors).
(v) The specialist exemptions required and how these should be implemented (e.g. photographic or cooker lights)
(vi) The legislative and tax measures required to ensure that LEDs rapidly come down in price and are able to offer consumers 90%+ energy savings.

The manufacturers have investments to protect and should not be relied upon to provide objective assessments on the types of innovation and levels of supplies that can be achieved if markets for products offering high levels of energy performance were created.

3. User-orientated performance standards

Different makes and designs of CFL vary considerably in their light quality, energy performance, mercury content, UV radiation, build quality, compactness and lifetime.

It is important that the EU creates minimum standards and enforcement mechanisms for CFLs designed to ensure that all CFLs on sale in the EU meet the expectations of the end user.

The best CFL designs already offer a high level of energy performance and user experience, but it can be difficult for consumers to discriminate between good and bad CFLs. The dumping of poor quality CFLs will need to be pro-actively blocked by the usual trade and enforcement mechanisms. Consumer choice should be assisted by the use of clear and helpful energy labels, which may need to be recalibrated upwards.

4. Rationale for a high level of energy efficiency

Climate change

According to the available science, early and significant carbon emissions offer the best means of limit the negative social and environmental impacts of climate change and the economic costs associated with adaptation.

Energy security

With the EU’s supplies of oil and natural gas running out faster than expected and increased energy imports coming from Russia and the Middle East it makes sense to
reduce energy demand and to increase energy security and energy independence through the installation of efficient energy using products.

Economic efficiency and competitiveness

If the EU’s domestic light bulbs were more energy efficient this would make the European economy more efficient and competitive.

If it proves impossible to introduce bold energy performance standards for domestic light bulbs it is unlikely that other countries and technologies will achieve significant improvements in energy efficiency.

China

Most light bulbs are now produced in China and it unlikely that light bulb production will return to the EU.

China has announced plans to phase out the manufacture of incandescent light bulbs and can be expected to continue climbing up the technological and value chains.

Peak electricity demand

Lights tend to be on during periods of peak electricity demand and to play a major part in determining the total amount of installed capacity of electricity generators that all EU nations require. As a result, domestic lights tend to use some of the most expensive electricity produced on a daily basis.

Fuel poverty

With 500 million people in the EU facing increased energy bills, removing wasteful energy use through the implementation of ambitious energy performance standards for domestic light bulbs would help to reduce fuel poverty and to accelerate the recovery from the present economic recession.

5. Overview of Ban The Bulb proposals

CFL and LED based minimum standards

CFLs already offer 65% - 80% energy savings whilst dimmable LEDs already offer 90% energy savings for table and floor lamps when compared to equivalent domestic incandescent light bulbs.

Non-dimmable designs (90% of the market) : next 3-5 years

CFLs should represent the minimum energy performance standard for the majority of domestic lights, which do not need to be dimmed within 3-5 years.

Dimmable light bulbs (10% of the market) : next 3-5 years

LEDs should represent the minimum energy performance standard for all dimmable domestic light bulbs within 5 years.

The niche requirement for light bulbs to be dimmed should not be allowed to hold back energy performance across the entire domestic lighting sector and equivalent dimmable technologies should have no purchase price advantage over CFLs.

If dimmable lights are to be permitted to make up a minor proportion of the lighting market they should offer the best energy performance possible today (e.g. a 45% saving relative to incandescents).

Halogen lamps with an infra-red coating (Class B), which can be dimmed and offer 45% energy savings, should only be allowed where CFLs are inappropriate and should be replaced by dimmable LEDs within the next 5 years.

All domestic light bulbs (100% of the market) : within 5 years

LEDs should provide the minimum energy performance standard for all domestic lighting within 5 years.

Supporting legislation

The EU should consider using all of the means at its disposal to ensure that the diversity and volume of LEDs on the market is significantly increased and that purchase price of LED-based lamps is reduced significantly.

6. Light bulb designs

CFLs : minimum energy performance within 3-5 years

High-quality CFLs should represent the minimum energy performance standard for the majority of easily substituted domestic lighting.

EU standards for CFLs should ensure that all CFLs on sale in the EU offer a good quality of light, are well made, produce very low levels of UV radiation and offer long lifetimes (6000 hours+).

EU standards should favour encapsulated CFL designs and spiral or stick CFLs which are certified to emit very little or no UV in order to remove the need for medical exemptions.

Any domestic light bulb designs offering energy performance below that already available from CFLs should be eliminated within 5 years.

Halogen lamps with infra-red coating (B-class) offering a 45% energy saving, and are not protected by patents, so should be used where dimmers and timers are essential and CFLs are not appropriate.

Halogen lamps with infra-red coating (Class B) : limited use for 3-5 years

Halogen lamps with infra-red coating (Class B) offer a 45% energy saving compared to incandescents, and dimmability, but should not be adopted as the new minimum energy performance standard for the majority of the domestic lighting sector or invested in further by the major manufacturers.

The light bulbs contain technologies that are not protected by patents, so should be used for roles where dimming is essential and/or CFLs are not appropriate. This technology is available to all manufacturers, but should only be allowed until dimmable LEDs become more widely available within 5 years.

LEDs : minimum energy performance within 5 years

LEDs are already available which are suitable for decorative table and floor uses and provide fully dimmable, no mercury content, instant brightness alternatives to 40W, 60W and 100W incandescents. The development of LEDs needs to be accelerated.

EU efforts should be focused on joining up its legislative, tax and market powers in ways that to ensure that LEDs are made in large numbers and become much cheaper within the next 5 years.

5W LEDs are already available as table and floor lamp substitutes to 75W incandescents. These offer instant brightness, dimmability, no mercury content, 50,000 hour lifetimes (50 times longer than incandescents), solid state resistance to knocks and vibration, intense white light, 90% energy savings.

13W LEDs are already available as table and floor lamp substitutes to 100W incandescents. These offer instant brightness, dimmability, no mercury content, 50,000 hour lifetimes, solid state resistance to knocks and vibration, intense white light, 85% energy savings.

Halogen lamps filled with Xenon gas (Class C) : very limited use for 3-5 years

Halogen lamps filled with Xenon gas (Class C) are convenient for the light bulb manufacturers, but with only a 25% improvement in energy performance do not offer adequate energy savings to be a worthwhile substitute for CFLs or LEDs beyond 3-5 years.

It is unlikely that energy efficiency standards will be revisited on a regular basis so this technology should be leap-frogged.

Other technologies, which are already available, offer dimmability, similar light qualities and better energy performance and offer a better minimum standard.

7. Lifetime costs of inefficient technologies

The lifetime costs of energy using products wasting 65% - 80% of their energy should be calculated. At present, lighting represents 10% - 15% of household electricity use and these percentages of demand could be cut to 1% - 3%. This energy saving would save the EU billons of euros on an annual basis.

The positive effects of reduced electricity demand on energy security, energy bills and the carbon emission produced by the EU’s 500 million residents should also be calculated and taken into account when deciding the costs and benefits of applying ambitious energy efficiency targets to light bulbs.

8. National Dispensation : Italy

It has been argued that Italy will find it more difficult than other nations to change the types of light bulb it uses due to the dominant type of light fitting used in this country. If this is true, then Italy could be granted a temporary dispensation from the timetable used by the rest of the EU27.

Italy should be granted no more than 1-2 years extra to act and informed of the higher energy costs it will incur by deferring greater energy efficiency. These costs should also be made public. Every effort should also be made to explore how adaptors, modified light bulbs and installation grants could be used speed up uptake in countries such as Italy.

9. Mercury / Recycling

CFLs currently contain 4-6mg of mecury and this should be reduced to 2mg within 5 years.

Mercury is a hazardous substance and covered by the EU’s RoHS Directive. The costs of recycling CFLs are currently added to the purchase price and this can be counter productive in terms of encouraging greater energy efficiency.

The most effective recycling systems that enable consumers, retailers, local governments and national government to play their roles in improving the recycling of hazardous household substances should be found and used across the EU.

10. Global production capacity

China produces 3 billion CFLs per annum and should be required to improve the quality of imports to the EU and helped to shift production towards LEDs. The phasing in of new minimum standards as appropriate new designs become available should allow supplies to match demand over several years. The total replacement of domestic light will take over 10 years and allow manufacturers to diversify their lighting products and markets.

11. VAT reduced from 17.5% to 5%

Across the EU, VAT for energy saving light bulbs that match and/or exceed the energy performance of CFLs should be reduced from 17.5% to 5%.

12. Energy labels

At present, energy labels can be hidden, small and impossible for the non-expert to understand.

Energy labels should be made simpler to understand and more useful to consumers.

In particular, energy labels should highlight running costs, energy consumption, UV radiation levels and the mercury content associated with each make and design of light bulb.

Actual and/or relative running costs for each light bulb design, compared to a standard incandescent lamp, should be highlighted on packaging.

13. Fuel poverty

Light bulb manufacturers should be encouraged to invest research and development and helped to invest in significant manufacturing capacity for the most energy efficient light bulb. The EU should not subsidise any light bulbs designs less efficient than CFLs.

The economies of scale offer the best route to cheap LEDs and it is essential that high quality CFLs and cheap LEDs are brought to market as quickly as possible.

Efforts to distribute energy saving light bulbs for free should be considered but it would be more effective to remove wasteful designs from the market and to subsidise energy efficient designs in shops.

14. Building Regulations : Lumens per watt per m2

The way in which light bulbs vary and large number of halogen spotlights can be extremely profligate in their collective energy use, whilst being relatively efficient on an individual basis.

As a result, it may be necessary for the EU to update building regulations and require lights to be used in a way that offers a minimum number of lumens per watt per m2.

15. Delivering on the ambition of the EU’s 20/20/20 plan

It is important that the EU puts in place world leading energy efficiency legislation and retains a focus on reducing overall energy demand and carbon emissions by 20% by 2020 and shows that the EU is serious about making full use of the energy efficient technologies that are already available.

Other countries are highly likely to copy the energy efficiency measures put in place by the EU and a rare opportunity exists for the EU to help the 500 million people to save money on their energy bills and to show leadership to the world.

Position from Ban The Bulb

on the EC Working Document
on possible ecodesign requirements for general lighting equipment

In the context of Directive 2005/32/EC establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy using products.

HPA : Precautionary Advice for users of Unencapulated CFLs

2008-10-09T12:05:00.001-07:00

The UK's Health Protection Agency (HPA) has conducted research into the levels of ultraviolet light produced by compact fluorescent lamps and found that some energy saving compact fluorescent lights can emit ultraviolet radiation at levels that, under certain conditions of use, can result in exposures higher than guideline levels.

As a precautionary step the HPA has advised householders that unencapsulated CFLs (recognised by their thin spiral or angular tubes) should not be used within 1 foot (30cm) of the user for more than 1 hour.

Encapsulated CFLs and larger long tube "strip lighting" commonly used in offices, do not produce significant quantities of ultraviolet and can be used on ceilings without any special precautionary measures.

The Agency's Chief Executive Justin McCracken said, "This is precautionary advice and people should not be thinking of removing these energy saving light bulbs from their homes. We are advising people to avoid using the open light bulbs for prolonged close work until the problem is sorted out and to use encapsulated bulbs instead. In other situations where people are not likely to be very close to the bulbs for any length of time, all types of compact fluorescent light bulbs are safe to use."

The Ban The Bulb campaigns has always called for evidence-based medical and specialist exemptions to any ban of inefficient incandescent light bulbs and welcomes the HPA's research and their sensible and pragmatic precautionary advice.

It is to be hoped that the manufacturers and EU will act the HPA's advice in terms of improving the design of unencapsulated CFLs.

It is also to be hoped that forthcoming EU legislation will promote the accelerated uptake of encapsulated CFLs and LED alternatives that offer a broad spectrum of visible light, dimmability and better energy efficiency but are currently more expensive than CFLs.

The Ban The Bulb campaign feels that light sensitive people suffering from Lupus and other similar conditions should be offered a medical exemption allowing them to continue using incandescent light bulbs or preferably to access subsidised LEDs which are far more energy efficient than traditional light bulbs.

News coverage:

The Guardian
BBC News Online
The Daily Telegraph
The Daily Mail

note: The HPA's precautionary advice says encapsulated CFLs and long tubes are perfectly save to use and does not conclude that CFLs cause cancer or should stop being used by anyone who is not light sensitive.

LEDs are a much better solution than so called "high efficiency" incandescents which use twice as much electricity as CFLs and are currently being promoted by light bulb manufacturers, as a way of protecting their investments in existing factories.

............................

HPA Press release : 9 October 2008

Emissions from compact fluorescent lights

New research by the Health Protection Agency has shown that some energy saving compact fluorescent lights can emit ultraviolet radiation at levels that, under certain conditions of use, can result in exposures higher than guideline levels. The Agency and Government Departments are calling on the European Union, relevant product standards bodies and the lighting industry to consider how product standards for lights can be tightened up.

Given its research findings, the Agency is recommending some precautionary measures for the use of certain types of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs). The Agency's view is that open (single envelope) CFLs shown in Fig. 1 should not be used where people are in close proximity - closer than 30 cm or 1 ft - to the bare light bulb for over 1 hour a day. The Agency advises that for such situations open CFLs should be replaced by the encapsulated (double envelope) type shown in Fig. 2. Alternatively, the lamp should be moved so that it is at least 30 cm or 1 ft away.

The Agency's Chief Executive Justin McCracken said, "This is precautionary advice and people should not be thinking of removing these energy saving light bulbs from their homes. We are advising people to avoid using the open light bulbs for prolonged close work until the problem is sorted out and to use encapsulated bulbs instead. In other situations where people are not likely to be very close to the bulbs for any length of time, all types of compact fluorescent light bulbs are safe to use."

Not all open (single envelope) fluorescent light bulbs have significant UVR emissions but if people are in very close proximity to some of them, the exposure to bare skin is like being outside in direct sunlight. For example, Agency scientists found that when very close (2 cm, less than 1 inch) to some open CFLs, the UVR level can be equivalent to that experienced outside in the UK on a sunny day in the summer and so some precaution is warranted. When further away (over 30 cm or 1 ft), the UVR level is much lower and less than being outside on a sunny day in winter, which is not a concern.

Encapsulated (double envelope) compact fluorescent light bulbs (see Fig. 2), which look similar to traditional domestic light bulbs, do not emit significant amounts of UVR. The larger long tube "strip lighting" design fluorescent lights, commonly used in offices, workplaces and homes for many years, can also be used on ceilings without any special precautionary measures.

The precautionary advice from the Agency is interim advice. The Agency's study has stimulated research into the problem by others and the Agency may issue further advice when more information is available. As a result of the Agency's work the Government is pressing the EU to take account of the findings in future European legislation.

Exposure to UVR can cause particular problems for people suffering from some medical conditions, including Lupus. The Agency, Government and the lighting industry have met with patient groups to give advice on the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs and the availability of new technologies for low energy lighting. In addition, the Agency's work has been taken into account by an EC scientific committee looking into the issue of light sensitivity. This committee published its opinion last Friday, 3 October 2008.

Press Enquiries: Contact the HPA Chilton Press Office on (01235) 822744 / 822745 / 822876 / 822737.

E-mail: chilton.pressoffice@hpa.org.uk

Precautionary advice: Energy saving compact fluorescent lights

This factsheet provides some precautionary advice about the use of compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) in the home.

CFLs and ultraviolet radiation

The Health Protection Agency has carried out research which shows that some energy saving light bulbs emit ultraviolet radiation which could, under certain conditions, expose people above recommended guideline levels.

As an interim precautionary measure, until the problem has been solved, the Agency is advising that some types should not be used closer than 30cm (1 ft) for long periods of time.

If you have energy saving compact fluorescent lights in your home you don’t need to worry unless you are using a lamp containing one of the open (single envelope) bulbs shown in figure 1 closer to your skin than 30cm (1 ft) for more than an hour a day.

If you do need a lamp this close for a prolonged period then we suggest you change the bulb and use a low energy bulb of the encapsulated (double envelope) type shown in figure 2.

Alternatively, simply move the lamp until it is at least 30cm (1 ft) away.

Both types of bulb are fine for any use further away than 30cm (1 ft).

This is precautionary advice and people should not be thinking of removing these energy saving
light bulbs from their homes. For both children and adults 30cm (1 ft) is a safe distance from the compact fluorescent light bulb.

Light sensitivity

People who suffer from Lupus and other light sensitive conditions may be specifically affected by the emissions from compact fluorescent lights. They have to be very careful about their exposure to sunlight, so also need to be cautious about their use of compactFigure 1. Open bulb Figure 2. Encapsulated bulb

EU considers VAT cut on energy saving light bulbs

2008-06-01T13:57:00.000-07:00

Two years after the Ban The Bulb campaign originally proposed that the VAT applied to energy saving light bulbs should be reduced from 17.5% to 5%, the British and French governments have proposed EU-wide measures to reduce VAT for energy saving goods, which look like coming into force in all of the EU's 27 countries.

The Ban The Bulb campaign was orginally told by both the EU's tax office and DEFRAthat such a move was impossible, due to the complexity of re-opening VAT arrangements, so takes some pride in having pushed for this significant development.

Courtesy of EuActiv

Heads of state and government from the EU’s 27 member states agreed to consider a Franco-British proposal to cut value-added tax (VAT) on certain environmentally-friendly goods, such as energy efficient light bulbs and insulation materials.

The plan to change the EU’s tax rules – first pushed for by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy in July 2007 – initially looked doomed to failure, due to a lack of support from other nations.

Yet, the final conclusions from the Spring Summit meeting, released on 14 March, invite the Commission to "examine areas where economic instruments, including VAT rates, can have a role to play to increase the use of energy-efficient goods and energy-saving materials" - a feat appararently achieved thanks to Brown's intense lobbying of other EU leaders.

According to him, products that could benefit from a reduced VAT rate of 5%, rather than the current minimum of 15%, include cars with reduced CO2 emission, insulation materials, efficient light bulbs and energy-efficient domestic appliances.

The move came as leaders restated their commitment to cutting greenhouse emissions and combating global warming (EurActiv 17/03/08).

However, the real test will come once the Commission – generally in favour of a greater harmonisation of VAT rates and the use of taxes as a tool for "greening" the EU economy – presents its new VAT plans in the summer.

They will require the unanimous backing of all 27 EU member states. Yet, any change in VAT rates across the EU remains a very sensitive issue, with many countries fearing the move could make them lose out on vast revenues generated by their VAT.

Another issue will be that of selecting which products are to be included in the list, with some saying a static list will not work, as technology evolves so fast that what is energy-efficient today won't be tomorrow.

Positions:

"I think people have been persuaded by the argument that we should look at this very carefully," said UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, after the meeting, insisting the statement made by leaders on VAT was a sign of "substantial progress" on the issue.

