Painter Georg Baselitz, designer Ingo Maurer and around 100 other renowned artists, designers and architects continue to demand that the EU Parliament decision to phase out the incandescent lamp be revoked. Baselitz claims that he and his colleagues from the world of art and design do not want to have to forfeit being able to choose exactly what light they can use, or how their works of art are illuminated, saying that the incandescent lamp is a key part of the overall lighting culture. And he adds that halogen lamps are indispensable when it comes to the illumination of art, architectural spaces, stages and facades.
Since people have started using so-called energy-saving lamps, the consumption of energy in private households has risen, as experts predicted. According to the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: “When the heat dissipated by conventional incandescent lamps is reduced, the missing warmth is compensated for by the central heating system”. The savings effect is thus zero – the money saved on lighting is spent on increased heating costs.
On 22. April, 2010 the artistic activists from German-speaking Europe filed a petition with the European Commission in Brussels: “We artists, exhibition designers, museum curators, architects and designers cannot accept the EU phasing out the incandescent lamp”.

We demand the decision to phase out the incandescent lamp be revoked:
Volker Albus, Georg Baselitz, Hilla Becher, Stephan Berg, Daniel Birnbaum, Christian Boros, Marc Brandenburg, Arno Brandlhuber, Mark Braun, Joachim Brohm, André Buchmann, Daniel Buren, Anthony d’Offay, Thomas Demand, Marie-Theres Deutsch, Jörg Ebers, Clemens Fahnemann, Harald Falckenberg, Yvonne Fehling und Jennie Peiz, Thomas Florschuetz, Ceal Floyer, Hubertus Gaßner, Ingvild Goetz, Bärbel Grässlin, Thomas Grässlin, Durs Grünbein, Andreas Gursky, Nanette Hagstotz, Mathias Hahn, Jitka Hanzlová, Harald Hauswald, Eberhard Havekost, Wulf Herzogenrath, Julian Heynen, Candida Höfer, Carsten Höller, Klaus Honnef, Janneke de Vries, Gregor Jansen, Ann Veronica Janssens, Daniel Josefsohn, Johannes Kahrs, Astrid Klein, Barbara Klemm, Hans Kollhoff, Karola Kraus, Mateo Kries, Mischa Kuball, Daniel Lergon, Veit Loers, Philomene Magers, Ingo Maurer, Andreas Mühe, Heike Munder, Carsten Nicolai, Jennie Peiz, Susanne Pfeffer, Tobias Rehberger, Anselm Reyle, Bernhart Schwenk, Werner Spies, Monika Sprüth, Urs Stahel, Julia Stoschek, Katja Strunz, Thomas Struth, Hadi Teherani, Matteo Thun, Rosemarie Trockel, Philipp von Matt, Michael Werner, Thomas Weski, Robert Wilson, Rein Wolfs, Beat Wyss, Felix Zdenek, Ralf Ziervogel, Michael Zimmermann, Armin Zweite

Source: Neue Westfälische newspaper

OK so there is a bit of exaggeration as the money has been spent on other things as well as CFLi give-aways. Some is spent on the very heavily discounted lamps still being sold in DIY superstores and Supermarkets, EON are even getting their name printed on the boxes by Philips!

So you could say that we are now being forced to pay for something we don’t want and is not working to create the energy savings promised!

So far I have yet to see anything new in incandescent replacements though i have not yet made it around the entire exhibition, and am unlikely to do so given constraints on time. Sad to report that Osram are still claiming an 11W CFLis equal to a 60W incandescent despite the judgment in Iceland posted previously.

I will let you know if anything interesting surfaces tomorrow.

evan Shaw

There has been concern for some years over the EMF created by high tension power lines that have been liberally draped over the landscape since the 1930s providing the electrical power grid that we all rely on for a continuous and reliable supply of electricity. Epidemiological studies have identified clusters of Childhood Leukemia around areas where power lines are in close proximity to housing and schools. So far a direct cause and effect has yet to be demonstrated however there are degrees of caution that need to be observed.

Howard has identified levels of EMF around and close to some CFLi lamps that exceed the doses considered to create risks and he asks what the potential impact is of bringing many of these EMF sources into our homes to replace the EMF free incandescent lamp.

His paper is sufficiently detailed to clearly demonstrate the need for more research and the need for funding, may we wish him the best in his search for funding and continued work in this field.

