Today is the start of the phased ban on incandescent light bulbs in Europe.
This is a really poorly thought out policy, and a very thinly veiled attempt to push consumers from cheaper unpatented technologies like the common light bulb that dates back to Thomas Edison, and force them to buy newer patented alternatives which have their own drawbacks.
The argument that this is for environmental reasons does not hold water, nor do the cost analysis.
There is the argument that older bulbs use only a few percent of energy consumed to actually produce light, and the rest is simply converted to heat. Well I heat my house in the winter at the same time of the year I use the most lighting, and if my light bulbs contribute to that, I will simply use less central heating.
In addition, while newer bulbs may be more efficient, the amount of energy used for home lighting is a very, very tiny percentage of world energy use and therefore the amount of energy saved is also tiny. We are also replacing a product that used to be made in Europe (ordinary light bulbs) with one that is now made in China and shipped half way across the world (CFLs). The extra energy used to transport these bulbs is surely not part of the politicians energy calculation.
CFLs contain mercury, a dangerous poison. Long ago mercury thermometers were made illegal almost everywhere in the world over safety concerns. Most of us, including those of us who are environmentally aware, don’t want to have any unnecessary mercury in our homes! It does not matter what the amount is, or if our local city governments promise to recycle it. The most environmentally friendly product is not one that’s been recycled, it’s the one that was never purchased in the first place! We simply do not want to buy, consume or be exposed to any mercury in our homes. There is no internationally or scientifically recognized ‘safe limit’ to exposure to mercury in living spaces that I’m aware of. There is certainly no desirable limit of exposure.
Besides, the technology exists now to make CFLs with considerably less mercury than is currently being done. While politicians and product manufacturers would love to see us all go out and buy the high mercury version now, only to rush out and replace them by buying the lower mercury version later, that’s not what we as consumers want to do. If we are going to buy CFLs at all, for most of us it makes sense to wait until the low mercury versions are available to buy them!
When the time comes that manufacturers create a product consumers want to buy that replaces the traditional light bulb, it will be time to phase them out. Until then, it’s time politicians see that people don’t want inferior, poisonous and pointless technology forced down their throat for the sake of corporate profits.
In the meantime, politicians might want to turn their attention to matters of real consequence to the environment, like agricultural reform, increased efficiency in vehicle transport, the phasing out of nuclear and carbon based power generation and the reinvigoration of local economies.
This whole idea of getting rid of light bulbs must have been dreamt up by the same politicians who thought of the EU consitutional reforms we are all so eagerly waiting for.