"VAT is a uniquely European tax. Europe has now got an energy policy to cut carbon emissions […] If - whether it be lightbulbs, or fridges or household goods generally, or whether it be the insulation materials that make for more energy efficient homes - if we can cut the rates of VAT, then I believe that will be a good thing for Europe," he said.

"Over the next few months I think other countries will join the debate that France and Britain have already started," he added.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said he was "very satisfied" that green VAT was mentioned in the summit conclusions, although he conceded that the debate was far from over and that a number of countries remained opposed.

"We have not taken the decision - not yet - but the Council is asking the Commission to reflect and make proposals on the matter. You know that [discussions on] reduced VAT are a hell of a fight, so we are not there yet. But I can see more density in the Council’s communications. When you recall the rigidity of debates on the issue of VAT, this is an event.

While green NGOs are generally favourable to such VAT reductions to support the purchase of energy-efficient products, industry is divided on the question. According to t he European Renewable Energy Council (EREC), the current VAT rules create a "perverse incentive in favour of energy consumption, which conflicts with the goals of the EU in terms of energy and environmental policy". But, the European association of household appliance manufacturers (CECED) cautioned against any reduction of VAT rates to promote the uptake of energy-efficient goods. It said this would "lower the value of the product in the eyes of the consumer […] contrary to the signal we should be sending out, which is that energy efficiency has a value".
Next steps:

* Summer 2008: Commission due to bring forward new legislative proposals on harmonising EU VAT rates EU to consider VAT cuts on green goods

Current EU rules on value-added tax (VAT), spelled out in the 2006 VAT Directive external Pdf external , specify that member states must subject supplies of goods and services to a rate of at least 15%.

However, they also allow countries to apply reduced rates (never less than 5%) in a broad range of areas deemed essential, like medicines, or labour-intensive services, including renovation of private dwellings, cleaning and hairdressing (EurActiv 27/07/06).

While reduced rates for energy consumption are also allowed to ensure poorer households have access to energy, social considerations rather than 'green' objectives have traditionally driven the selection of items on the list.

The EU executive is due to bring forward new legislative proposals on VAT rates in the summer of 2008 with a view to putting some order to this highly disparate and complex VAT structure and create some additional certainty for businesses and consumers.

China : co-ordinated efforts to make CFLs 90% cheaper

2008-01-28T09:00:00.000-08:00

The China Daily has published a report which says that National Development and Reform Commission has established a subsidy for the makers of energy saving light bulbs which will reduce the cost of 150 million compact fluorescent lamps by 2010.

Additional subsidies by Beijing's municipal government and district governments mean that CFLs will soon be available in Beijing for only 10% of their original cost.

Energy-saving light bulbs do save energy, but many residents refuse to use them simply because they are several times more expensive than the traditional versions. They do not see the long-term benefits of saving energy, focusing instead on the bulbs' higher up-front costs.

Still, people really cannot be blamed for this situation. They need to be persuaded to see the long-term benefits of adopting such technology.

A new scheme set up by the National Development and Reform Commission to subsidize the makers of energy-saving light bulbs will cut the prices of such bulbs in half, bringing them to a level that consumers will be able to accept.

It is estimated that the price cuts will unleash the sale of 150 million energy-efficient light bulbs to residents and working units in the remaining three years of the 11th-Five-Year Plan period (2006-10). As a result, carbon dioxide emissions are projected to fall by 29 million tons.

The program is a great idea indeed. It will not only help the country hit its goal of cutting energy consumption per unit of GDP by 20 percent and reducing polluting emissions by 10 percent by the end of 2010, but it will also support the central government's plan to return money to taxpayers in the form of benefits.

Meanwhile, Beijing's municipal government will subsidize an additional 30 percent worth of price cuts, and district governments will contribute another 10 percent, making energy-saving light bulbs just a tenth of their original cost.

Beijing will implement the scheme on trial basis in its downtown West District, with the goal of getting all families use the bulbs. The authorities hope the cheap prices will bring this target within easy reach.

Beijing has undoubtedly set a good example for the rest of the country. It is hoped that other provinces and cities will follow suit.

In a country with a population of 1.3 billion people, getting every single person to voluntarily take part in the campaign to save energy will have a huge impact on the amount of resources consumed and therefore the amount of pollution produced.

Looked at from this perspective, the plan to put energy-saving light bulbs in every home should represent a massive effort on the part of the public to protect the environment.

The Sun: light bulb distribution project a big success

2008-01-25T00:11:00.000-08:00

In a high innovative collaboration which involved Scottish and Southern Energy, Tesco and CoolNRG, the UK's biggest newspaper, The Sun, has distributed 4 million energy saving light bulbs in a single day.

Their special offer was heavily promoted for the week leading up to the distribution of light bulbs last Saturday.

This is one of the best examples in the world of a media organisation using its ability to communicate with large numbers of people to explain the benefits of using energy saving light bulbs and helping ordinary people to become actively involved in efforts to tackle climate change.

Congratulations to The Sun for doing something different, which was such a huge success!

Their innovation even helped them to increase their circulation by 10% to 4 million. This isn't anything to be sniffed at, especially in an era of declining newspaper circulations.

This is how the Media Guardian reported on what happened:

Saturday's edition of the Sun, which offered readers two free green lightbulbs, was a promotional success, boosting circulation to nearly 4m copies.

Sales soared by 408,000 copies compared with the previous Saturday after the Sun offered readers two free energy-saving lightbulbs, which they could pick up at newsagents and supermarkets selling the paper.

On Saturday the Sun normally sells in the region of 3.5m copies, but Saturday's sale was 3,908,000.

"We practically sold out," one Sun executive said. "We are gobsmacked."

The Sun turned half of its front page green for the promotion, which offered the eco-friendly lightbulbs to readers who bought the paper at more than 4,000 independent newsagents and stores including Tesco, Asda, WH Smith, Sainsbury's, Somerfield and Morrisons.

"Help save the world - and £13 into the bargain," the paper told readers, saying that the £4 pack of light bulbs, provided by Southern Electric, could lead to power bill savings of £9 annually for each reader.

The Sun also offered readers the chance to win an eco-friendly Toyota Prius Hybrid.

Last July, when the Mail on Sunday gave away Prince's new unreleased CD, Planet Earth, the paper sold an extra 600,000 copies, hitting a circulation of 2,800,846.

But the following week it lost most of those extra sales, selling only 31,000 copies above its base sale the week before the giveaway.

Last weekend the Daily Mail attempted a spoiler, offering readers two free energy saving bulbs "worth £6".

But the Mail failed to put in place a distribution deal and readers had to send for their bulbs in the post.

The Sun's promotion could not have been better timed to impress News International's new boss, James Murdoch, who arrived at the company from BSkyB in December.

Earlier this month Murdoch pledged to make News International carbon neutral.

Migraines, rashes, peer-reviewed science?

2008-01-05T13:58:00.000-08:00

Dear BBC,

I am very disappointed that you have not asked for any peer-reviewed science to support the claims that compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) "worsen rashes" or "cause migraines".

These are very big and broad anecdotal claims, which have not been substantiated scientifically. Yet your headlines create the clear impression that the views expressed by individuals, interest groups and 'experts' can be treated as though they were robust statements of fact.

I run the Ban The Bulb campaign (www.banthebulb.org) and have asked for carefully enforced evidence-based medical exemptions for two years (please see my campaign goals), yet I must report that I have not found, or been sent, any science which backs up the claims made by migraine sufferers.

It is well known that migraines can be caused by stress, food and daylight, so saying that CFLs are responsible for light-sensitive medical conditions, while ignoring all of the other everyday triggers is a significant claim to make and grossly unscientific.

It would not be difficult to conduct experiments which compared the effects of CFLs on control and experimental groups as part of a properly designed medical trial and to publish the results in the form of a peer-reviewed article within a credible journal.

Similarly, the claims that rashes are worsened by CFLs assumes that someone is using very outdated fluorescent tubes. Fortunately the technologies incorporated into a CFL have moved on since they were first made available in large numbers, over 30 years ago.

The Ban The Bulb campaign has asked for better information on the boxes of CFLs and for better procedures to recycle the 4-6mg of mercury contained within each lamp ever since the campaign was established (in Feb 2005) so I appreciate your highlighting of this issue.

Overall, however, I wish that you had applied the same rigour and sceptism to these medical claims as you have devoted to interrogating the science available for climate change.

Please see my articles for BBC News Online's Green Room if you want to find out about the positive environmental benefits of using low energy light bulbs, in terms of reducing greenhouse gas and mercury emissions into the atmosphere or why 30 countries have now agreed to phase out
the use of incandescent light bulbs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4667354.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4922496.stm

Yours sincerely,

Dr Matt Prescott
Director, Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Even the Today Programme enjoyed a good kick at the erstwhile low energy light bulb...

Letter to Editor of The Guardian : Lionel Shriver column

2008-01-03T16:04:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb has sent the following letter to the Editor of The Guardian following the publication of an article by a columnist called Lionel Shriver.

Dear Sir,

I am writing as a result of the column published by Lionel Shriver on Thursday 3 January, 2008.

Having successfully proposed the banning of incandescent light bulbs as an easy first step in our efforts to reduce the waste of energy, cut carbon emissions and save money I was very disappointed that The Guardian decided to publish so many unfair and ill-informed comments.

I understand that Lionel was only writing a frivolous and light-hearted column, but I still feel that it was extremely harmful of your newspaper to suggest that there are no compact fluorescent lamps that could produce a decent quality of light and that it was a good idea to stockpile wasteful incandescent light bulbs.

Lionel was right when she said that a 20 watt compact fluorescent lamp (CFLs) takes more energy (4kWh) to make than an equivalent incandescent light bulb (1kWh). However, she failed to mention that a CFL also lasted 6-15 times longer (6000-15000 hours) and used 80 watts less electricity for every moment of it's life.

In addition, a good quality CFL, with pleasant light properties and a high level of build quality and performance, could save its owner £45 - £130 of electricity over it's lifetime while only costing 60p - £4.00 more to buy.

Please see the following review of different designs of compact fluorescent lamp, which I recently wrote for your own newspaper.

As with all things if you buy a cheap CFL, which relies on basic and old technologies, you might not get the performance you would like. This does not mean that better and more aesthetically pleasing CFLs are not available.

The mercury recycling issue associated with CFLs does indeed need to be more adequately addressed by retailers and city councils, but the excess electricity used to power an incandescent releases almost three times more mercury into the atmosphere than the 4mg contained within a CFL. At least with a CFL the mercury is contained and the option of recycling exists.

Lionel was also right to say that there are reasons to be concerned by the lack of detail and urgency in the UK government's and the EU's proposals to phase out and ban incandescent light bulbs.

If light bulbs bans cannot be coherently implemented in a rapid and successful fashion how are we ever going to phase out any of the bigger and more problematic technologies which also waste vast amounts of energy unnecessarily?

Personally, I am extremely worried by the lighting industry's calls for 10+ years to achieve the 60-70% energy savings which are already possible with today's CFLs (and which I might add will shortly be beaten by LEDs).

The manufacturers have invested in high-efficiency incandescents which use 30% less electricity than today's incandescents and understandably they want to see a return on this investment, but this does not mean we should settle for half the energy savings that are already possible.

I would therefore have liked to have seen Lionel use her public platform to call for technology neutral performance criteria which allowed CFLs to become the new minimum standard.

If this was the case that there can be little doubt that plenty of new and better lighting technologies would be developed and used within 3-5 years.

Incandescents were invented over 120 years ago, and could be replaced by many superior technologies if only the right regulations and financial incentives were put in place.

Saying that all CFLs are rubbish and that there are no decent alternatives to incandescents is factually incorrect and could slow the uptake of the many energy efficient technologies, which the latest climate change science tells us need to be brought to market as soon and widely as possible.

As things stand, the proposed domestic light bulb bans are going to be phased in over several years and it will cost billions more to produce extra electricity needed to continue powering ever more incandescents and halogen spot lights, by building new power stations, than it will
to change the small proportion of the country's energy guzzling light fittings which cannot accommodate CFLs or LEDs.

I haven't even attempted to calculate costs associated with the impacts of climate change or our need to secure energy supplies from some of the most unstable countries and regions in the world, but these costs definitely shouldn't be ignored by those who say they cannot be bothered to
change their light bulbs.

Until a light bulb ban was proposed and defended on hard-headed technological, economic and scientific grounds many people had the same prejudices as Lionel.

To date, over 30 countries (including the members of the EU, the US, China and Australia) have had a look at the available lighting technologies and decided that the case for the modest and painless banning of domestic incandescent light bulbs stacks up.

The UK's ban of incandescents will reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by 2-3 million tonnes, similarly the EU's annual emissions will be reduced by 23 million tonnes while the Chinese government's decision to stop manufacturing 70% of the world's incandescent light bulbs will reduce the world's annual carbon emissions by even more.

I sincerely hope that you will consider balancing Lionel's personal comments by highlighting some of the ways in which CFLs and other energy saving technologies could become more widely used and, with the minimum of sacrifice, play a significant part in our efforts to tackle
climate change.

Warmest regards

Matt

Dr Matt Prescott
Director, Ban The Ban
www.banthebulb.org

UK plans to phase out 150W, 100W, 60W : update

2008-01-03T15:47:00.000-08:00

In September 2007 the UK's retailers agreed to stop replacing their stock of 150W incandescent light bulbs in Jan 2008, so I thought it might be a good idea to post exactly what was announced by the UK government and the country's retailers following a collaboration with the big energy utilities.

In summary, in Jan 2008, we can expect to see the retailers voluntarily stopping the replacement of 150W domestic incandescents.

Assuming all goes well at the UK and EU levels, 100W incandescent will then stop being sold in Jan 2009, 60W incandescents will stop being sold in 2010, and the more difficult to replace designs of light bulb will be given longer to cease being sold.

Binding EU-wide ban proposals are due to be tabled in 2009 and then expected to start coming into force during 2011 or 2012.

NEWS RELEASE
Ref: 328/07
Date: 27 September 2007

Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR
Out of hours telephone 020 7270 8960
Energy guzzling lightbulbs phase out to start next year

The most energy-guzzling light bulbs in Britain will start disappearing from shop shelves early next year as part of efforts to cut CO2 emissions, Secretary of State for the Environment Hilary Benn said today.

This voluntary initiative, which is being led by major retailers and energy suppliers, will see energy efficient light bulbs replace their least efficient equivalents on shop shelves over the next four years.

Its aim is to save up to 5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year by 2012 from UK electricity generation – the equivalent to the carbon emissions of a typical 1 Giga Watt coal fired power station.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced in March, while Chancellor of the Exchequer, his aim for the UK to be one of the first countries to phase out inefficient light bulbs and set an ambitious target date to achieve that by the end of 2011, ahead of possible actions by the EU to ban these products altogether.

Secretary of State Hilary Benn said:

"Britain is leading the way in getting rid of energy-guzzling light bulbs and helping consumers reduce their carbon footprint. Choosing energy saving light bulbs can help tackle climate change, and also cut household bills, with each bulb saving up to £60 over its lifetime.

"I am delighted that major companies have said they are prepared to help deliver this ambitious timetable and offer products which will help their own customers play their part in combating climate change.

"But there are many more energy hungry gadgets on sale in shops that waste too much energy. That's why I want to see today's initiative widened. I want to see more retailers, manufacturers and service providers taking action to phase out the least efficient products from their ranges, for example, certain set top boxes and TVs, and so help offer greener choices to their customers."

Kevin Hawkins, Director General of the British Retail Consortium said:

"Retailers are committed to reducing their carbon footprint and play an active role in helping consumers reduce their own environmental impact. This is just the latest in a number of initiatives in which retailers are helping to shape consumer habits through the promotion
of energy saving products. We look forward to working closely with Government and manufacturers in the lead up to the 2011 deadline to ensure the supply of energy saving light bulbs matches demand, and that they become a viable alternative to conventional light bulbs for consumers of all incomes"

Keven Verdun, Chief Executive of the Lighting Association said:

'The UK lighting suppliers strongly support the Government's ambition in this initiative. For many years the European lamp industry has promoted the benefits of phasing out energy inefficient light bulbs. In June 2007 the industry presented its own proposals for EU legislation to phase out inefficient light bulbs across the whole of Europe, commencing 2009. We welcome the positive support of governments for this transition to more efficient lighting technologies which we believe can make a substantial contribution to reducing our energy consumption and CO2 emissions."

Philip Sellwood, Chief Executive of the Energy Saving Trust said:

"We fully support the idea of phasing out inefficient lighting in favour of energy efficient light-bulbs. In most homes, lighting accounts for 10 – 15% of the electricity bill and UK households currently use £1.8 billion worth of electricity every year on lighting. An energy saving light bulb can last up to 10 times longer than a non-efficient version. Just one energy saving bulb could save up to £7 a year, fit all the lights in your house with energy saving
bulbs and you could save around £600 over the lifetime of the bulbs. If everyone in the UK installed three energy saving lightbulbs, we would save enough energy to power all the UK's street lighting for a year."

Duncan Sedgwick, Chief Executive of the Energy Retail Association, said:

"Britain's major energy suppliers welcome this move and are committed to distributing low energy light bulbs to households across the country over this period. This is building on the 43 million low energy light bulbs that they have already distributed through their current energy efficiency commitment."

Energy saving compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) can help reduce carbon dioxide emissions and contribute to tackling climate change because they use only a fifth to a quarter of the electricity of ordinary bulbs to generate the same amount of light.

CFLs are also cost effective. Advice from the Energy Saving Trust suggests that because it will last up to 10 times longer than a traditional bulb, just one energy saving bulb could save up to £7 a year and, depending on the length of time lights are in use every day, could save around £60 before it needs replacing. Fit all the lights in your house with energy saving bulbs and you could save around £600 over the lifetime of the bulbs.

In the UK £140 million a year is wasted by leaving lights switched on unnecessarily. This causes 900,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions.

Each house currently has on average around 23.5 light bulbs.

Notes to editors

1. The Government has proposed, as an illustrative schedule for the phase out of inefficient lamps, that retailers might want to follow:

* By January 2008, cease replacing stock of all inefficient (General Lighting Service, GLS) A-shaped incandescent lamps of energy rating higher than 100W (predominantly 150W lamps).

* By January 2009, cease selling all inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps of energy rating higher than 60W (predominantly 150W lamps, 100W lamps, plus some 75W lamps)

* By January 2010, cease selling all GLS A-shaped lamps of efficacy of energy rating higher than 40W (predominantly 60W lamps)

* By 31 December 2011, cease selling all remaining inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps and 60W "candle" and "golfball" lamps. (predominantly 40W and 25W A-shaped GLS bulbs, and 60W candles and golfballs).

