| |
CX2SA > ENERGY 30.06.06 01:09l 124 Lines 5701 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 17600_CX2SA
Read: OE5RCO DL1LCA GUEST
Subj: Lighting the key to energy..
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0SIF<DB0FHK<DB0FBB<DB0IUZ<DB0GOS<DB0RES<ON0AR<TU5EX<
CX2SA
Sent: 060630/0001Z @:CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA #:17600 [Minas] FBB7.00e $:17600_CX2SA
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.LAV.URY.SA
To : ENERGY@WW
Lighting the key to energy saving
=================================
A global switch to efficient lighting systems would trim the world's
electricity bill by nearly one-tenth.
That is the conclusion of a study from the International Energy Agency (IEA),
which it says is the first global survey of lighting uses and costs.
The carbon dioxide emissions saved by such a switch would, it concludes, dwarf
cuts so far achieved by adopting wind and solar power.
Better building regulations would boost uptake of efficient lighting, it says.
"Lighting is a major source of electricity consumption," said Paul Waide, a
senior policy analyst with the IEA and one of the report's authors.
"19% of global electricity generation is taken for lighting - that's more than
is produced by hydro or nuclear stations, and about the same that's produced
from natural gas," he told the BBC News website.
The carbon dioxide produced by generating all of this electricity amounts to
70% of global emissions from passenger vehicles, and is three times more than
emissions from aviation, the IEA says.
Lounge departure
----------------
Not many inventions last for more than 100 years without major modifications.
The incandescent light bulb, developed a century and a quarter ago by
luminaries including Sir Joseph Swan and Thomas Edison, is one, and still
produces almost half of the light used in homes around the world.
But incandescent bulbs are very inefficient, converting only about 5% of the
energy they receive into light.
The biggest consumer is the fluorescent tube. Commercial and public sector
buildings account for 43% of the electricity used for lighting; and here,
fluorescents dominate.
The report notes that the efficiency of tubes can vary widely, between about
15% and 60%.
Regulations on their use vary widely too. Health and safety concerns dictate
what light levels should be achieved in various buildings, but the IEA found
the levels prescribed by regulatory authorities vary by a factor of 20 from
one country to another.
The IEA reserves particular ire for that favourite of the western middle-class
lounge, the halogen uplighter.
"This... is the least efficient of all commonly used electric lighting
systems," it says. "They add a large amount of heat into the living space as a
by-product... this heat might require additional air-conditioning energy for
its removal."
It is concerned too that a significant proportion of the world's population
has no access to electric lighting at all. Instead they rely on burning fuel,
which is expensive, inefficient, produces poor light quality and contributes
to respiratory disease.
Bright idea
------------
Energy-efficient lighting can seem such an obviously good idea that it is hard
to comprehend why it is not used everywhere.
"There is no single panacea," said Dr Waide. "What we suggest is setting up a
comprehensive set of policies.
"There is a strong case for introducing lighting measures into building codes.
Currently codes have a lot of energy measures in them, but with few exceptions
there aren't specific provisions for lighting."
Such codes could, for example, mandate the use of highly-efficient fluorescent
tubes and ballasts, the devices which regulate input voltages for the lamps;
at worst these can consume 40% of the energy going into the system.
China, the IEA reports, has recently developed such codes. If they are
implemented in all new build, this would "...offset the need for a new Three
Gorges Dam project every eight years".
For the individual, the most obvious switch to make is from incandescent bulbs
to compact fluorescent systems (CFLs), marketed in many countries as "energy
-saving bulbs".
The IEA calculated the total costs to the consumer associated with buying and
then using the two types, and found a significant difference.
"The overall cost of 10,000 hours of light provision from incandescents is 85
euros," said Paul Waide, "but for CFLs it's 25 euros, because they use so much
less energy, and because you might have to buy only one CFL for every 10
incandescents."
He acknowledged there were concerns about the quality of light coming from
some CFLs, and that some consumers reported lower lifetimes than manufacturers
claimed; the key here, he said, is better regulation of the product sector by
governments.
"There is also a lot that governments could do to reduce the price
differential between CFLs and incandescents; it's extremely efficient from a
societal perspective."
The future may see even more efficient systems. LEDs hold out the most
promise; currently four times as efficient as incandescents, manufacturers are
aiming for 80% efficiency by the end of the decade, which would represent a
16-fold improvement on the traditional bulb.
But, the IEA concludes, there is no need to wait for LEDs. Policy measures and
individual action to bring the switch would slash 38% from the global
electricity bill for lighting by 2030.
*******************************************************************
* CX2SA:BBS CX2SA-6:CLUSTER CX2SA-7:WX CX2SA-8:APRS/DIGI/IGATE *
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
* HF: 7.040/14.107 KHz http://cx2sa.net E-Mail: cx2sa@cx2sa.net *
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
* SysOp: Jose Maria Gonzalez Devitta Minas * Lavalleja * URUGUAY *
*******************************************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