The full report is available here
Kevan Shaw

Energy Saving Lamps and the Ban of Incandescent Lamps
?An Open Letter from the Institute of Building Biology + Ecology Neubeuern (IBN) to the Responsible Politicians in the European Union??To the Chancellor of Germany: Ms. Angela Merkel?To the German Minister of Environment: Mr. Siegmar Gabriel?To the European Environment Agency: Ms. Jacqueline McGlade
We, hereby, ask you to use all means at your disposal to overthrow the Europe-wide ban of incandescent lamps.
For the past 30 years, the IBN has been researching a wide variety of ecological and biological aspects. The Institute has also trained building biology environmental consultants, testing specialists, and energy efficiency advisors. Among others, environmental protection and energy efficiency are of prime concern to us.
The only advantage energy saving lamps have over incandescent lamps is their low energy consumption, which for most products is an economic and ecological consideration. This advantage, however, is bought at the price of a number of disadvantages that have not yet been pointed out—or only partly so—by the representatives of industry, trade associations, media, and consumer protection organizations.??Characteristics of energy saving lamps not found in incandescent lamps include:
? Electromagnetic pollution emissions across several frequency bands, umpteen times higher than allowed for computer monitors, with steep harmonics, interference, peaks, pulses, distorted sine waves
? Light flickering across several frequency bands, also rich in harmonics, peaks, spurious signals, distorted sine waves, “dirty” light
? Poorer quality of the light spectrum with only two to four narrowband colors, spectral power distribution strongly deviates from natural daylight, high percentage of blue and UV light
? Emission of toxins and odors
? Brightness often lower than specified, may become even much lower over time
? Lifespan often shorter than specified, especially after numerous switching cycles, in tests, energy saving bulbs would sometimes blow out before the incandescent ones
? Elaborate manufacturing process including components that are a health risk: various heavy metals, plastics, adhesives, phosphorescent coatings, electronics, capacitor, printed circuit boards, ballast (radioactive components until 2007), average mercury content 2-4 mg (some 100 kilograms in Germany alone)
? Toxic waste disposal (most end up in household garbage anyhow)
? Energy efficiency in most energy saving lamps lower than specified
? Above-mentioned electromagnetic pollution emissions not only occur at lamp, but also spread across the electrical installation incl. its cables, wires, appliances…
? The same applies to spurious signals and fault currents that may cause technical problems in sensitive electronic installations, devices, and data transmissions…
? Poor compatibility with modern home automation systems (interference, flickering)
? Ultrasound emissions
? Life cycle assessment questionable

In addition, energy saving lamps are a health risk because of their mercury content. When an incandescent lamp breaks, a broom and scoop is all you need to sweep it up and the problem is solved. But if an energy saving lamp breaks, you will have a toxic waste problem right in your own home.
Please find a comprehensive list of arguments and quotes attached.
In the interest of a holistic climate protection as well as the protection of citizens from unnecessary electromagnetic pollution and environmental toxins, we ask you to deal with this issue.

Sincerely,
Prof. Dr. Anton Schneider
Institut für Baubiologie + Oekologie (IBN)?Institute of Building Biology + Ecology (IBN)?Independent private GmbH Holzham 25 D-83115 Neubeuern
For more information see also?http://www.baubiologie.de/downloads/manuskripte/Gluehbirne-Energiesparlampen-2009?http://www.baubiologie.de/downloads/manuskripte/Energiesparlampen-Zitate-2009.pdf

Using the constructed base case, it has been shown that a switch to CFL is beneficial for Icelandic household economically. However, the benefit is much less than the public is led to believe in advertising by manufacturers. As shown in table 1, the break even point is somewhere between the 5th and 6th year. After 20 years, the savings amount to 9,7 Euros per year, for each household in Iceland.

It can therefore be concluded that Icelandic consumers are being misinformed about the true economic benefits of switching to CFL.

As mentioned earlier, the EU preparatory report by VITO, found the biggest environmental impact of lamps to be during their use phase. Their calculations assume the EU27 average for electricity generation, which is 31% from coal, 22% from oil and gas and 47% from renewable sources, of which 32% comes from nuclear power plants. Iceland obtains nearly 100% of its electricity and heat from renewable sources. The use phase therefore does not contribute to global warming. As has been shown, using parts of the EcoReport tool, adoption of regulation 244/2009 with universal household adoption of CFL in Iceland, results in more environmental costs both in Iceland and internationally.

This goes against the spirit and intention of EU regulation 244/2009.
In light of these results it is logical to ask further. If nothing else changes, at what point is the electricity generation ratio of a country such that switching to CFL causes more environmental damage than good ?