At the moment, we expect candles and golfballs, tungsten halogen lamps and lamps supplied with non-lighting electrical appliances to remain on sale, because suitable energy-efficient alternatives do not currently exist.

2. The following retailers support this initiative: ASDA, B&Q, The Co-operative Group, Home Retail Group (Argos and Homebase), IKEA, John Lewis, Marks & Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Somerfield, Tesco, Waitrose, Wickes, Woolworths, British Retail Consortium, Association of Convenience Stores and the British Hardware Federation. It is also being promoted through the major energy companies as part of their activities through the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT).

3. The next phase is that the Government will be issuing a public consultation paper on the detailed analysis, targets and standards that we would like to achieve for domestic lighting products in the UK, with a view to updating the illustrative phase out schedule above.

4. The EU is expected to bring forward its proposals for lighting measures under the Framework Directive for the Eco-design of Energy Using Products (the EUP Directive). Implementing measures will set specific and potentially compulsory standards for several of the least efficient street, office/industry and domestic lighting products destined for the European market in order that they meet energy efficiency, as well as other, requirements. Proposals for street and office lighting are due to be agreed by the end of 2008. Work on the domestic lighting begun at the beginning of June. The Commission is expected to table a proposal by the end of 2009.

5. Climate Change Minister Joan Ruddock today also wrote to retailers to progress the initiative announced in Budget 2006 to encourage more energy efficient set top boxes and other consumer electronics, including setting targets to reduce stand-by power.

6. Defra launched its ActOnCO2 carbon calculator www.direct.gov.uk/actonco2 as a public trial version on 20 June. There have been over 300,000 visits so far. The calculator helps people make the link between their own actions and climate change. Individuals or households can calculate the carbon footprint resulting from their home, appliances and personal travel using Government
approved data and methodologies. Users can also receive a personalised action plan with tips for reducing their carbon emissions. The calculator takes account of lighting in its home section.

7. Under the Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC), electricity and gas suppliers are required to meet targets for the promotion of improvements in household energy efficiency. They do this by encouraging householders to take up measures like cavity wall and loft insulation and energy efficient lights. The current phase of EEC is from 2005-08 and the Government has recently consulted on the third phase, to be called the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target, from April 2008 to March 2011. At least 10 million households received measures under the first phase of EEC (2002-05), which stimulated £600m of investment in energy efficiency and delivered net benefits to householders in excess of £3 billion. It will achieve carbon savings of around 1.1 MtC02 annually by 2010. EEC2 is at broadly double the level of EEC1 and is expected to save around 1.8 MtC02 annually by 2010. CERT is proposed to roughly double the activity under EEC2 and is expected to achieve an annual saving of about 4.0 MtCO2 by 2010.

8. The European Lamp Companies' Federation proposal for Domestic lighting, published June 2007 (http://www.elcfed.org – Latest News), sets out the EU industry's full position and proposals to the European Commission for EU legislation regarding the phase out of inefficient bulbs. These proposals are intended to allow time for a smooth switch to high-efficiency halogen and compact fluorescent lamps and the development of LED and high efficiency incandescent lamps. Contact
Jarita Christie, ELC Public Affairs Manager on +32 485 890 070 for further information.

President Bush announces US plan to phase out incandescents

2007-12-24T04:59:00.000-08:00

President Bush has signed an Energy Bill which will phase-out 100-watt incandescent light bulbs in 2012 and 40-watt incandescent light bulbs by 2014.

All light bulbs must use 25 percent to 30 percent less 2014 (which means that the next generation of "high-efficiency" incandescents will remain permitted) and be 70% more efficient (the same as today's compact fluorescent lamps) by 2020.

The Ban The Bulb campaign is disappointed that it will take the US at least another 12 years to use energy efficient lighting technologies which are already available, and sees this legislation as a missed opportunity to make a 70% cut in energy use within 3-5 years.

The Daily Green has reported the following...

As the global shift toward green continues, Congress has shown they are taking concerns over climate change, pollution and resource use seriously. Can it be said that they're starting to see the light?

Although a recent bid to force electric companies to increase wind and solar power to 15% of total electrical output by 2020 failed, Congress is getting close to passing an energy bill that contains a little-known provision designed to phase out the 125-year-old incandescent light bulb in the next four to 12 years. Instead the future will be lit with next generation energy-efficient lighting, as USA Today reports.

Under the measure, all light bulbs must use 25% to 30% less energy than today's products by 2012 to 2014. The phase-in will start with 100-watt bulbs in 2012 and end with 40-watt bulbs in 2014. By 2020, bulbs must be 70% more efficient.

Compact fluorescent bulbs already meet that 70% efficiency standard. They also last six to 10 times longer than incandescents. Compact fluorescents now cost around $2, vs. about 50 cents for an incandescent. Halogen bulbs, specially designed energy-saving incandescents and the emerging light-emitting diodes (LEDs).

The new rules are expected to save consumers $40 billion in energy and other costs from 2012 to 2030, avoid construction of 14 coal-fired power plants, and cut global-warming emissions by at least 51 million tons of carbon annually, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

The move to ban the bulb isn't wholly surprising, given similar announcements by Australia, Canada and Ireland, as well as discussions in the European Union and New Zealand. California legislators have discussed a possible state-wide ban.

Any mandatory changes to consumer behavior is going to rankle some critics. But looking back in history, most become widely accepted and appreciated in time for their wide benefits to society. Think of leaded gasoline, radium dinner plates, mercury thermometers, seat belts and child-proof containers. A few decades from now, people may look back on incandescent light bulbs as relics so inefficient that they are dangerous.

Greenpeace Ireland "Ban The Bulb Day" + viral marketing

2007-12-05T16:06:00.000-08:00

Greenpeace has just staged a "Ban The Bulb Day" in Ireland and produced an advert targetting the lads market.

UPDATE:

(Dublin 6th Dec) Irish Environment Minister, John Gormley today announced he will develop a national energy efficiency standard for lightbulbs, which will see an end to the use of incandescent bulbs by January 2009.

Mr Gormley said the changes would result in emissions savings of up to 700,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year from residential lighting alone. He estimated it would also save consumers about €185 million per year in electricity costs.

Greenpeace launch a Ban The Bulb campaign in India

2007-10-14T06:13:00.000-07:00

Greenpeace India have launched their own, unaffiliated, Ban The Bulb campaign calling for legislation to phase out incandescents in India.

A global switch-over to efficient lighting systems will trim the world's electricity bill by nearly one-tenth, the International Energy Agency says in a report, which it claims is the first global survey of lighting uses and costs. Nineteen per cent of the world's energy consumption is given over to lighting.

Incandescent bulbs, which are widely used across the world, are the biggest culprits in emitting carbon dioxide. The report also says though incandescent bulbs are the biggest efficiency offender, fluorescent tubes are the biggest consumer as they are extensively deployed in business premises who are basically just bad at turning them off.

The Greenpeace campaign 'Ban the Bulb' has been launched in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Hyderabad, Chandigarh, Pune and Bangalore.

Greenpeace is campaigning for a legislation, seeking a phase-out of incandescent light bulbs in India.

See: IEA report: Barriers to Technology Diffusion: The Case of Compact Fluorescent Lamps

See : IEA report : Light's Labour’s Lost- Policies for Energy-efficient Lighting

It would be appreciated if Greenpeace acknowledged the existence of www.banthebulb.org and the discussions we had in London several months ago.

China + GEF plan to phase out incandescents

2007-10-03T04:57:00.000-07:00

The Chinese government has agreed to phase out incandescent light bulbs over the next 10 years in a collaboration with the Global Environment Facility (who will be subsidising the cost of energy saving light bulbs for consumers across the developing world).

Ban The Bulb welcomes this practical and cost-effective collaboration, but feels it is a shame that it is expected to take 10 years to phase out incandescents in China.

Many poor countries and individuals struggle to pay the small upfront costs associated purchasing compact fluorescent lamps, so it is good to see the GEF's using it's resources to subsidise the cost of CFLs in China and other transition / developing countries in ways that allow them to reduce their energy demand, electricity bills and carbon emissions.

China, which makes 70% of the world's lightbulbs, has agreed to phase out incandescent bulbs in favour of more energy-efficient ones, part of a push by a leading world environmental funding agency.

The transition could be made in the next 10 years, said Monique Barbut, chief executive officer of the Global Environment Facility.

"We are starting a world campaign to ban all inefficient lightbulbs," Ms Barbut said at the Reuters Environmental Summit in Washington.

"And China has just agreed."

China's program will be formally announced in December at a meeting of climate negotiators in Bali, Indonesia, she said.

Among rich countries, Australia has already decided to phase out incandescents by 2010, Ms Barbut said, and the facility is working with the Australian government to help with the China project.

The switch to more efficient bulbs from traditional incandescent ones could mitigate 500 million tonnes of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide annually, equal to about half the climate-warming emissions of Germany, she said.

China is the first developing country to agree to join this program, and the facility will invest about $25 million for the Chinese program alone.

Other countries - including Mexico, Indonesia, Venezuela and Costa Rica - may join in future, Ms Barbut said.

"If we decide and if countries really agree, it is something that could be done in the next 10 years," she said.

The Global Environment Facility is one of the richest and least-known environmental funding agencies worldwide.

With a current trust fund of about $US3.2 billion ($A3.61 billion), the Washington, DC-based agency is the financial arm for international intergovernmental agreements on biodiversity, climate change and persistent organic pollutants. It also supports agreements on international waters, ozone and desertification.

As the lightbulb switching program goes forward, the environment facility is working to develop a fund to get these more efficient bulbs into the hands of the poor.

"An efficient lightbulb costs four times more than an inefficient lightbulb - it lasts 10 times longer but it's four times more (expensive) - and for many very poor people ... the problem is that they can't afford the four times more at one time," Ms Barbut said.

Compact fluorescent lamps use between a quarter and a fifth of the energy of incandescent bulbs producing the same light.

The matter is being discussed by countries in the European Union and the United States, she said, adding that China is ahead of the United States in this respect.

US Senate Bill to ban light bulbs introduced

2007-10-03T04:11:00.000-07:00

Although it is wonderful to hear that the US Senate is legislating to phase out incandescent light bulbs, it is worrying that so many people are enthusiastic about halogen light bulbs and high efficiency incandescents as a transition technology.

Halogen lights have the potential to offer significant energy efficiency improvements when compared to a single traditional incandescent light bulb (such as when you decide to light a desk with a 20W halogen rather than light a whole room with one or more 100W incandescents), but the sad truth is that halogen spotlights tend to be used in very large numbers to illuminate kitchens and offices to an extremely high level of brightness. As a result, halogens frequently end up greatly increasing the number of watts being used to light each m2 of a room.

High efficiency incandescents offer a 30% energy saving when compared to incandescents, but offer much less than the 75% energy savings that are already possible with equivalent compact fluorescent lamp.

Ban The Bulb welcomes moves to phase out incandescents but thinks that the new minimum standard for energy performance should be technology neutral, but based on the energy savings that are already possible with compact fluorescent lamps, the total amount of energy used to light each m2, and trying to achieve the maximum possible energy savings within 5 years.

A bill has been introduced in the [US] Senate that will require manufacturers to phase out the old style light bulbs and replace them with new types that will give the same level of light and use less energy at the same time. It is estimated that changing to the new more efficient light bulbs will add up to a savings of $6 billion a year in electricity costs. The bill is called The Energy Efficient Lighting for a Brighter Tomorrow Act (S. 2017), it was introduced by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and has broad bi partisan support.

Senator Bingaman states that his bill will give the light bulb manufacturers a reasonable process for them to plan and implement the changes. He further states that we have had the same lighting technology for the past 125 years. When the bill is fully implemented, it will save almost as much energy as all of the Federal appliance standards from 1987 to 2000.

One of the original co-sponsors of the bill, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) commented on the fact that we have improved on just all of Thomas Edison's inventions, except for the light bulb. This legislation will encourage a new generation of talented inventors to improve on his greatest invention, the only one that has been neglected. He also stated his intention of working with Senator Bingaman to get the bill passed and making sure that the new products are made by Americans.

If the bill is passed into law, they will begin in 2012 and go on through 2014 with phasing out the current 40, 60, 75 and 100 watt incandescent bulbs and replace them by lower wattage bulbs that will be able to produce the same level of light.

By 2014, the bulbs that we have known all our lives will be obsolete. They will be replaced with the products of the new technologies such as LEDS-light emitting diodes-, halogen incandescent bulbs, compact florescent lamps and higher efficiency incandescent bulbs, giving the consumer plenty of different products to choose from.

In technical terms, the new standards for incandescent lighting will save 88 billion kilowatt hours of electricity per year. And because you do replace light bulbs much more often than you do large appliances, the savings from the new bulbs will be realized much sooner than any savings from larger appliances. The new generation bulbs will cost more, but they will last for years, not months like the current ones do. As a result, there will be considerable savings in lighting costs over the long term.

They have already talked to and negotiated with major lighting manufacturers and efficiency advocates. Philips Lighting initiated the negotiations on phasing out inefficient incandescent lamps, and Osram Sylvania and General Electric were actively engaged in the process. Some of the advocates involved in the negotiations are the Alliance to Save Energy, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy and the Natural Resources Defense Council. Senator Bingaman took a hands on approach and was personally involved in the negotiations at critical point along the way including having meetings with the key participants. The House of Representatives has already passed a similar bill. The House Bill was authored by Congressmen Harman and Upton.

Source: Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources http://energy.senate.gov/

Thanks to Antony Froggatt for passing on this news article

UK starts phase out of 150W, 100W, 60W light bulbs

2007-09-27T07:50:00.000-07:00

The Ban The Bulb campaign welcomes the combined efforts of the UK's government, energy companies, retailers and manufacturers to phase out the most wasteful designs of domestic incandescent light bulb over the next 4 years.

In 2005, the National Audit Office told us that promoting energy efficiency was 7 times more cost effective than building new supplies of electricity, so the government's production of an illustrative timetable for phasing out 150W, 100W and 60W incandescent light bulbs from Jan 2008 onwards, and the voluntary moves by the retailers and energy companies to make energy saving light bulbs more available are very positive steps in the right direction.

Ban The Bulb now feels that it is important that the minimum energy performance standards used to determine the next generation of lighting technologies are robust and at least as good as those already possible with today's compact fluorescent lamps.

Binding statutory bans should also be fully implemented within 5 years, rather than the 12 years currently being proposed by the lighting industry.

The Ban The Bulb campaign was set up in 2005 and is grateful to all of those in California (Lloyd Levine), Australia (Malcolm Turnbull), the EU (Angela Merkel), UK (Tony Blair + Gordon Brown) and India (Greenpeace) who have supported the goal's of this campaign.

A brief history of the Ban The Bulb campaign can be read here.

Please see the articles on the left of this page or the following articles from The Guardian's website for more details:

Chain stores to end sale of traditional lightbulbs

Ban the bulb?

ENERGY GUZZLING LIGHTBULBS PHASE OUT TO START NEXT YEAR

UK, DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

The Government News Network on 27 September 2007

The most energy-guzzling light bulbs in Britain will start disappearing from shop shelves early next year as part of efforts to cut CO2 emissions, Secretary of State for the Environment Hilary Benn said today.

This voluntary initiative, which is being led by major retailers and energy suppliers, will see energy efficient light bulbs replace their least efficient equivalents on shop shelves over the next four years.

Its aim is to save up to 5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year by 2012 from UK electricity generation - the equivalent to the carbon emissions of a typical 1 Giga Watt coal fired power station.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced in March, while Chancellor of the Exchequer, his aim for the UK to be one of the first countries to phase out inefficient light bulbs and set an ambitious target date to achieve that by the end of 2011, ahead of possible actions by the EU to ban these products altogether.

Secretary of State Hilary Benn said: "Britain is leading the way in getting rid of energy-guzzling light bulbs and helping consumers reduce their carbon footprint. Choosing energy saving light bulbs can help tackle climate change, and also cut household bills, with each bulb saving up to £60 over its lifetime.

"I am delighted that major companies have said they are prepared to help deliver this ambitious timetable and offer products which will help their own customers play their part in combating climate change."

"But there are many more energy hungry gadgets on sale in shops that waste too much energy. That's why I want to see today's initiative widened. I want to see more retailers, manufacturers and service providers taking action to phase out
the least efficient products from their ranges, for example, certain set top boxes and TVs, and so help offer greener choices to their customers."

Kevin Hawkins, Director General of the British Retail Consortium said: "Retailers are committed to reducing their carbon footprint and play an active role in helping consumers reduce their own environmental impact. This is just the latest in a number of initiatives in which retailers are helping to shape consumer habits through the promotion of energy saving products. We look forward to working closely with Government and manufacturers in the lead up to the 2011 deadline to ensure the supply of energy saving light bulbs matches demand, and that they become a viable alternative to conventional light bulbs for consumers of all incomes"

Keven Verdun, Chief Executive of the Lighting Association said: 'The UK lighting suppliers strongly support the Government's ambition in this initiative. For many years the European lamp industry has promoted the benefits of phasing out energy inefficient light bulbs. In June 2007 the industry
presented its own proposals for EU legislation to phase out inefficient light bulbs across the whole of Europe, commencing 2009. We welcome the positive support of governments for this transition to more efficient lighting technologies which we believe can make a substantial contribution to reducing our energy consumption and CO2 emissions."

Philip Sellwood, Chief Executive of the Energy Saving Trust said: "We fully support the idea of phasing out inefficient lighting in favour of energy efficient light-bulbs. In most homes, lighting accounts for 10 - 15% of the electricity bill and UK households currently use £1.8 billion worth of electricity every year on lighting. An energy saving light bulb can last up to 10 times longer than a non-efficient version. Just one energy saving bulb could save up to £7 a year, fit all the lights in your house with energy saving bulbs and you could save around £600 over the lifetime of the bulbs. If everyone in the UK installed three energy saving lightbulbs, we would save enough energy to power all the UK's street lighting for a year."

Duncan Sedgwick, Chief Executive of the Energy Retail Association, said: "Britain's major energy suppliers welcome this move and are committed to distributing low energy light bulbs to households across the country over this period. This is building on the 43 million low energy light bulbs that they have already distributed through their current energy efficiency commitment."

Energy saving compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) can help reduce carbon dioxide emissions and contribute to tackling climate change because they use only a fifth to a quarter of the electricity of ordinary bulbs to generate the same amount of light.

CFLs are also cost effective. Advice from the Energy Saving Trust suggests that because it will last up to 10 times longer than a traditional bulb, just one energy saving bulb could save up to £7 a year and, depending on the length of time lights are in use every day, could save around £60 before it needs replacing. Fit all the lights in your house with energy saving bulbs and you could save around £600 over the lifetime of the bulbs.

