Multi-billion-dollar benefits from switching to energy-efficient lighting
|
COMMENTS 
A UN-led report says that few actions can cut carbon emissions more easily than the phase out of inefficient lighting, making it one of the most effective and economically advantageous means to combat climate change
Findings released on December 1, 2010, at the ongoing 16th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Cancun, Mexico, say that countries can make huge savings in electricity output and costs, and significantly cut down greenhouse gas emissions by changing to alternative lighting technologies such as CFL and LED lights from the current incandescent and fluorescent light bulbs.
The en.lighten report estimates that the emissions savings would equal taking tens of millions of cars off the road. Eight per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions is linked to lighting.
En.lighten is an initiative funded by the Global Environment Facility in partnership with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and leading global lighting manufacturers Philips and OSRAM, to advocate efficient lighting technologies on a global scale.
The report’s detailed market assessments of the environmental and economic potential of a switch to efficient lighting in 100 countries, says that South Africa could save $280 million a year, and remove emissions equal to 625,000 cars annually, by switching to energy-saving bulbs.
Mexico would save $900 million, reducing 5 million tonnes of CO2 emissions a year, in a soon-to-be-announced plan to replace incandescent lamps in the country. With the electricity saved from this small shift, three coal power plants would become redundant.
It is expected that Brazil will save $2 billion a year and 4 million tonnes of CO2 -- the equivalent emissions from 1 million cars -- when legislation in the country is finalised by mid-2012; India can save US$1.8 billion every year.
The improvements are brought about by something as simple as switching to compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs. Unlike incandescent light bulbs which produce 95% heat and just 5% light, CFLs produce an equivalent amount of light using 75% less energy. They also last up to 10 times longer than incandescent bulbs.
Light emitting diodes (LEDs) are another option, and better, since they are free of mercury unlike CFLs which have to be very carefully disposed of because of their mercury content. This is of concern in developing countries that generally have a poor safety record. Nevertheless, given that the main source of new mercury emissions worldwide is from the burning of coal, estimates indicate that overall it is far more environmentally friendly to switch from old bulbs to new ones, says the report.
India’s total electricity consumption from fuel combustion is 602 TWh and its CO2 emission from fuel consumption is 1,324 Mt/year. The report envisages that India will save US$1.8 billion every year from switching to energy-efficient lighting. Here’s how:
- A yearly reduction in lighting electricity consumption of 22 TWh is equal to seven medium-sized coal-fired power plants being avoided. Also, 21Mt CO2 reduction per year will equal 5.3 million mid-sized cars being off the roads.
- India has the Bachat Lamp Yojana programme under which 400 million incandescent bulbs will be replaced by CFLs. The energy savings and resultant carbon emissions savings will be 55 million tonnes a year, the report says.
The 100-country assessment comes in the wake of a UNEP study that showed that if all countries met in full their pledges made at last year’s Copenhagen Accord, emissions by 2020 could fall to 49 gigatonnes (billion), which is 5 Gt short of where emissions should be in 2020 if global temperature rise is to be contained at less than 2 degrees Celsius. The world needs a quick fix to bridge this gap, and switching to energy-efficient lighting is one such, says the report.
Source: Summary of UNEP en.lighten report, December 2010