Iceland is not the only country in Europe with a high percentage of its electrical energy coming from sources that do not emit greenhouse gasses. If the benchmark is set for example at 60% or more, it is found that Austria, France, Lithuania, Norway (EFTA country), Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and Switzerland (EFTA country) fall into this category. These countries have a combined population of ca. 106.3 million people. Is it possible that regulation 244/2009 with universal adoption of CFL in these countries would increase their contribution to global warming ?
This weakness in EU legislation to promote energy efficiency also raises questions about the most effective way of achieving energy efficiency in lighting.

„The amount of energy used is determined by the lighting equipment e.g. lamps and luminaries. It will also be determined by the lighting requirement for the application„ The validity of this point is perhaps best shown in the case of Japan. The country has the highest average lighting system efficacy installed in 2005. Despite this fact, they were along with South Korea, the second highest per capita consumer of light in the world in 2005. This is explained with higher illumination levels from fluorescent light sources and higher average operational hours of 3,7 hours per day. This suggests that lighting requirement as judged by the user is a significant contributor to energy consumption.

User behaviour in lighting is difficult to research in practice. Some studies have been done but this is still a relatively unresearched area.
Indication on possible ways forward can perhaps be had from a Swedish study on user behaviour in lighting by Bladh, M. And Krantz, H. Published in 2008. This study was a qualitative one with a cross section of family types and age groups. It showed that energy used for lighting is an interplay of various factors. The importance of the three most used lamps in a household is established. They account for more than half of the electric consumption for lighting in all cases but one. It also showed that people´s cost consciousness in relation to lighting is very low. Older people tend to consume less electricity for lighting than other age groups. This contradicts what is known about vision in older people. It is a well known fact that the human eye needs more light to perform as it gets older. Bladh and Krantz suggest that older people in general tend to have a more cost conscious behavior than other age groups. The lights that are not needed are simply turned off. This possibly suggests that user behavior is even more important than previously thought.

It is probably safe to say that we all want to protect the environment for ourselves and future generations. How do government regulators achieve that ? Banning the most popular lamp type on the market with the possible negative side effects shown in this research is questionable public policy.

The full text of the abstract can be downloaded here

Here is a translation of the decision, the full text is available as a PDF in the downloads page:

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000200 EndHTML:0000005232 StartFragment:0000002653 EndFragment:0000005196 SourceURL:file://localhost/Users/admin/Desktop/Kristj%C3%A1n%20Gunnar%20Kristj%C3%A1nsson.doc

Decision

Johann Olafsson & Co. inc, Krókhálsi 3, Reykjavik, has by declaring that energy savers are environmentally friendly in an advertising brochure about OSRAM energy savers broken against 5th article, 2nd paragraph of 6th article, 1. paragraph of 8th article and 2 paragraph of 9th article of law no . 57 from 2005 about supervision of business practices and marketing.

Johann Olafsson & Co inc. has by suggesting in an advertising brochure about OSRAM energy savers that 11W energy savers give out comparable light quantity to 60W incandescent light bulbs broken against 5th article, 2nd paragraph of 6th article, 1st paragraph of 8th article and 2 paragraph of 9th article of law no 57 from 2005 about supervision of business practices and marketing.

With reference to 2 paragraph of 21st article of b law no 57 from 2005 on supervision of business practices and marketing is Johann Olafsson & Co. prohibited to publish advertising and statements saying that energy savers are environmentally friendly and prohibited to publish advertising where it is suggested that 11W energy savers give out an equivalent light quantity to 60W incandescent light bulbs.

The ban takes effect on the publishing of the ruling.  If the ruling is not adhered to it can be expected that decision on fines will be taken, based on IX chapter of law no 57/2005 on supervision of business practices and marketing.

consumer agency March 26th. 2010

Tryggvi Axelsson

Director

I have been trying to figure out how to post one of my talks on here but am en-mired in technical problems not the least of which is trying to film one of my lectures, the last attempt failed because of poor sound quality.

One interesting paper that has be produced and will find its way onto the site soon is an MSc  Thesis by Halldor Steinsen fro Iceland who has undertaken a detailed study of the impact of the proposed ban on incandescent lamps in Iceland and substantially proves that a change to CFLi will produce a net increase in CO2 emissions attributable to the change over rather than  savings ! i am working with Halldor to provide an edited version of the paper for publication here and elsewhere.

Please do keep in touch with this site through comments and any information you may have as a submission.