In the UK £140 million a year is wasted by leaving lights switched on unnecessarily. This causes 900,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Each house currently has on average around 23.5 light bulbs.

NOTES TO EDITORS

1. The Government has proposed, as an illustrative schedule for the phase out of inefficient lamps, that retailers might want to follow:

* By January 2008, cease replacing stock of all inefficient (General Lighting Service, GLS) A-shaped incandescent lamps of energy rating higher than 100W (predominantly 150W lamps).

* By January 2009, cease selling all inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps of energy rating higher than 60W (predominantly 150W lamps, 100W lamps, plus some 75W lamps)

* By January 2010, cease selling all GLS A-shaped lamps of efficacy of energy rating higher than 40W (predominantly 60W lamps)

* By 31 December 2011, cease selling all remaining inefficient GLS A-shaped lamps and 60W "candle" and "golfball" lamps. (predominantly 40W and 25W A-shaped GLS bulbs, and 60W candles and golfballs).

At the moment, we expect candles and golfballs, tungsten halogen lamps and lamps supplied with non-lighting electrical appliances to remain on sale, because suitable energy-efficient alternatives do not currently exist.

2. The following retailers support this initiative: ASDA, B&Q, The Co-operative Group, Home Retail Group (Argos and Homebase), IKEA, John Lewis, Marks & Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsbury's, Somerfield, Tesco, Waitrose, Wickes, Woolworths, British Retail Consortium, Association of Convenience Stores and the British Hardware Federation. It is also being promoted through the major energy companies as part of their activities through the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT).

3. The next phase is that the Government will be issuing a public consultation paper on the detailed analysis, targets and standards that we would like to achieve for domestic lighting products in the UK, with a view to updating the illustrative phase out schedule above.

4. The EU is expected to bring forward its proposals for lighting measures under the Framework Directive for the Eco-design of Energy Using Products (the EUP Directive). Implementing measures will set specific and potentially compulsory standards for several of the least efficient street, office/industry and domestic lighting products destined for the European market in order that they meet energy efficiency, as well as other, requirements. Proposals for street and office lighting are due to be agreed by the end of 2008. Work on the domestic lighting begun at the beginning of June. The Commission is expected to table a proposal by the end of 2009.

5. Climate Change Minister Joan Ruddock today also wrote to retailers to progress the initiative announced in Budget 2006 to encourage more energy efficient set top boxes and other consumer electronics, including setting targets to reduce stand-by power.

6. Defra launched its ActOnCO2 carbon calculator http://www.direct.gov.uk/actonco2 as a public trial version on 20 June. There have been over 300,000 visits so far. The calculator helps people make the link between their own actions and climate change. Individuals or households can calculate the carbon footprint resulting from their home, appliances and personal travel using Government approved data and methodologies. Users can also receive a personalised action plan with tips for reducing their carbon emissions. The calculator takes account of lighting in its home section.

7. Under the Energy Efficiency Commitment (EEC), electricity and gas suppliers are required to meet targets for the promotion of improvements in household energy efficiency. They do this by encouraging householders to take up measures like cavity wall and loft insulation and energy efficient lights. The current phase of EEC is from 2005-08 and the Government has recently consulted on the third phase, to be called the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target, from April 2008 to March 2011. At least 10 million households received measures under the first phase of EEC (2002-05), which stimulated £600m of investment in energy efficiency and delivered net benefits to householders in excess of £3 billion.

It will achieve carbon savings of around 1.1 MtC02 annually by 2010. EEC2 is at broadly double the level of EEC1 and is expected to save around 1.8 MtC02 annually by 2010. CERT is proposed to roughly double the activity under EEC2 and is expected to achieve an annual saving of about 4.0 MtCO2 by 2010.

8. The European Lamp Companies' Federation proposal for Domestic lighting, published June 2007 (http://www.elcfed.org - Latest News), sets out the EU industry's full position and proposals to the European Commission for EU legislation regarding the phase out of inefficient bulbs. These proposals are intended to allow time for a smooth switch to high-efficiency halogen and compact fluorescent lamps and the development of LED and high efficiency incandescent lamps.

China and the US moving towards light bulb bans?

2007-09-25T12:00:00.000-07:00

According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, both China and the US are moving towards bans of domestic incandescent light bulbs...

This is great news, but as you will see below their are reasons to be concerned that the lighting industry will be left to determine what the new minimum energy performance standards of domestic light bulbs should be and how long should be allowed for everyone to stop using incandescent light bulbs.

Ban The Bulb feels the minimum energy performance standards should:

(1) Be the same or better than today's compact fluorescent lamps and

(2) That no more than 5 years should be allowed before 100W and 60W incandescents are phased out.

The House and Senate are working on legislation that over the next seven years would phase out the conventional light bulb, a move aimed at saving energy and reducing man-made emissions believed linked to climate change.

General Electric Co., Philips Electronics NV of the Netherlands and other manufacturers have been meeting with conservation and environmental groups and say they are close to agreement on the general terms of a phaseout. Bipartisan coalitions in Congress are likely to add these terms to a broad energy bill expected to be voted on next month.

While manufacturers voiced some concerns about producing enough bulbs to meet the new deadlines, they emphasized that they want prompt federal legislation that would prevent states from setting their own standards, creating a patchwork of differing requirements. Nevada has already set its own standard, and California is considering one.

Paul Waide, a policy analyst with the International Energy Agency, based in Paris, told the Senate Energy Committee yesterday that the European Union, Canada and Australia are planning similar phaseouts of conventional incandescent bulbs, and China is beginning to consider one.

"It is not inconceivable that over the next 10 to 15 years that maybe all incandescent lights will be removed from the global market," he said. If that happened, he added, the resulting reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions might equal almost three-fourths of the reductions that industrial nations have promised under the Kyoto Protocol to curb global warming.

The U.S., which has four billion electric lights using such bulbs, represents about a third of the world market. Installing more-efficient incandescent or compact fluorescent bulbs would save consumers about $6 billion a year in energy costs, said Jeffrey Harris, a vice president of the Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit group based in Washington.

Common incandescent bulbs, which have been around for more than 100 years, are able to convert only 5% of the electricity they use into visible light. The rest is lost as heat.

Under the timetable proposed in both House and Senate versions, incandescent bulbs would begin to disappear from U.S. markets beginning in 2012, with 100-watt bulbs going first, then 75-watt bulbs a year later and then the more popular 60- and 40-watt bulbs by 2014.

They would be replaced by compact fluorescent bulbs and more-efficient incandescent lamps, which can cut energy use from 30% to 75%. By 2020, both bills call for lighting standards that can only be met by the compact fluorescents or other technologies that can match their efficiency.

Manufacturers hope to use a few different technologies to meet the proposed standards, but they say it will be a challenge getting new lamps out by 2012, the proposed starting date. The manufacturers also had initially been looking for a longer phaseout period of five years instead of three.

Randy Moorehead, vice president of government relations for Philips Electronics, North America, said the industry mostly supports the phase-in period but has problems with the 2020 proposed standards. Mr. Moorehead said Congress should wait to set a 2020 standard to see where the technology is headed. He said manufacturers will have to scrap new multimillion-dollar investments in equipment and employees to meet 2012 standards.

GE had announced a new energy-efficient incandescent lamp that will be 30% more efficient by 2012. GE plans to roll out the first version in 2010. GE indicated the bulb would likely be comparable to a 60-watt or 40-watt bulb. Osram Sylvania, a unit of Siemens AG, is also introducing an energy-efficient incandescent bulb.

Philips is unveiling a halogen light this fall that will be markedly more efficient and three times longer-lasting than incandescent bulbs -- but will also be more expensive initially than compact and incandescent bulbs.

GE and the two other big light bulb makers, Philips and Osram Sylvania, also are looking at light emitting diodes, or LEDS, as new sources of residential lighting. "We'll certainly fill in any gaps with other technologies," says Earl Jones, senior counsel for GE's consumer-and-industrial unit.

Nearly all compact fluorescent bulbs are made in China. Although they cost more than conventional bulbs, the energy savings over their longer lifetimes are substantial. Noting that only 10% of bulbs sold in the U.S. are compact fluorescents, Kyle Pitsor, vice president of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, said the industry will mount a public-education campaign to push the more efficient bulbs.

BTB is deeply concerned that some of the world's biggest light bulb manufacturers, such as Philips and GE, are lobbying to be allowed to sell the next generation of incandescent light bulbs, which use 30% less electricity that today's models, and are not focusing their efforts on scaling up the production of compacts fluorescent lamps which already offer 75% energy savings.

The motives for this move remain unclear. However, it seems crazy to halve the effectiveness of the world's proposed light bulb bans, for no apparent reason, and BTB hopes that all of the big manufacturers will consider refocusing their efforts on bringing more compact fluorescent lamps to market and developing new technologies, such as LEDs and ceramic lighting technologies, which will significantly improve on what is already possible with CFLs.

Ban The Bulb supports measures which are technology neutral, and is not opposed to incandescents on principle, but is not prepared to endorse minimum standards which encourage the unnecessary waste of money, energy and carbon and delay changes which are already feasible.

EU import tariff on Chinese CFLs extended

2007-08-29T09:17:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Andy Ball for letting me know that the 66% tariff currently being charged on energy saving light bulbs imported into the EU from China has been extended for another 12 months.

Interestingly, it appears that Osram has not built any factories in China, unlike companies such as Philips. It also relies most heavily on the stick designs of CFL which the Chinese tend to make. Taken together these factors seem to have made Osram the most vulnerable to Chinese competition.

EU will retain light bulb tariff

Two thirds of energy-saving bulbs are imported from China
The European Commission has decided to retain import tariffs on Chinese-made energy-efficient light bulbs for up to another 12 months.
The decision was made even though only one of Europe's four energy-efficient light bulb producers, Germany's Osram, had called for more time to adjust.

The tariffs, introduced to stop cheap Chinese imports entering Europe, can add up to 66% to the price of bulbs.

The tariff extension will require the majority backing by EU member states.

They now have a month to decide.

'Severe contradiction'

A Commission spokesman said the extension of anti-dumping duties was needed to give European bulb producers time to adjust.

"In the overall Community interest, there are grounds to leave the possibility to continue in these anti-dumping measures for up to another year, mainly to allow in a changing reality a soft transition," said Commission spokesman Johannes Laitenberger.

Osram's rivals, including the Netherland's Philips, which already makes bulbs in China, had wanted the duty cancelled.

Environmental group Worldwide Fund for Nature said the Commission was displaying a "severe contradiction" in extending the import tariffs at the same time as lecturing consumers on the need to save energy.

Replacing old light bulbs with energy-efficient ones has long been hailed as a particularly effective way of reducing energy consumption.

Environmentalists say this would be easier to achieve if the tariffs were removed, since consumer would be more likely to buy energy-efficient bulbs if their price was lowered.

EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson said: "This case has once again shown the complexities of managing antidumping rules in a global economy and against the broad range of EU interests."

Less than 20% of energy-saving bulbs on sale in Europe are made within the European Union, with more than two thirds imported from China.

While we are on the issue of taxation, if would like to support the reduction of VAT on energy-saving products inside the EU (one of this campaign's founding goals) you might like to sign this online petition which has been set up on the Downing Street website.

The Guardian : Light bulb review

2007-08-02T15:13:00.000-07:00

The Guardian has published a light bulb review I wrote for them which assessed the performance of a wide range of energy-saving light bulbs and rated them (out of 10) according to a key set of criteria including warm-up time, light quality, looks (size), lifetime and cost.

In general, I was pleasantly surprised by the recent improvements in the performance of energy saving light bulbs, otherwise known as compact fluorescent lamps or CFLs.

I also realised that the traditional-style (globe-shaped) designs of CFL produced a much more even and pleasing light, for a room, than the more iconic stick-shaped bulbs.

Some of the lamps were significantly better than the energy saving bulbs I had used before and I ended up recommending the 60 Watt equivalents from Philips (12 Watt, Softone, 8 year), Tesco (11 Watt, Energy Saver, Bayonet cap) and GE (11 Watt, Energy Saving Elegance) as the best all round performers (please see the review below).

The Philips design shown in this picture costs £3.99 per bulb and scored 10 out of 10 in all of the categories tested. It also claimed to last for 8000 hours.

The Tesco-branded bulb scored 8 or 9 out of 10 in all of the categories tested, claimed to last 6000 hours and cost only 81p.

The 100 Watt equivalents from Philips (20 Watt, Softone, 8 years) and GE (20 Watt, Energy Saving Elegance, 6 years) were also very good - although the Philips design was much more compact than the very bulky design from GE.

My thanks to Leo Hickman, Lucy Clouting and Bibi van der Zee for their assistance with the collection of the different light bulbs and the production of this article.

Bright lights

Still not convinced by the performance of eco light blubs? Matt Prescott founder of the Ban the Bulb campaign, puts the latest models to the test

The Guardian Thursday August 2 2007

Blame the 1970s. One of the problems holding back the uptake of energy-saving light bulbs has been that many people have still not forgotten the poor-quality versions they used then. But today, with lighting now using approximately 10% of the UK's electricity supplies, energy prices rocketing upwards, and a generally increased concern about the effects of climate change, many people say they are now prepared to give energy-efficient bulbs a second chance - provided that their performance has improved. So I put some compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) to the test.

Although not perfect, the good news is that energy-saving bulbs have improved considerably, even over the past couple of years. They might not work properly with dimmers yet, but they are generally smaller, brighter and softer on the eye than they used to be. Because they work by making a phosphorous coating glow rather than by heating a filament, energy-saving light bulbs use 60% less electricity to make the same amount of light as an equivalent incandescent. This saves about £9 worth of electricity per bulb per year; or put another way, they last 6-15 times longer than the 1,000 hours of a traditional bulb and offer the UK a quick and simple way of cutting CO² emissions by 2-3m tonnes each year.

Despite these advantages, energy-saving bulbs are a lot more variable in their performance than we have come to expect from incandescents, and each make and retailer offers quite a different product. For example, it is possible to buy traditional globe-, spiral- and stick-shaped bulbs of varying size, cheap and cheerful CFLs from China, or relatively sophisticated CFLs from the major western brands, which incorporate many of the latest patents. For this review, I have stuck to a basic range of 100W- and 60W-equivalent CFLs.

My personal assessments are based on how well each light bulb worked in the same room, straight out of the box, and how happy I would have been to continue using each bulb in my own home. I have not been able to verify the life-expectancy claims for each one, as this is said to range from 6,000 to 15,000 hours (you can only watch a light bulb for so long), but I have mentioned the manufacturers' claims.

In most cases, the information available on the packaging was close to useless and took plenty of very determined reading to yield anything useful. None of the labels explained, in plain English, the amount of mercury in the bulb, how to dispose of it safely once used, its financial, carbon and energy savings, or the spectrum of light produced. Given that these are the first things people always ask me when seeking advice about what bulb to use, it's a shame this isn't standardised on all packaging.

The presence of mercury is something I am frequently asked about. A small amount is still needed in order to make all compact fluorescent lamps work, although the amount has steadily declined and is now about 50% less than used to be the norm even a couple of years ago, at approximately 4 milligrammes per bulb. The fact that it is still used is regrettable yet unavoidable at present, but the average quantity is three times less than the mercury released into the atmosphere by burning the extra coal need to power equivalent incandescent bulbs. As the mercury is contained within a sealed glass container it should be a relatively straightforward matter to recycle it safely. The EU's restriction of hazardous substances directive came into effect on July 1 2006 and provides a framework for how such recycling could be done, but is not yet law. To date, Ikea is the only company I know of that recycles all the CFLs returned to it and I hope it will not be long before all retailers follow suit in this important area.

And the results are ...

Following my test, I found that I preferred the performance of the traditional-style CFLs. They all produced a high level and quality of light within 1-3 seconds and produced an even light quality in all directions. The light intensities were good in all cases, and they all illuminated my test room more effectively than the stick bulbs, which cast light spots and shaded areas on the walls. The traditional-style designs from Philips offered the best performance. They warmed up to a bright light almost instantaneously and provided a very good even light around the entire room. The 100W-equivalent Philips bulb was more than capable of lighting a large room on its own. The traditonal-style bulb from Tesco also performed well against all of the test criteria and was very cheap at only 81p even though the life expectancy was relatively short at 6,000 hours.

· Dr Matt Prescott is director of the Ban the Bulb campaign (banthebulb.org).

EU to lift 66% trade tariffs on Chinese light bulbs

2007-07-27T02:53:00.000-07:00

According to the Associated Press the EU has said that it plans to lift trade charges on Chinese light bulbs despite German complaints.

At present energy saving light bulbs made in China have a 66% trade tariff added to their cost when they are imported into the EU.

This "tax" has protected EU-based light bulb manufacturers from Chinese imports for several years, but this protection mechanism has looked vulnerable ever since the EU's leaders announced that they wanted to make the carbon savings associated with using more energy efficient lighting.

The following AP article suggests that Philips (in Holland) has prepared for this eventuality by setting up manufacturing capacity in China whilst others manufacturers, such as Osram (in Germany), have not built any manufacturing capacity in China and will therefore suffer a loss of market share when this tariff is removed.

Issues which will now come to the fore include the quality of the energy saving light bulbs made in China (especially in relation to mercury content, life-time and light quality) and the carbon emissions associated with transporting light bulbs from China to the EU. The minimum standards set by the EU when they phase out traditional domestic incandescents in 2011 will therefore have added significance.

The Associated Press

BRUSSELS, Belgium: Charges that raise the price of Chinese-made energy-efficient light bulbs should be scrapped, European Union regulators said Thursday.

The European Commission said it planned to lift antidumping duties on power-saving bulbs made in China that raise prices for European customers by two-thirds. The commission came out against Germany's Osram AG, which has pushed to keep the duties in place, claiming below-cost imports are unfair to European manufacturers.

EU spokesman Peter Power said Osram was trying to damage Dutch rival Royal Philips Electronics NV, which makes bulbs in China. The EU will suggest lifting the duties in the coming months, he said.

"Osram is seeking to continue antidumping measures because they hit Philips proportionately harder," Power told reporters. "It is a question of commercial competition between two European companies."

It is also a question of saving power and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Lighting is a major drain on the power grid, and the EU aims to cut both energy use and carbon dioxide releases by a fifth by 2020.

Shifting to eco-friendly bulbs will soon be mandatory, as the EU plans to set new efficiency standards for all lights used in homes and workplaces and on streets. Most lamp manufacturers have agreed to phase out standard incandescent light bulb within eight years.

But the higher cost of greener bulbs has deterred customers. Since 2001, the EU has slapped a 66 percent duty on imports of fluorescent bulbs from China because European producers claimed they were unfairly hurt by low-cost bulbs being dumped on the European market.

Those fees were due to expire July 19, after five years. But they are still in place while the EU's executive arm holds talks with national trade experts — including Germany, which wants to keep the duties in place.

Power said a meeting Thursday would discuss the problem, but would make no final decision. A definitive proposal, including the suspension of the duties, was expected within months.

He said Osram was not the voice of besieged European manufacturers, and noted that Philips, General Electric Co. and Havells Sylvania together make more bulbs in Europe than Osram does. To complicate matters further, like Philips, Osram also makes bulbs in China that are sold at dumped prices.

A group of EU importers, the Foreign Trade Association, called on national governments this week to lift the duties.

The EU has investigated a host of complaints from European companies in recent years claiming their shoes, furniture and DVDs have unfairly lost ground to a wide range of Chinese-made products sold below cost in Europe, breaking world trade rules.

Thanks to Antony Froggatt for passing on this article.

Ban The Bulb on Facebook

2007-07-04T13:42:00.000-07:00

Ban The Bulb has created a group on Facebook.

If you would like to join the group please search for the logo under "ban the bulb"... and help to spread the word.

Warmest regards

Matt

P.S. If you want to speak with me about my Green Room article for BBC News Online you can call me on +44(0)7789 854737. I'm on holiday, so please only call me if it is urgent. I'll be back in the UK on Tues 24 July and happy to help then.

EU light bulb manufacturers back phase out (8 yrs)

2007-06-22T15:13:00.000-07:00

According to Associated Press, European light-bulb makers have said they want to phase out the standard incandescent light bulb in eight years, replacing it with more eco-friendly, energy-efficient lamps.

The manufacturers' proposal, submitted to the European Commission, is similar to plans under way or under consideration elsewhere, including Australia, California, and Canada, as governments seek energy savings and green-friendly credentials.

The switch could lead to significant reductions in carbon dioxide emissions from domestic lighting, and savings of $9.4 billion for European consumers, said the European manufacturers. The group includes General Electric Co., Havells Sylvania, and Philips.

The leaders of the 27 European Union nations agreed on new energy and emissions cutting guidelines in March, including phasing out the old incandescent lamps.

Andris Piebalgs, the EU's energy commissioner, welcomed the initiative, saying it showed efficiency "is a way of combatting climate change" and reducing energy dependency across Europe.

The EU is applying new binding minimum energy efficiency rules for all lights used, either in the home, at work, or in street lighting.

The industry group said manufacturers will have eight years to switch to high-efficiency halogen and compact flourescent lamps and develop high-efficiency incandescent bulbs.

"Under the proposal, within eight years from now, 85% of the total EU traditional incandescent lamp market of 2.1 billion lamps would need to meet new efficiency requirements," the group said.

It added that the highest watt lamps, those between 25 watts and 100 watts, will be phased out by 2015.

Ban The Bulb feels that 8 years is rather a long time to phase out light bulbs between 25W and 100W, and that somewhere between 3 and 5 years would be more appropriate.

BTB would also like to see the European Commission being more specific about the 15% of light bulbs which will be allowed to exceed the minimum standard.

The 20W CFLs which replace 100W incandescents, are already available so taking 8 years to reach this minimum standard does not seem to make the most of the immediate gains which would be possible if 60W and 100W incandescents were phased out more rapidly.

Greenpeace launch energy efficiency campaign

2007-06-22T15:01:00.000-07:00

Eoin "Owen" Dubsky has been in touch to let me know that Greenpeace International have set up an new energy efficiency campaign.

Ban The Bulb is glad to see Greenpeace setting up a campaign which will help to expand the case for greater energy efficiency beyond the light bulbs and wishes the campaign well.

Ban The Bulb : Campaign Archive

2007-05-21T07:08:00.000-07:00

I hope that some of you will find Ban The Bulb's campaign archive of interest and use.

The Problem... (Feb 05)

Some important facts... (Feb 05)

BBC News Online Green Room Light bulbs: Not such a bright idea (Feb 06)

Suppliers of cheap CFLs (Feb 06)

Ban The Bulb campaign proposals (Feb 06)

BBC News Online Green Room Shedding light on call to ban bulb (April 06)

House of Commons : Early Day Motion (July 06)

BBC News Online Green Room Where have all the leaders gone? (Oct 06)

Making the switch (Oct 06)

City council energy audits (Oct 06)

Tax using wattage x lifetime (Nov 06)

Hansard : Written Answer (Nov 06)

EDM : cross party support (Nov 06)

No. 10 petition (Nov 06)

Recent letters to BTB (Dec 06)

Wal Mart improve CFL marketing (Jan 07)

No. 10 : petition : 0% or 5% VAT (Jan 07)

California : Ban The Bulb by 2012? (Feb 07)

DEFRA : Effects of fiscal measures (Feb 07)

Supermarkets competing to be green (Feb 07)

Philips : phasing out indandescents? (Feb 07)

Australia : Light bulb ban by 2010? (Feb 07)

Ontario in Canada: consider bulb ban (Feb 07)

Why not ban incandescents in UK + EU? (Feb 07)

Ban The Bulb : new logo (Feb 07)

No. 10 : VAT on energy saving goods (Feb 07)

EU light bulb ban possible? (Mar 07)

EU : Light bulb ban by 2010 (Mar 07)

Ban The Bulb : History of the campaign (Mar 07)

Currys ban incandescent light bulbs (Mar 07)

EU : Ban not guaranteed (Mar 07)

EU : Lamp companies help governments (Mar 07)

Import duty on Chinese CFLs (Apr 07)

Green MEP tables Written Declaration (Apr 07)

Ban The Bulb investigates EU plans (Apr 07)

Ontario : Ban, free CFLs + procurement (Apr 07)

Villagers replace every light bulb (May 07)

Lester Brown's Plan B (May 07)

US senators propose light bulb ban (May 07)

Greenpeace India : Ban The Bulb! petition (May 07)

Greenpeace launch energy efficiency campaign (June 07)

EU light bulb manufacturers back phase out (8 yrs) (June 07)

BBC News Online Green Room Sex sells, but at what cost? (Oct 06)

Ban The Bulb on Facebook (July 07)

EU to lift 66% trade tariffs on Chinese light bulbs (July 07)

The Guardian Ethical Living Light bulb review (Aug 07)

The Guardian : Light bulb review (Aug 07)

EU import tariff on Chinese CFLs extended (Aug 07)

China and the US moving towards light bulb bans? (Sept 07)

The Guardian Climate Blog Ban The Bulb? (Sept 07)

UK starts phase out of 150W, 100W, 60W light bulbs (Sept 07)

US Senate Bill to ban light bulbs introduced (Oct 07)

China + GEF plan to phase out incandescents (Oct 07)

Greenpeace launch (an unaffiliated) ban the bulb campaign (Oct 07)

Greenpeace Ireland launch "Ban The Bulb Day" and viral marketing (Dec 07)

President Bush announces plan to phase out incandescents (Dec 07)

UK plans to phase out 150W, 100W, 60W: update (Jan 08)

Letter to Editor of The Guardian: Lionel Shriver column (Jan 08)

Migraines, rashes, peer-reviewed science? (Jan 08)

The Sun: light bulb distribution project a big success (Jan 08)

China: co-ordinated efforts to make cfls 90% cheaper (Jan 08)

EU considers VAT cut on energy saving light bulbs (June 08)

HPA: Precautionary Advice for users of unencapsulated CFLs (Oct 08)

European Commission: Position from Ban The Bulb (Nov 08)

BBC News Online Green Room No time to dim efficiency ambitions (Nov 08)

LED replacements for long fluorescent tubes (Nov 08)

EU light bulb ban imminent... but how ambitious (Dec 08)

GE stops incandescent development, LEDs the future (Dec 08)

EU negotiations... the latest news (Dec 08)

Disappointingly weak EU light bulb ban (Dec 08)

Free bulbs switch on Ethiopians (Dec 08)

Greenpeace India set up a Ban The Bulb petition

2007-05-20T08:56:00.000-07:00

Greenpeace India have set up a Ban The Bulb petition.

Their petition to Sushil Kumar Shinde, the Minister of Power in India, says the following:

Dear Minister,

You're aware that climate change is the biggest environmental threat India is facing.

Burning coal to generate electricity is leading to increase in global temperatures, changing monsoon patterns, faster melting of Himalayan glaciers and rising sea levels. India will be one of the worst affected countries. Large parts of India's coastal cities like Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai will be submerged, while agriculture and fisheries production will decrease, and vector-borne diseases such as dengue will become commonplace.

We only have a few more years before climate change reaches the point of no return. Every day, India uses 18,000 MW of electricity for lighting; most of it is wasted by the use of inefficient ordinary light bulbs. To reduce CO2 emissions, India must become more energy efficient.

Compact Fluorescent Lamps use only 20% of the energy used by an ordinary light bulb. By replacing all ordinary light bulbs with CFLs, we can reduce India's CO2 emissions by 55 million tonnes.

You have the power and responsibility to bring about this change by announcing a total ban on incandescent light bulbs by 2010, and to make CFLs more readily accessible to the common man.

As a supporter of Greenpeace’s campaign, I urge you to do the right thing not just for my generation, but for future ones as well.

Please go here if you would like to sign the Ban The Bulb! petition

Ban The Bulb wishes Greenpeace India well with their petition and hopes that a light bulb ban will be forthcoming in India.

US senators propose a light bulb ban

2007-05-17T08:17:00.000-07:00

Antony Froggatt has passed on the following news from the US, where 3 senators are proposing a domestic incandescent light bulb ban. A lot seems to be happening on this front in the US and it will be interesting to see what happens next.

South Carolina is attempting to follow the lead of Australia and the European Union by enforcing the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs.

Three senators proposed legislation that would ban the selling of traditional incandescent light bulbs after 2017, the Tribune Regional News reported.

State Sens. John Drummond, Phil Leventis and Vincent Sheheen would ban the bulbs in an attempt to reduce electricity usage and carbon dioxide emissions, though the measure is causing debate.

"I don't think the government has any business telling us what kind of light bulb to use," said state Rep. Phillip Lowe.

There's another bill on the table that caused a little less opposition. It would require people to replace their burnt-out incandescent bulbs with CFLs as they need new bulbs.

Other U.S. states are also considering similar legislation. In New Jersey, there's a bill to replace all the bulbs in government buildings, and similar proposals have been introduced in California, Connecticut, North Carolina and Rhode Island.

CFLs cost a little more but last longer and are more efficient. But issues of disposal have yet to be worked out. The CFLs have traces of mercury in them.

Unfortunately none of the attention grabbing proposals to ban incandescents, made anywhere in the world, have yet made it into binding legislation and there is a danger that light bulb bans have been announced in order to silence critics rather than drive meaningful change.

Places such Australia, Canada, California and the EU have all announced light bulb bans, to great applause, but none have said how their bans will be implemented.

Lester Brown's new Plan B 2.0 book backs bulb ban

2007-05-11T04:34:00.000-07:00

Lester Brown, a world-leading environmental guru and President of the Earth Policy Institute in the US, has just written a book called Plan B 2.0 which picks up on the Ban The Bulb campaign.

Lester states that...

"Switching light bulbs is an easy way of realizing large, immediate gains in energy efficiency. A study for the U.S. government calculated that the gasoline equivalent of the energy saved over the lifetime of one 24-watt compact fluorescent bulb is sufficient to drive a Prius from New York to San Francisco."

BTB welcomes Lester's support for the Ban The Bulb campaign and hopes that he'll succeed in getting the US to think more seriously about the merits of banning domestic incandescent light bulbs.

Villagers replace all of their incandescents with CFLs

2007-05-11T04:19:00.000-07:00

My thanks to Antony Froggatt for passing on the following news...

A remote moorland village in Staffordshire has become the first community in the UK to replace all its incandescent light bulbs with new energy efficient ones.

Residents of the 30 houses in Ilam, in the Peak District, decided to make the switch in the hope of reducing the village's carbon emissions by around four tonnes a year.

The move came about after a group of bell ringers raised the idea of reinstating an old water turbine as a green source of energy for the village. A local environmental charity, the Marches Energy Agency, suggested taking a broader approach.

Robin Tidman, from the agency, said: "Through experience we have successfully developed our own approach to creating low-carbon communities and so we can help villages like Ilam play their part in tackling climate change.

"We started by working out the carbon footprint - how much energy was being used in Ilam - to check on how much energy was being wasted. The banishment of incandescent bulbs years ahead of the recently announced European Union target is a fantastic achievement for Ilam."

The Government plans to phase out old-fashioned light bulbs in favour of new energy-saving versions by 2011. Funding for the 600 new energy efficient light bulbs was provided by Staffordshire County Council along with the Staffordshire Moorlands District Council and the Peak District National Park.

Why not see if your village or community can follow Ilam's example?

Ontario ban by 2012 plus free CFLs + procurement

2007-04-22T14:52:00.000-07:00

Suzanne Fraser from Project Porchlight has been in touch to let BTB know that the government of Ontario in Canada has announced a ban of inefficient light bulbs by 2012.

A total of $1.5 million has also been allocated by the province for Project Porchlight volunteers to deliver 500,000 bulbs door-to-door in communities across Ontario.

The phase-out period is designed to give Ontario residents a chance to adapt to more efficient lighting technologies, such as compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs, and to start the public on the road to more complex energy conservation actions.

“Phasing out inefficient lighting will stimulate and sustain public dialogue about energy efficiency in general,” said Stuart Hickox, executive director of Project Porchlight, which a One Change campaign. “There is a profound sense of urgency about climate change that can only be sustained by giving everyone something to do. The simple act of changing a light bulb takes people from awareness to action; people become part of the solution.”

This move has occurred because the incandescent light bulb is amongst the most inefficient technologies in use in Canada.

Changing all of the 87 million light bulbs in Ontario will result in a savings of approx 6,000,000 MWh annually, enough to power 600,000 households.

Switching to CFL bulbs will prevent 43.5 million tonnes of greenhouse gases over the lifetime of the bulbs.

Changing light bulbs is the universal starting point for broad public action to reducing energy use. Polling done by Ekos Research following recent Project Porchlight campaigns (Ottawa, Guelph, Thunder Bay) shows that once people receive a CFL bulb, up to 65% say they will either change all their bulbs to CFLs right away or as old bulbs burn out. Up to 80% of respondents say that because of switching one bulb, they will now consider “energy efficiency” as a factor in all their future purchases.

“Switching to energy-efficient light bulbs is the first choice that we can make in becoming energy efficient consumers,” continued Mr. Hickox. “The government’s action shows that they understand that the bulb is just the start. Once people change bulbs, they will quickly move to more complex energy conservation actions.”

Innovative social marketing programs such as Project Porchlight offer people a chance to adapt to and appreciate new technologies such as CFL bulbs. In addition to funding from the Ontario government, Project Porchlight campaigns are also sponsored by the Ontario Ministry of Energy, the Ontario Trillium Foundation, Hydro Ottawa, Thunder Bay Hydro, the Yukon government, and Natural Resources Canada.

Before we get too excited, it is worth noting that critics have said that the provincial government of Ontario has a poor record at delivering on commitments and that they have back-tracked on the closure of coal-fired power stations by 2007, some of which will now be staying open until 2014.

On the bright side, as part of this initiative, the provincial government has vowed to stop purchasing standard incandescent light bulbs, which currently represent less than 1% of lighting in government buildings.

BTB investigates the EU's plans for a light bulb ban

2007-04-18T02:09:00.000-07:00

When the EU's leaders pledged to phase out domestic incandescent light bulbs at a summit hosted by Angela Merkel in March 2007 this campaign was very happy.

Unfortunately, BTB has become increasingly concerned by the lack of clarity and binding commitments in the original announcement.

In the UK, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, followed the EU's announcement by saying that high energy (GLS) domestic incandescents would start to be banned in the UK by 2011.

However, this commitment has not been matched by other European leaders and nothing is guaranteed as far as domestic lighting across the EU is concerned.

In addition, the subsequent failure of the EU to produce a timetable for action or a programme for phasing out different lighting technologies across the EU has set off alarm bells.

Based on these concerns, the BTB campaign has exchanged the following correspondence with the European Commission's energy, press and tax spokesmen and women.

As you will see below, there are genuine grounds for worrying whether our leaders are determined and/or unified enough to deliver a ban on domestic incandescent light bulbs which will deliver any real carbon emission reductions.

It is great that our leaders have got to the point that they are ready to make all the right noises and to take the applause.

However, they now need to convince us that they also intend to deliver on their fine words and to show genuine worldclass leadership.

Dear Ferran,

I am writing to ask if you could let me know which directives the EU will be using to phase out incandescent light bulbs and/or to incentivise the uptake of their energy efficient alternatives.

Warmest regards

Matt

Dr Matt Prescott
Director, Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Dear Mr Prescott,

Ferran Tarradellas has asked me to send you this information regarding lightbulbs and other ways of saving energy.

Electric lighting generates emissions equal to 70 per cent of those from all the world's passenger vehicles. But it is still very inefficient. Incandescent light bulbs have been used for 125 years and up to 90 per cent of the energy each light bulb uses is wasted, mainly as heat.

The more efficient lights, such as the compact fluorescent light bulb, use around 20 per cent of the electricity to produce the same amount of light. A compact fluorescent light bulb can last between 4 and 10 times longer than the average incandescent light bulb and can lead to major savings in household energy costs (lighting costs can be reduced by up to 66 per cent).

The Commission is aware of the substantial energy saving potential related to household lighting. Since 1998, a directive imposes the display of the EU energy label on the packaging of household lamps pointing out incandescent lamps to consumers as particularly bad performers. While very effective for other appliances, the label did not succeed in pulling the market towards a major market share for economic lamps. This had to do with the high difference in purchase price for consumers, aesthetic and performance considerations.

Under the Ecodesign directive (2005/32/EC), the Commission is now examining 20 product groups (including lighting) in order to improve their overall environmental performance, with special attention to their energy efficiency. In this framework it will be possible to the Commission to set mandatory requirements on manufacturers that would exclude the worst performing products from the European market. However, such measures have to be preceded by extensive stakeholder consultation and by an assessment of the impact on the lamp industry (in Australia all lamps are imported) and on consumers (affordability, aesthetic and quality of lighting).

Studies on potential measures for lighting equipment in streets and offices will be finished by this summer, and a study on domestic lighting which will help determine whether phasing out incandescent lamps is a valid policy option in the EU, will start in May.

The study to be launched in May to examine the potential policy measures relating to the environmental performance of household lighting, including its energy efficiency will also estimate the amount of energy that would be saved by phasing out incandescent lamps in the EU. First calculations estimate that the yearly savings once all incandescent lamps will be replaced by energy-saving lamps is 45 billion kWh per year. As an order of magnitude, this represents the total annual electricity consumption (including appliances) of about 10 million European households.

Energy Efficiency Action Plan:

You can find the list of the five new items (solid fuel small combustion installations, laundry dryers, vacuum cleaners, digital TV converter boxes and household lighting) for the new tender for studies under section "Second round of preparatory studies" on the DG TREN Ecodesign website:

Incandescent bulbs will be dealt with under domestic lighting.

We have just opened the offers for preparatory studies into all these areas and now we'll have to evaluate them to select the winning tenderers.

The main criterion for choosing these products is still their relatively high potential in reducing GHG emissions, as required in Article 16.2 of the Ecodesign Directive 2005/32/EC:

Best wishes,
Marilyn Carruthers
Press Officer to Energy Spokesman

Hello Marilyn,

Thank you for replying on Ferran's behalf.

Please could you let me know the following

(1) The proposed date(s) for banning domestic incandescents within the EU,
(2) Whether all types of domestic incandescent will be treated the same way,
(3) Whether all EU countries will be obliged to implement bans in the same way at the same time,
(4) What exemptions will be made,
(5) What financial / practical assistance will provide for the EU's poorest citizens
(6) What measures will be made to ensure that other relevant legislation supports the goal of banning incandescents and
(7) Whether changes in VAT will be allowed to make incandescents more expensive and CFL cheaper before any ban comes into force.

Warmest regards

Matt

Director, Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Dear Matt,

I am afraid that its rather too early to answer your questions. As the info I send you explains, we are in a study phase where incandescent bulbs are concerned.
It is too soon to either confirm that there might be a ban or give a date or to say what types of bulb might be included since before we get to that stage extensive consultation with stakeholders will be held.

Regarding your last question on changes in VAT, I am forwarding your question to our Spokesman responsible for tax issues. Maria Assimakopoulou.

Best wishes,

Marilyn

Dear Marilyn,

Thank you for this additional information.

I suspect that a lot of reputational harm would be done to the EU if a domestic incandescent light bulb ban now failed to materialise and I hope that the EU's official position will be clarified without delay.

I also think that it is important for the goals of the WEEE, RoHS and EUP Directives to be harmonised as much as possible and for it to be made clear whether the EU will allow energy efficient goods and services to benefit from reduced levels of VAT across the EU, before any bans come into force.

I look forward to hearing from Maria Assimakopoulou in due course and appreciate your prompt and helpful response to my enquiry.

Warmest regards

Matt

Dr Matt Prescott
Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Dear Marilyn,

I am writing to ask if you are able to provide any further details on the details on the proposed ban in domestic incandescent light bulbs including:

(1) a timetable for EU-wide action as part of the EUP Directive,
(2) the sequence in which specific domestic lighting technologies might be banned,
(3) the extent to which bans might vary between nations,
(4) the specialist and medical exemptions which are under consideration and
(5) the proposals which might to allow member states to use their tax systems to incentivise greater energy efficiency.

Warmest regards

Matt

Dr Matt Prescott
Director, Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Dear Matt,

Thank you for your email of April 8. As I said in my email of 15 March - we are in a study phase where incandescent bulbs are concerned. There is no proposal to ban them at present - your questions 1-4 are therefore impossible for us to answer yet.
In regard to your tax question I am copying Mrs Assimakopoulou who will answer you on this.

Best wishes,

Marilyn

Dear Marilyn,

Thank you for your response to my query regarding the details of the EU's proposed light bulb ban.

Whatever the intention, I am afraid that the impression was definitely created that the EU was proposing to ban domestic incandescent light bulbs within the next few years.

Please see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6433503.stm

If the press coverage in March was mistaken, I would urge you :

(1) to be precise about what you the European Commission is proposing to do about improving the energy efficiency of domestic lighting and

(2) to publish a press release which corrected the widely established view that the EU's leaders have in any way committed to ban inefficient domestic light bulbs.

As things stand, the EU has been given a lot of credit for sounding as though it intends to make domestic lighting more energy efficient -without being required to specify any meaningful targets or a timetable for action.

I would therefore appreciate it if the EU's position could be clarified in public without delay.

I shall look forward to hearing from Maria regarding my question on the scope for using tax incentives to encourage greater energy efficiency within the EU.

Warmest regards

Matt

Director, Ban The Bulb
www.banthebulb.org

Dear Matt,

For the moment normal VAT rates apply to both Incandescent lighting and Compact fluorescent light bulb.

Today, there is no legal basis for a reduced rate.

Whether changes in VAT will be allowed to make incandescents more expensive and Compact Fluorescent Lights cheaper before any ban comes into force, we will have to wait for the outcome of the report (in particular on the link between VAT rate decrease and consumer price decrease).

Best regards,
Maria Assimakopoulou

Dear Maria,

Thank you for your prompt and helpful response.

Please could you tell me what explicitly stops individual governments from reducing the rate of VAT on energy saving goods and services and when the report you have mentioned is likely to be published.

Warmest regards and thanks,

Matt

Dear Matt,

VAT rules at EU level are harmonised and any change therefore needs to be agreed with the unanimity of the 27 Member States. Member States cannot decide on their own initiative to modify the EU law.

The report on the impact of the existing VAT reduced rates should be available around end of July/September. The Commission, based on the findings of this report will make a Communication aiming to launch a debate among Member States on modifying the current rules on VAT reduced rates. This again doesn't mean that incandescent lighting will then be included in the list of reduced VAT rate.

If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Best regards,

Maria

Dear Maria,

Thank you very much for this clarification.

Your generous assistance is greatly appreciated.

Warmest regards

Matt

European Parliament Written Declaration

2007-04-08T04:45:00.000-07:00

Green MEP, Caroline Lucas, has tabled the following Written Declaration in the European Parliament.

Written declaration on introducing a prohibition on the sale of incandescent light bulbs in the European Union

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Rule 116 of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas energy saving is an essential part of the EU’s strategy to reduce CO2 emissions and improve security of supply,

B. whereas 80% of home lighting today uses highly inefficient incandescent bulbs thatconvert only 5% of the energy used into light,

C. whereas these bulbs could be rapidly replaced, saving €5-8 billion across the EU in fuelbills and around 20 million tonnes of CO2,

D. whereas there is a growing worldwide move towards legislation to ban incandescentbulbs, including in Cuba (May 2006), Venezuela (November 2006), California (February2007), Australia (February 2007) and Ontario (February 2007),

1. Calls upon the Commission to initiate legislation to ban the sale of incandescent lightbulbs in the European Union by 2010;

2. Calls upon Member States, with EU encouragement, immediately to launch public information campaigns on the economic and environmental advantages of efficient lighting systems and to maximise existing legislation to facilitate the phasing-out ofincandescent bulbs;

3. Urges the Commission to use the proposal for a new international energy efficiency agreement to launch a global ban on the use of incandescent bulbs;

4. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of thesignatories, to the Commission and the Member States.

If 50% of MEPs signed this document it would become official European Parliament policy.

Elements of the lighting industry are known to be resistant to this document's wording, in particular the emphasis on a blanket ban of incandescent light bulbs, and to prefer that the declaration was calling for specific types of incandescent to be phased out by specific dates.

BTB suspects that it is unlikely that 50% of MEPs will sign up to this written declaration and that this call for a wholesale ban will simply focus minds across the EU on what measures would represent sensible and meaningful progress.

It is clear to BTB that some incandescents will need to be phased out later than others, in particular due to the need for a range of specialist + medical exemptions and responsible recycling schemes but that much more is also likely to be possible than the manufacturers would ever volunteer on their own accord... especially with regard to phasing out 60W and 100W screw and bayonet incandescents as quickly as possible.

BTB was delighted to offer Caroline Lucas' office some advice before this written declaration was tabled, but was unable to cover all of the relevant details at short notice.

Import duty on Chinese CFLs up for renewal by EU

2007-04-08T04:09:00.000-07:00

James has sent in the following article from the FT which explains how the light bulb manufacturer Siemens / Osram is lobbying against the renewal of the 66% import duty currently imposed on compact fluorescent lamps made in China when they are imported into the EU.

BTB suspects that this import duty will be renewed, or only cut a little, because the Western light ban manufacturers are co-operating with the EU's plans to phase out / ban incandescent light bulbs. It may also be significant that most Chinese CFLs are much less sophisticated than those made in the West (because they do not benefit from the patents) and could discredit all energy-saving light bulbs by offering disappointing performace.

While Europe's leaders were last week urging householders to fit energy-efficient light bulbs, several governments were busy attempting to block moves to cut their price.

A European summit agreed to toughen regulations against old-fashioned incandescent bulbs by 2009 as part of a bid to cut greenhouse gas emissions. But earlier in the week officials from trade ministries rebuffed attempts by the European Commission to end five-year-old surcharges on imports of energy-efficient bulbs from China.

The 66 per cent duty was imposed in 2002 after European manufacturers complained of dumping by the Chinese. It expires in October but Siemens of Germany, which owns the Osram brand, is pushing for an extension. The other big makers, Philips of the Netherlands, which pays a 33 per cent tariff, and GE of the US, disagree. Ending the duty would cut prices to the level of conventional bulbs.

The Commission believes that Osram does not have the requisite 25 per cent of the market to ask for measures but some states, including Italy, this week askedit to do its maths again.

A spokesman said: "The Commission has not yet reached a definitive assessment in this review at this stage. It will do so in the next couple of weeks."

A UK government spokeswoman said: "Replacing just one bulb with an energy-efficient alternative can reduce lighting costs by up to £9 per year, or £100 over the lifetime of the bulb." It also saves tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. Cuba, Venezuela and Australia are to ban incandescent bulbs.

EU diplomats said the late addition of the item to the summit agenda was the personal initiative of Angela Merkel, German chancellor, whose country holds the Union's rotating presidency.

Asked whether she used such bulbs, she said: "Most of the bulbs in my flat are energy-saving bulbs but they are not yet quite bright enough. Sometimes if you drop something on the carpet, you can't always find it." She should expect a knock at the door soon from Siemens.

EU lamp companies help government change lights

2007-03-18T11:11:00.000-07:00

Antony Froggatt has just passed on the following press release from the European Lamp Companies Federation.

The European Lamp Companies Federation (ELC) today announced the first-ever joint industry commitment to support a government shift to more efficient lighting products for the home. The commitment was announced by Philips, Osram, GE, SLI Sylvania and other European lamp manufacturers following a meeting between industry, national governments and the European Commission at the International Energy Agency, in Paris.

The lighting industry is developing a multi-pronged approach to achieve this government objective including public incentives to encourage consumers to purchase more efficient products and setting performance standards that will eliminate the least efficient products from the market.

In Europe approximately 2.1 billion energy inefficient lamps are sold every year mainly for homes, and other commercial uses. There are 3.6 billion such inefficient lamps in use in Europe. Assuming that an average of 50% of energy consumed could be saved by changing to energy efficient home lighting, Europe could save approximately 23 megatons of CO2, which is equal to the output of 27 power plants (@ 2TWh) or electricity cost saving of 7 billion Euros.

ELC members are already proactively assisting the government to influence the shift towards more efficient lighting through the European framework directive EuP (ecodesign of energy using products) in the areas of street and office lighting. They now also urge the European Commission to adopt a similarly proactive approach to domestic lighting. The group is now actively working on scenarios for the various governments so as to recommend realistic targets and timelines for an effective, successful shift that continues to provide consumers with the best lighting products for their needs while also serving to reduce energy consumption.

This co-operation between business and government is welcomed by Ban The Bulb, especially as it should help to ensure that meaningful change is delivered in a timely fashion across Europe.

EU light bulb ban not guaranteed

2007-03-16T07:36:00.000-07:00

Ban The Bulb is concerned that the wording used by the EU's leaders when they announced their plans to ban incandescent light bulb by 2009 was very vague (For example, Gordon Brown had added 2 years to the EU's deadline for action within 2 days), and BTB has consequently exchanged the following emails with the EU's energy spokesman and his team.

Dear Mr Prescott,

Ferran Tarradellas has asked me to send you this information regarding lightbulbs and other ways of saving energy.

Electric lighting generates emissions equal to 70 per cent of those from all the world's passenger vehicles. But it is still very inefficient. Incandescent light bulbs have been used for 125 years and up to 90 per cent of the energy each light bulb uses is wasted, mainly as heat.

The more efficient lights, such as the compact fluorescent light bulb, use around 20 per cent of the electricity to produce the same amount of light. A compact fluorescent light bulb can last between 4 and 10 times longer than the average incandescent light bulb and can lead to major savings in household energy costs (lighting costs can be reduced by up to 66 per cent).

The Commission is aware of the substantial energy saving potential related to household lighting. Since 1998, a directive imposes the display of the EU energy label on the packaging of household lamps pointing out incandescent lamps to consumers as particularly bad performers. While very effective for other appliances, the label did not succeed in pulling the market towards a major market share for economic lamps. This had to do with the high difference in purchase price for consumers, aesthetic and performance considerations.

Under the Ecodesign directive (2005/32/EC), the Commission is now examining 20 product groups (including lighting) in order to improve their overall environmental performance, with special attention to their energy efficiency. In this framework it will be possible to the Commission to set mandatory requirements on manufacturers that would exclude the worst performing products from the European market. However, such measures have to be preceded by extensive stakeholder consultation and by an assessment of the impact on the lamp industry (in Australia all lamps are imported) and on consumers (affordability, aesthetic and quality of lighting).

Studies on potential measures for lighting equipment in streets and offices will be finished by this summer, and a study on domestic lighting which will help determine whether phasing out incandescent lamps is a valid policy option in the EU, will start in May.

The study to be launched in May to examine the potential policy measures relating to the environmental performance of household lighting, including its energy efficiency will also estimate the amount of energy that would be saved by phasing out incandescent lamps in the EU. First calculations estimate that the yearly savings once all incandescent lamps will be replaced by energy-saving lamps is 45 billion kWh per year. As an order of magnitude, this represents the total annual electricity consumption (including appliances) of about 10 million European households.

Energy Efficiency Action Plan:

You can find the list of the five new items(1. solid fuel small combustion installations, 2. laundry dryers, 3. vacuum cleaners, 4. digital TV converter boxes and 5. household lighting) for the new tender for studies under section "Second round of preparatory studies" on the DG TREN Ecodesign website.

Incandescent bulbs will be dealt with under domestic lighting.

We have just opened the offers for preparatory studies into all these areas and now we'll have to evaluate them to select the winning tenderers.

The main criterion for choosing these products is still their relatively high potential in reducing GHG emissions, as required in Article 16.2 of the Ecodesign Directive 2005/32/EC:

Best wishes,

Marilyn

Hello Marilyn,

Thank you for replying on Ferran's behalf.

Please could you let me know the following

(1) The proposed date(s) for banning domestic incandescents within the EU,
(2) Whether all types of domestic incandescent will be treated the same way,
(3) Whether all EU countries will be obliged to implement bans in the same way at the same time,
(4) What exemptions will be made,
(5) What financial / practical assistance will be provided for the EU's poorest citizens
(6) What measures will be made to ensure that other relevant legislation supports the goal of banning incandescents and
(7) Whether changes in VAT will be allowed to make incandescents more expensive and CFLs cheaper before any ban comes into force.

Warmest regards

Matt

BTB is concerned that these statements do not commit the EU's member countries to banning incandescent lights by a specific date or in a consistent manner across the EU.

I will keep you posted with developments and thank Antony Froggatt for his recent assistance.

Currys ban incandescent light bulbs from stores

2007-03-16T06:46:00.000-07:00

The UK's biggest electrical retailer, Currys, has announced that it will stop selling incandescent light bulbs.

Apparently, sales of energy saving light bulbs have increased 20 fold on a year by year basis, and now make up 60% of the companies light bulbs sales.

Although a welcome development it is noticeable that Curry's still sell very few other energy saving products and that they have stopped selling cathode ray televisions which use 4 times less electricy than plasma screen televisions.

It is also interesting to note that the energy company E.ON has joined forces with the retailer Morrisons to offer two Philips low-energy Genie bulbs for 99p...

Hopefully more companies will copy these moves and extend their commitment to energy efficiency beyond light bulbs.

EU-wide incandescent light bulb ban by 2010

2007-03-10T09:46:00.000-08:00

On Friday, at an EU conference hosted by Germany's Chancellor, Angela Merkel, the European Union's leaders announced their intention to ban incandescent light bulbs, for the 490 million people living within the EU's 27 countries, by 2010.

When the Ban The Bulb campaign was founded two years ago such a development seemed a distant dream, and I would like to thank the many people who have helped this historic announcement to come about.

Richard Black from BBC News Online, gave the whole campaign a huge boost by inviting BTB to write a number of comment pieces for BBC New Online's "Green Room".

In the first Green Room article I was able to make the basic case for making better use of the energy saving light bulbs. This publicity resulted in hundreds of people writing letters to their Member of Parliament, as well as to the UK's Department for the Environment (DEFRA), and stimulated a vigorous debate within the UK government.

Mark Kinver and Richard then allowed me to produce a number of follow-up articles for the Green Room slot which addressed the more technical issues associated with the manufacture and use of incandescents and CFLs, the need for strong political leadership and the need to regulate markets in ways which helped to save money, reduce carbon emissions and increase energy security.

Oliver Tickell also wrote an article (about different ways of taxing light bulbs) for the Guardian, during which he calculated the lifetime saving from a single CFL was £100, and I am sure that this number lodged in many brains.

The Energy Saving Trust, Building Research Establishment and the Market Transformation Programme provided credible data which helped to strengthen the win-win-win rationale behind the campaign.

Gerald Strickland, the chief executive of the European Lamp Companies Federation, did what he could to facilitate BTB's constructive engagement with the lighting industry, and I am pretty sure that his skill and tact helped to calm and focus the responses of the major lighting manufacturers such as Philips, GE and Osram to the BTB campaign from Feb 06 onwards.

Leo Hickman generously made www.BanTheBulb.org, a campaign of the week for The Guardian in Feb 2006, and has followed up on his early support with articles which have explained why it was worth changing light bulbs immediately and asked why the UK couldn't ban incandescents, if Australia could.

Roger Harrabin asked Tony Blair if he would consider banning incandescent light bulbs, following the publication of the UK's Energy Review in July 2006, and was told that the UK had asked the EU to consider an EU-wide ban.

The Germans seem to have ignored or forgotten this request from the UK government but, whatever happened at the EU-level, it is clear that something changed between 21 Feb and 10 Mar 2007.

As recently as 21 Feb 2007, the EU's energy spokesman, Ferran Tarradellas was saying there were no plans to ban domestic light bulbs.

George Monbiot mentioned the idea of banning incandescent light bulbs in his book Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning, whilst my local member of parliament, Dr Evan Harris MP, proposed an Early Day Motion in support of the campaign which ended up being signed by 44 MPs from 7 political parties. The Oxford Mail also provided valuable local support at the time of the EDM.

Many different people set up supportive petitions on the No. 10 Downing Street website; these petitions typically requested changes in VAT for energy saving goods and service and/or a light bulb ban, and I suspect that light bulbs became one of the most popular topics for petitions on the No. 10 website.

Assembly Member Lloyd Levine from California proposed the "How Many Legislators Does It Take To Change A Light Bulb Act" and called for the banning of incandescents in California by 2012.

This funnily-phrased piece of proposed legislation was a particularly significant development and raised the level of political interest in banning incandescents from 31 Jan 2007. This was partly because the proposal was now well-received, rather than ridiculed, but also because Lloyd's political status could be seen (especially by all politicians!) to have grown as a result of showing some political courage when it came to tackling climate change.

Within three weeks, the Australian environment minister Malcolm Turnbull (who didn't want to sign up to Kyoto but had to be seen to do something about climate change after the worst drought in 100 years) had picked up on the Ban The Bulb proposal which was being prepared, by a co-founder of Planet Ark, John Dee, and light bulb manufacturer, Philips...

Minister Turnbull said that Australia's light bulb ban would be introduced by 2009-2010 and, despite being vague about how a ban would be implemented, removed many of the excuses for inaction which had previously been thrown up by many developed countries, including the UK.

Laura Yates and John Sauven from Greenpeace expressed an interest in supporting the Ban The Bulb campaign, after the ban in Australia, and we had begun to discuss how this might be made to work and the campaign could be adapted for countries such as India.

At around the same time, BBC News 24 asked why Australia had proposed banning incandescents and what could be done in the UK and EU. I suggested that Australia's "can do culture" probably had something to do it, whilst the UK's more instinctive focus on the barriers to change seemed to slow down or block innovative decision-making in the UK/EU.

Andrew Mason a school boy from Scotland and others started to ask politicians such as David Miliband, in ways which couldn't be easily fudged, why the UK hadn't yet introduced a ban.

Matt McGrath interviewed BTB for the BBC World Service on Thursday 8 March and subseqently discovered that domestic light bulbs, and five other technologies, had just been added to the 14 technologies highlighted for legislation in the EU's Action Plan for Energy Efficiency.

This was the first significant indication that a light bulb ban might be announced while the EU's leaders were meeting in Germany... this impression was strengthened by some of the things which were being said about the EU showing leadership and reducing carbon emissions by 20% by 2020... but remained no more than a hunch.

Antony Froggatt helped Caroline Lucas MEP to produce a Written Declaration (based on BTB's research), for Green MEPs to sign and this neatly summarised the case for Europe's leaders to do something decisive... and the rest is now history!

An idea which was once considered radical has become mainstream, and the conversation has already moved on to some of the additional steps which will be required to significantly reduce the atmosphere's carbon dioxide concentration, such as taxing aviation more and increasing the role of renewables in supplying energy.

BTB will continue to monitor how the EU's light bulb ban is implemented and to encourage other countries to take advantage of the carbon, energy and money savings possible from using energy efficient technologies which are already available but which haven't got established yet for one reason or another.

Thanks to Rebecca Blood, Dangerousmeta, Tree Hugger, the National Audit Office (who wrote an excellent report on the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency in 2005)... and last-but-not least my friends and family in Australia, Holland and the UK.

Things like this don't happen spontaneously or overnight and all of the help and support BTB has received is greatly appreciated.

EU-wide light bulb ban becoming possible

2007-03-09T01:18:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb has heard that incandescent light bulbs have been added to EU's list of technologies under consideration as part of the EU's Action Plan on Energy Efficiency (increasing the number of technologies from 14 to 20) since 21 Feb.

Together with the EU's recent announcement of an intention to cut the EU's carbon emissions by 20% by 2020, and calls of leadership by the EU, it looks as though a a de facto ban (using changes to incentives such as VAT, technology neutral minimum standards such as lumens per watt and/or the phased ban of specific technologies) could be in the offing.

A late addition....

The Following Written Declaration was put together by Caroline Lucas MEP and was submitted prior to the EU leaders meeting in Germany. I'm afraid it's written in the political equivalent of legalese, but I hope you'll get the drift of it.

WRITTEN DECLARATION

pursuant to Rule 116 of the Rules of Procedure

by Caroline Lucas, Mojca Drcar Murko, Karin Scheele and Jens Holm

on introducing a prohibition on the sale of incandescent light bulbs in the European Union

Written declaration on introducing a prohibition on the sale of incandescent light bulbs in the European Union.

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Rule 116 of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas energy-saving is an essential part of the EU’s strategy to reduce CO2 emissions and improve security of supply,

B. whereas 80% of home lighting today uses highly inefficient incandescent bulbs that convert only 5% of energy used into light,

C. whereas these bulbs could be rapidly replaced, saving €5-8 billion across the EU in fuel bills and around 20 million tonnes of CO2,

D. whereas there is a growing worldwide move for legislation to ban incandescent bulbs, including in Cuba (May 06), Venezuela (Nov 06), California (Feb 07), Australia (Feb 07) and Ontario (Feb 07),

1. Calls upon the Commission to initiate legislation to ban the sale of incandescent light bulbs in the European Union by 2010;

2. Calls upon Member States, with EU encouragement, to immediately launch public information campaigns on the economic and environmental advantages of efficient lighting systems; and to maximise existing legislation to facilitate the phase-out of incandescent bulbs;

3. Urges the Commission to use the proposal for a new international energy efficiency agreement to launch a global ban the use of incandescent bulbs;

4. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories, to the Commission and Member States.

No. 10: VAT on energy efficient goods + services

2007-02-28T17:11:00.000-08:00

Given that taxes can be changed more quickly than laws, the Ban The Bulb campaign has suggested that the sales tax (VAT) on CFLs should immediately be reduced from 17.5% to 5%, and that this should rapidly be followed by the phased ban of different types of incandescent light bulb.

BTB has known for some time that applying a zero rate tax rate on CFLs would open up too many complex discussions within the EU to be a realistic option.

However, based on the response to the following petition from the No. 10 website (please see below), BTB sees no reason for not immediately reducing the VAT rate on CFLs from 17.5% to 5%.

Ideally in the next UK Budget.

In the UK, the VAT on a small number of predominantly high-value energy-efficient technologies has already been reduced.

However, these technologies have continued to sell in very small numbers and have predominantly been bought by the wealthy middle class.

This means that the existing tax concessions have had a relatively minor effect on carbon emissions (and co-incidentally tax revenues) and not helped those in greatest need.

In BTB's view, it would be better if all energy-efficient goods and services were charged the 5% VAT rate.

Surely, low-cost and effective technologies, such as CFLs, which could sell in very large numbers and reduce the million tonnes of carbon dioxide emission associated with lighting by 60% should not be excluded from tax reductions on the grounds that this measure might effect tax revenues.

The savings associated with greater energy efficiency, such as building and subsidising fewer nuclear power stations, and helping the fuel poor to use significantly less energy and save money, whilst achieving the same level of comfort and light, should more than compensate for any reduction in sales tax.

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Review VAT on energy efficiency products and services."

Details of petition:

"Prime Minister. There has been a lot of talk of increasing taxes to drive energy efficiency however I would like you to consider the following tax reductions: Remove VAT on ALL energy efficiency products. Remove VAT on all building works specifically aimed at improving home energy effiicency e.g. Double Glazing, Cavity Wall insulation, loft insulation, micro generation systems, Solar Panels, energy efficient boilers etc. Reduce VAT on energy efficient cars By removing VAT, these products and services will be cheaper for the customer and stimulate demand, reducing energy consumption."

The Government's response

VAT is a broad-based tax on consumer expenditure and reliefs from it have always been strictly limited. When the UK joined the European Community in 1973, it meant signing up to the general agreements which covered the application of VAT throughout the EC. Under these and successive agreements we are allowed to keep our existing zero rates of VAT on things such as food, books and young children's clothing, most of which had been exempt from the old purchase tax that preceded VAT. Whilst these agreements allow us to keep our existing zero rates they do not allow us to extend them or introduce new ones. It is therefore not possible to remove VAT from the environmentally friendly products listed.

Under the same European agreements, a reduced rate of VAT of not less than 5% is available for the construction, renovation and alteration of housing provided as part of a social policy. We have been sparing in our use of reduced rates and have only introduced them where we are convinced that the tax system offers the most efficient and best-targeted support for our social objectives. To date we have used this provision to introduce a reduced rate of VAT for the installation of a range of energy-saving and energy-efficient products and microgeneration technologies, including solar panels, wind turbines, insulation and draught stripping in houses and other residential accommodation.

However, at present, these agreements do not allow a reduced rate to be applied to goods alone when not supplied as part of an overall service. Changes to the European agreements governing the availability of VAT reduced rates require the unanimous support of all EU Member States. The Government has made the case at European level for changes to the agreements that would enable wider use of reduced rates for energy-saving and energy-efficient products. However, there is significant resistance to the introduction of new reduced rates for goods from some Member States because of the potential impact on the Single Market. We will consider our options and priorities for new reduced rates carefully when the issue next becomes due for discussion at EU level.

It would be good to know which countries were providing significant resistance, and on what grounds, and why draught insulation and condoms are considered to include a service eligible for 5% VAT, whilst CFLs are not. It is also noticeable that the contacts with other governments have not been specified, the potential impacts on the Single Market have not explained and the timing of the next discussion at the EU level has not been made clear.

Ban The Bulb's new logo

2007-02-27T12:57:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb would like to thank Steve at Hyl Design for designing the campaign's new logo.

Steve provided all of his work and ideas for free, and was a delight to work with.

Why not ban incandescents in the UK... and the EU?

2007-02-21T14:37:00.000-08:00

Since launching Ban The Bulb in February 2005 a lot has happened (including Hurricane Katrina, The Stern Review and the launch of the IPCC's 4th Assessment Report).

In fact, the case for taking urgent action to reduce carbon emissions and tackle the threats posed by climate change has become increasingly diverse and compelling... not to mention accepted by both the business community and the public.

It is therefore great to see how the politicians in Cuba (May 06), Venezuela (Nov 06), California (Feb 07), Australia (Feb 07) and Ontario (Feb 07) have gradually initiated and/or proposed light bulb bans.

Being based in the UK, I would obviously like to see my own government joining in the party, and giving this job to themselves rather than to the EU or a future government.

If a trade rule is responsible for preventing, or delaying, a unilateral ban of incandescents in the UK it would be good to know which rule was to blame and to understand why we haven't been able to announce a light bulb ban in the UK yet - given that there is no bigger threat than climate change (Sir David King, June 04), climate change represents the the world's biggest market failure (Sir Nicholas Stern, Oct 06), and the Climate change fight "can't wait" " (Tony Blair, Oct 06).

Much of the necessary legislation (including the Eco-Design and the RoHS Directives) is already in place or in the EU pipeline.

Despite this, it is far from clear that incandescent light bulbs will ever be considered a wasteful technology by all of the EU's 27 member countries.

The European Commission has just announced an interest in cutting EU emissions by between 20% and 30% by 2020, yet it has has failed to outline how this will ever be achieved.

The UK and the EU could announce a phased and responsible ban of incandescent light bulbs tomorrow if they wanted - as an easy first step design to reduce carbon emissions and save money - and one has to question their sincerity if they cannot contemplate this without resorting to vague mumblings about rules...

If there are any trade rules which could prevent this wasteful technology from being banned, perhaps we should take a stand and call for common sense to prevail?

Surely the UK government, the European Commission and others could cut through the red tape, and set a sensible timetable for for action, if they really wanted to get things done?

Many commonly used 60W and 100W light bulbs could be replaced over night... even if other, more niche, designs of light bulb would take longer to phase out.

It is certainly very exciting that things are suddenly moving so fast but much more could be done if our leaders genuinely wanted to show meaningful leadership, ambition and imagination.

Every journey starts with one step, and in BTB's view this energy-efficiency journey is worth starting today.

Ontario in Canada considers a light bulb ban...

2007-02-21T12:26:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb is pleased to see that the enthusiasm for banning incandescent light bulbs is proving contagious...

According to www.CBC.ca, Ontario in Canada is the latest place to suggest a willingness to get things moving.

Let's just hope that more politicians start to mention how they intend to decide which light bulbs should be banned (and by when!), what they are going to do to ensure that all CFLs are responsibly recycled, how they are going to help the poor to change their lighting, whether any heavily-taxed incandescents are going to remain available for specialist purposes, which other wasteful technologies they would like to get banned and/or which other energy-efficient technologies they would like to help get established...

Ontario is impressed by Australia's decision to ban old-fashioned incandescent bulbs.

The province is in the midst of drawing up plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions and Environment Minister Laurel Broten says the government hasn't ruled out following in Australia's footsteps.

She said banning incandescent bulbs is just one of many great ideas being put forward.

Australia announced Tuesday it will ban incandescent light bulbs in three years, estimating the move to fluorescent bulbs will cut 800,000 tonnes from the country's current emissions levels by 2012.

Premier Dalton McGuinty says replacing older energy-draining bulbs across the province with more efficient ones could help Ontario shut down its coal-fired power plants.

Among Canadian groups pushing for a move to fluorescent bulbs is the not-for-profit organization One Change in Ottawa.

The group has the backing of Hydro Ottawa and has replaced 250,000 bulbs in Ottawa. Similar campaigns are underway in Whitehorse, Guelph and Thunder Bay.

Australia considers light bulb ban... by 2010

2007-02-19T16:26:00.000-08:00

Ron Skinner has been in touch from Australia in order to let Ban The Bulb know that Australia's federal government has announced it is considering a ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs.

Ban The Bulb hopes that this aspiration will quickly turn into a commitment and that Australia's courageous move will help other countries to begin thinking about what they could do, quickly and simply, to reduce their carbon emissions.

The following account of the proposal comes from Australia's Nine MSN news service...

Australia is set to become the first country in the world to stop using the cheap standard light bulb, with the federal government expected today to announce a commitment to phasing out inefficient incandescent light within three years.

The ambitious plan, set to be unveiled by Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull, aims to have every Australian home lit by compact fluorescent light by 2009-10.

Replacing the old bulb is expected to cut annual greenhouse gas emissions by 800,000 tonnes, the Sydney Morning Herald reports.

Under increasing pressure to deal with climate change, the Howard government is set to use this plan as an example of Australia's commitment to solving the problem of global warming.

But will the plan be effective? Australia's emissions in 2004 totalled 564.7 million tonnes. The 800,000 saved is barely 1/700 of the total released.

Phasing out the old 40-cent bulbs will also cost Australians more, with fluorescent light generally several times more expensive than the standard option.

But Colin Goldman, the head of lighting importer Nelson Industries, told the Herald he supports the move.

"These days you can buy a six-pack at the $10 mark," he said. "The prices are coming down, and as soon as you get volume with greater numbers on the market they come down further."

Goldman said compact fluorescents were available that offered a range of light for use within households.

Compact fluorescent lights use only 20 percent as much electricity as standard light bulbs to produce the same amount of light, according to the federal government.

The idea of changing the light was also proposed in California last month, branded the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act".

Strictly speaking, BTB thinks Cuba might be the first country to have phased out incandescents, but either way this is a promising development. Especially, for a country which has just been hit by the worst drought in living memory...

Good on ya, Australia!:

Philips: phasing out incandescents within 10 yrs?

2007-02-10T06:10:00.000-08:00

Lighting manufacturer Philips has called for incandescent light bulbs to be phased out within 10 years under the EU eco-design directive.

Philips has suggested that inefficient incandescent light bulbs could be phased out in Europe within 10 years provided that EU governments and other stakeholders worked together.

More specifically, Philips' lighting boss Theo van Deursen recommended that discussions should be held under the EuP or eco-design of energy-using products directive.

This 2005 directive is already legally binding and provides a framework for a series of product-specific eco-standards to be drawn up.

Philips believes that a phase-out must be achieved "collectively" rather than being imposed on manufacturers, whilst environmental organisations have expressed concern about allowing voluntary agreements to determine the standards set under the EUP directive.

Although announced unilaterally, the announcement by Philips appears to be part of a long-running campaign by the lighting sector to promote greater energy efficiency and there are signs that a phased removal of incandescents from the market (as an example of inefficient and needlessly wasteful technology) could find some support among the EU's member states... with Tony Blair announcing in July 06 that the UK government would be seeking to phase-out the most inefficient light bulbs in partnership with other EU governments.

Supermarkets use their carbon footprints to compete

2007-02-04T02:38:00.000-08:00

Suddenly, the big supermarkets are competing to convince the public that they are green...

As a result, a significant amount of latent capacity has been unleashed in the strategy, marketing and retailing departments of these powerful agents for social change.

As well as developing new, more prominent, ways of displaying energy saving light bulbs, Wal Mart has said that it wants to sell 100 million CFLs a year and announced plans to install solar panels and wind turbines on their stores in Texas.

Meanwhile, the Chief Executive of Tesco, Sir Terry Leahy, has announced plans to spend £500 million on reducing the energy use of his stores and to halve the average energy use in all of his company's buildings by 2010.

At the consumer level, Tesco has also said that it will halve the price of the CFLs it sells and aim to have an energy-saving alternative available for every design of incandescent light bulb.

Stuart Rose, the Chief Executive of the Marks and Spencer department store chain has announced a 100-point "eco-plan" for the environment.

This £200 million plan included the development of labels for goods which have been flown in by aeroplane and their making it a priority for the ingredients of ready meals to come from local sources.

Please let me know if you hear of any other supermarkets who are doing something imaginative and potentially significant to reduce their carbon footprint.

DEFRA: Effect of Fiscal Measures on Domestic Lamps

2007-02-03T07:31:00.000-08:00

Since Feb 2005, Ban The Bulb has been campaigning for the cost of incadescent light bulbs to be increased by the introduction of a £1 surcharge per bulb, and for the price of energy-saving CFLs to be reduced by a cut in sales tax (VAT) from 17.5% to 5%... with the sale of incandescents being banned by a specified date in the not-too-distant future.

It is therefore interesting to read the following economic analysis which has been produced by DEFRA's Market Transformation Programme...

This analysis quantifies the effects on the Treasury's income of a range of measures which are similar to those which have been proposed by BTB.

Sadly, this analysis would appear to indicate that the government is more interested in maintaining it's existing streams of income than in cutting greenhouse gas emissions quickly and simply.

BNDL12: Effect of Fiscal Measures on Domestic Lamps

This brief and referenced information is a public consultation document and will be used to inform Government decisions. The information and analysis in the brief forms part of an integrated, public domain knowledge base that is managed and held by Defra’s Market Transformation Programme [1]. The policy scenarios and action plans are illustrative, intended to stimulate discussion and do not imply commitment by Government nor by any other body.

1. Background

This Briefing Note estimates the effects of three alternative economic instruments relating to household lamps:

Option 1: Increasing VAT on tungsten filament (GLS) lamps to 25%;

Option 2: Charging a flat rate of 50p on certain lamps;

Option 3: A combination of reducing the VAT on compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) to 5% and introducing an inefficiency charge of 85p on tungsten filament lamps.

2. Cost and benefits of economic instruments

2.1 Increasing VAT on tungsten filament lamps to 25%

Increasing the rate of VAT to 25% on the less efficient tungsten filament lamps will increase their prices only marginally, due to the very low price of these lamps (an average price of 50p). As compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) have a much higher price relative to tungsten filament lamps (an average price of £3.00), it seems unlikely that this change to VAT alone will result in a noticeable increase in the sales of CFLs.

From the Treasury’s point of view, each sale of an extra CFL would net 45p in VAT (at 17.5%) from the CFL sale but would lose 5.5p in tax per annum from the equivalent tungsten filament lamp sales for the next 12 years on average – 66p in all (assuming that each CFL lasts six times as long as a tungsten filament lamp which itself lasts 2 years on average).

At present 18 million CFL lamps are sold each year, netting about £8 million in VAT. 223 million tungsten filament lamps are sold each year netting about £16.7 million pounds in VAT. This figure would rise to £24.5 million per annum under the proposed increase if no extra CFLs were sold.

In the best case scenario (in energy efficiency terms) if all 480 million tungsten filament lamps the changed to CFLs the net cost to the Treasury would be £206 million.

2.2 Charging a flat rate of 50p on tungsten filament lamps

Adding an extra flat charge of 50p on the less efficient tungsten filament lamps will effectively double their price. Although CFLs are still about 300% more expensive, CFLs would then become a cost-effective alternative to tungsten filament lamps on purchase price alone: assuming that a CFL has a lifetime of at least 6000 hours, it would become more expensive to buy six tungsten filament lamps with a lifetime of 1000 hours.

If a tungsten filament lamp was replaced with a CFL the Treasury would gain 45p tax from the CFL sale but would lose an average of 30.5p per annum from ‘lost’ tungsten filament lamp sales tax revenue for the next 12 years £3.66 in all.

Therefore, in the best case scenario in which all the tungsten filament lamps are changed to CFLs, the net cost to the Treasury would be £1540 million over the 12 year life of the lamps. However, £1440 million of this represents taxes that the Government would not have had without the new flat-rate tax surcharge. The Treasury would actually be revenue positive from this measure until more than half the lamps (~260 million) have changed from tungsten filament to CFL.

2.3 Lower VAT for CFLs; flat rate surcharge for tungsten filament lamps

In a paper in 2003, the Energy Savings Trust suggested the following combination of fiscal measures for encouraging the sale of compact fluorescent lamps:

- the introduction of 5% VAT for energy efficient light bulbs, and
- an inefficiency change of 50p for incandescent bulbs.

In a revised paper published in October 2005, EST suggest that this inefficiency charge my need to be increased to 85p per bulb to account for the potential price increase of compact fluorescent lamps arising from a recycling charge applied to take into account the terms of the WEEE Directive on waste.

Such a change would cost the Treasury more in the long term (32p per CFL lamp sold), but would still be revenue positive until about half of the tungsten filament lamps have been switched to tungsten filament lamps.

3. Energy savings from change from tungsten filament lamps to CFL lamps

It has not been possible to quantify the impact of such price changes on sales, but Table 1 does provide estimates of the unit energy savings which result from a switch to selling more energy efficient lamps. It also shows the current proportion of energy efficient sales, thus indicating the scope for increasing sales further.

Table 1. Energy savings associated with economic instruments

CFL
Energy consumption per year of product (GWh) = 1074
Energy saving per product (GWh) = 0
Annual Sales that could be effected by economic instruments = 18 Million
Current % of sales = 7%

Tungsten filament 100W
Energy consumption per year of product (GWh) = 6076
Energy saving per product (GWh) = 4557
Annual Sales that could be effected by economic instruments = 63 Million
Current % of sales = 26.0%

Tungsten filament 60 W
Energy consumption per year of product (GWh) = 6944
Energy saving per product (GWh) = 5208
Annual Sales that could be effected by economic instruments = 117 Million
Current % of sales = 48.0%

Tungsten filament 40 W
Energy consumption per year of product (GWh) = 1765
Energy saving per product (GWh) = 1324
Annual Sales that could be effected by economic instruments = 45 Million
Current % of sales = 18%

Notes:

Energy savings are calculated as the difference between the energy consumption of a tungsten filament lamp and an equivalent (in terms of light output) CFL. Savings depend on the usage of the lamp. The savings given here represent the average hours of use for each lamp type.

5. Other fiscal options

The Chairman of the All-party Group on Climate Change has suggested to the Treasury that the tax on incandescent lamps should be gradually increased until they are the same price as CFLs; the Treasury are looking at the proposal.

With feedback, questions or comments, please contact: info@mtprog.com or call the MTP enquiry line on +44(0)845 600 8951, quoting the document reference.

[1] Further information and briefing on related issues at www.mtprog.com or follow the links if viewing on-line

Ban The Bulb... by 2012 in California?

2007-02-01T16:07:00.000-08:00

Ban The Bulb is delighted to hear that Lloyd Levine a Democrat Assembly Member for California has proposed a ban on the sale of incandescent light bulbs by 2012.

Lloyd's proposal shows moral courage and political imagination, and provides an excellent example to politicians all over the world.

I hope that Lloyd's proposal will attract cross-party support in California and get replicated in other US states.

With any luck this bold move might even persuade a few more British and EU politicians that the banning incandescent light bulbs is an idea worthy of their support!

Levine Legislation to Make California First State in the Nation to Ban Incandescent Light Bulbs

"How many legislators does it take to change a light bulb act" Touts the Multiple Benefits of Energy-Saving Light Bulbs

SACRAMENTO –– In yet another instance of California being a trend-setter for the rest of the nation, Assemblymember Lloyd Levine (D-Van Nuys), the Chair of the Assembly’s Utilities and Commerce Committee, today announced that he is introducing legislation - the How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Light Bulb Act - to ban the sale of incandescent light bulbs in California by the year 2012.

“Incandescent light bulbs were first developed almost 125 years ago, and since that time they have undergone no major modifications,” Assemblymember Levine said. “Meanwhile, they remain incredibly inefficient, converting only about five percent of the energy they receive into light. It’s time to take a step forward – energy-efficient bulbs are easy to use, require less electricity to do the same job, cut greenhouse gas emissions, and save consumers money.”

According to the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), a nonprofit organization that focuses on energy policy, replacing a 75-watt incandescent light bulb with a 20-watt compact fluorescent would result in the same amount of light but would save 1,300 pounds of carbon dioxide and save customers $55 over the life of the bulb (while the life of one 75-watt incandescent bulb is roughly 750 hours, the life of a compact fluorescent is a whopping 10,000 hours). Meanwhile, incandescent bulbs use 750 kWh over 10,000 hours, while compact fluorescents use only 180 kWh.

In addition, a utility can give away a compact fluorescent lamps more cheaply than it can fuel its existing power plants, which is why Southern California Edison, for example, has given away more than a million such lamps.

“Electricity-saving technologies may not be glamorous, especially when compared with the idea of a shiny new power plant, but the facts are that there are hundreds of electricity-saving innovations now on the market that if fully used throughout the United States, would significantly decrease the electricity the country now uses,” Levine said. “The time has come for this legislation, and what better state to lead the charge than California.”

With thanks to TreeHugger and New Consumer

No. 10 e-petition : 0% or 5% VAT on CFLs

2007-01-19T14:55:00.000-08:00

According to the following response to an e-petition posted on the No. 10 website, the UK government has been exploring whether or not the VAT on energy saving products could be reduced within the EU, and come up with the following reasons for inaction.

This document suggests that a zero rate of VAT is close to impossible due to long-term agreements between members states on EU tax policy.

However, it looks as though a 5% VAT rate might eventually be possible, provided that someone develops a service capable of delivering large numbers of energy saving light bulbs.

Green VAT - e-petition 18 January 2007

We received a petition asking:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to create a new class of products and services that are exempt/zero rated for VAT. Suggested inclusions: - Domestic wind turbines - Solar panels - Insulation - Energy saving lightbulbs - Video conferencing equipment - Refills for existing packaging such as bottles and jars."

Read the Government's response

VAT is a broad based tax on consumer expenditure and reliefs from it have always been strictly limited. When the UK joined the European Community in 1973, it meant signing up to the general agreements which covered the application of VAT throughout the EC. Under these and successive agreements we are allowed to keep our existing zero rates of VAT on things such as food, books and young children's clothing, most of which had been exempt from the old purchase tax that preceded VAT.

Whilst these agreements allow us to keep our existing zero rates they do not allow us to extend them or introduce new ones. It is therefore not possible to remove VAT from environmentally friendly products.

Under the same European agreements, a reduced rate of VAT of not less than 5 per cent is available for the construction, renovation and alteration of housing provided as part of a social policy. We have used this provision to introduce a reduced rate of VAT for the installation of a range of energy-saving and energy-efficient products and microgeneration technologies, including solar panels, wind turbines, insulation and draught stripping in houses and other residential accommodation.

However, at present, these agreements do not allow a reduced rate to be applied to goods alone when not supplied as part of an overall service. Changes to the European agreements governing the availability of VAT reduced rates require the unanimous support of all EU Member States.

The Government has made the case at European level for changes to the agreements that would enable wider use of reduced rates for energy-saving and energy-efficient products. However, there is significant resistance to the introduction of new reduced rates for goods from some Member States because of the potential impact on the Single Market. We will consider our options and priorities for new reduced rates carefully when the issue next becomes due for discussion at EU level.

The Government remains committed to meeting environmental challenges, and promotes household energy efficiency through a range of policy measures. In the latest Pre-Budget Report alone, the Chancellor announced further support for the Government's Energy Efficiency Commitment, which requires energy suppliers to achieve energy efficiency targets for the household sector.

Other measures and initiatives announced in the Pre-Budget Report include an examination of new methods for financing energy audits and energy-saving measures; tax measures to support 'zero-carbon' homes, along with an ambition that the majority of new homes will be 'zero-carbon' within a decade; an extension to the Landlords Energy Saving Allowance to improve energy efficiency in the rental sector; and an income tax exemption for income from the sale of surplus electricity from domestic microgeneration.

Wal Mart : to improve their marketing of CFLs

2007-01-02T05:47:00.000-08:00

According to a New York Times article, the world's largest supermarket, Wal Mart, has announced plans to increase its US sales of compact fluorescent lamps from 40 million per year to 100 million per year.

The Chief Executive of Wal Mart, H. Lee Scott Jr., has said that "the environment is begging for the Wal Mart business model" and has consequently set about using his company's economic clout to force the world's biggest light bulb manufacturers to cut the price of their CFLs and to help improve the marketing of their energy saving light bulbs.

Interestingly, this NYT video shows that Wal Mart's has developed a new aisle-end display for light bulbs which clearly communicates the alternatives available for different kinds of traditional light bulb, as well as their lower runnings costs.

Sadly, other "quixotic" ideas such as banning incandescents were discussed at a "light bulb summit" which Wal Mart convened with manufacturers, but dismissed as being too radical!

Even if Wal Mart doesn't want to be too radical, perhaps it could consider the implementation of programme which would allow it to phase out the sale of incandescents over the next 10 years...

This would clearly be a lot easier than tackling the carbon emissions associated with its supply chains, stores, shoppers and distribution network, and would allow the barriers to beneficial change to be seriously tackled.

Recent letters to BTB...

2006-12-20T14:26:00.000-08:00

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

2006-11-15T03:45:00.000-08:00

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

2006-11-06T12:17:00.000-08:00

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

2006-11-01T04:16:00.000-08:00

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

2006-11-01T03:46:00.000-08:00

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?

2006-10-22T07:01:00.000-07:00

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...

2006-10-06T03:42:00.000-07:00

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

2006-07-30T11:55:00.000-07:00

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...

2006-02-22T02:14:00.000-08:00

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...

2006-02-22T02:12:00.000-08:00

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

2006-02-06T02:21:00.000-08:00

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

Some important facts...

2005-02-24T02:29:00.000-08:00

Traditional incandescent light bulbs use about 90% of their energy making a metal element white hot.

By comparison, compact fluorescent light bulbs waste very little energy in the form of heat, as they work in the same way as fluorescent tubes (with electricity passing through a gas in the bulb and making a coating on the inside of the bulb glow brightly).

Although incandescent light bulbs are cheap to make, and to buy, they cost more to use because they waste energy and need to be replaced more frequently.

Lighting accounts for 10-15% of an average home's electricity bill, and fitting a single energy-efficient bulb (costing £2-5) can reduce your lighting costs by up to £7 a year.

In a recent report, the UK'S National Audit Office says that greater energy efficiency is the cheapest way to achieve the UK government's goal of a 20% cut in carbon dioxide emissions, from 1990 levels, by 2010... and to move towards the government's declared target of a 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2050.

The phasing out, and replacement, of incandescent lightbulbs is necessary because energy-efficient light bulbs are not being used, even though they have been available for over 20 years.

If energy-efficient light bulbs - and similar technologies - are to become widely used, and cheap to buy, more drastic action is necessary.

The problem...

2005-02-23T15:51:00.000-08:00

Light bulbs and energy efficiency

The waste of energy associated with using incandescent light bulbs costs money, causes unnecessary pollution and risks harmful climate change.

Although energy saving light bulbs have been available for over 30 years they have struggled to gain widespread acceptance and use - despite considerable improvements in their design and performance.

Ban The Bulb feels that compact fluorescent lamps have not become widely used because:

(i) energy saving light bulbs cost more to buy than incandescents,
(ii) they are not as readily available in shops as they might be,
(iii) consumers don't realise how much energy and/or money they could be saving,
(iv) governments have become reluctant to edit consumer choices (ban things!),
(v) the major manufacturers have refused to invest in new lighting technologies until they know that there is going to be a large market for new products,
(vi) energy efficiency has been overlooked as a way of meeting future energy demand,
(vii) Most of the discussion has focused on the building of new energy supplies which are comparatively expensive and time consuming.

This campaign believes that the case for dramatically increasing the use of energy efficient technologies, such as compact fluorescent lamps, needs to be made and that light bulbs offer a good place to start...

Light bulbs are positively associated with bright ideas and change, familiar to everyone and symbolic of the problems facing many other energy efficient technologies.

Tackling the barriers to transforming the light bulb market should also help to initiate conversations about reducing the demand for energy (not just arguing about which types of energy supply to build) and help to demonstrate how markets could be obliged and incentivised to achieve desired outcomes.

Climate change

The large-scale burning of fossil fuels to make energy has resulted in a build up of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere. This is leading to a warming in average global temperatures and altering the behaviour of the world's climate.

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases are thought to have resulted in average global temperatures increasing by 0.7 degrees centigrade.

The UK government's chief scientist has warned that climate change is one the greatest threats to humanity, and there are already many anecdotal reports of unusual changes in the weather - in most regions of the world.

Based on the views of over 1000 climate scientists and complex climate models, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted that global temperatures will increase by between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees centigrade by 2100.

The 1.4 degree change is predicted to occur if we do all in our power to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, whilst the 5.8 degree change is anticipated if we continue to behave in the way that we have previously.

Business-as-usual is not an option, and changes in lifestyles and consumption patterns are going to be necessary.

Although technologies which permit humans to produce and use energy more efficiently already exist many have not been adopted. Most societies have instead preferred to put off change, to blame someone else for their problems or to fight wars which appear to guarantee continued access to "cheap" fossil fuels.

They have also imagined that the problem of climate change will go away, affect future generations or that thousands of climate scientists must be wrong...

For understandable reasons humans tend to resist change, to purchase the cheapest solutions to their problems, to lack an awareness of the threat posed by climate change and to condemn governments which address long-term problems.

Individuals can also feel that there is little they can do to address such epic problems.

The solution...

2005-02-23T14:44:00.000-08:00

This campaign believes that with relatively little pain a great deal of beneficial change is possible, if only we can find the will to bring it about.

It also believes that the threat posed by climate change is real and immense.

As a result established human behaviours and attitudes need to be challenged, available technologies need to be better utilised and economic and legal frameworks need to be altered so that they better reflect the real costs of wasteful behaviours and technologies.

Alternatives should be offered at cost price, or for free, to the poorest members of society.

Light fittings should be required to use energy efficient lightbulbs wherever possible.

Where alternatives do not exist, the use of non-essential and wasteful equipment should be phased out, wasteful lightbulbs should be taxed more heavily and viable, more efficient, alternatives should be developed.

Some useful advice from the Energy Saving Trust:

To eliminate draughts + wasted heat use an easy-to-fix brush or PVC seal on your exterior doors.

Stop draughts + heat escaping through floorboards and skirting boards by filling gaps with newspaper, beading or sealant.

Make sure your windows are draught proofed. A low cost, short-term alternative to double-glazing would be to tape polythene across window frames.

Heating: Too warm? Turning your thermostat down by 1°C could cut your heating bills by up to 10%. And if you're going away for winter, leave the thermostat on a low setting to provide protection from freezing at minimum cost. Saving: around £30 per year.

Hot water: Of course it should be hot, but it doesn't need to be scalding. For most people, setting the cylinder thermostat at 60°C/140°F is fine for bathing and washing.

Plug it: Always put the plug in your basin or sink. Leaving hot water running straight down the drain really is throwing money away.

Curtains: close your curtains at dusk to stop heat escaping through the windows.
Lights: Always turn them off when you leave a room and adjust your curtains or blinds to let in as much light as possible during the day.

Televisions, videos, stereos, computers + cordless phones: To cut down on wasted energy, avoid leaving appliances on standby and remember not to leave them on charge unnecessarily. But please check the user manual first.

Fridges: Don't leave the door open for longer than necessary, cold air escapes. Avoid putting hot or warm food straight into the fridge by allowing it to cool down first. Defrost your freezer regularly to keep it running efficiently and cheaply. If it tends to frost up quickly, check the door seal. And if you have your fridge next to a cooker or boiler, leave a good gap between them.

Washing machines and tumble dryers: Always wash a full load and if you can't use a half-load or economy programme. Always use the low temperature programme bearing in mind that modern washing powders will be just as effective at lower temperatures. Wring out or spin-drying really wet clothes before putting them into a tumble dryer will save you money, and they dry faster.

Dishwashers: Try and use the low temperature programme, and ensure you wash a full load.