Comments on: Qu: Are energy-saving bulbs the brightest idea? http://whataboutchina.co.uk/2008/08/01/qu-are-energy-saving-bulbs-the-brightest-idea/ Answers to this and other awkward questions about climate change Sun, 19 Oct 2008 18:22:34 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Bethan http://whataboutchina.co.uk/2008/08/01/qu-are-energy-saving-bulbs-the-brightest-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-41 Bethan Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:48:57 +0000 http://whataboutchina.co.uk/?p=71#comment-41 Hi Neil, Thanks for your comment. It goes to show how important it is for large businesses to prioritise environmental policy, especially when it comes to being transparent in 'greening' their supply chain. I've heard a similar story to the 'Chinese Ikea lightbulbs'; this time the business is Sky, who, in their new campaign to be CarbonNeutral, have sparked a race for optimum energy efficiency between manufacturers of digi boxes. Suppliers will go the extra mile to improve their environmental credentials when winning business is at stake; a realistic and slightly depressing fact that should be a cue for to the government and consumers alike to put pressure on market leaders. Bethan Hi Neil,

Thanks for your comment. It goes to show how important it is for large businesses to prioritise environmental policy, especially when it comes to being transparent in ‘greening’ their supply chain. I’ve heard a similar story to the ‘Chinese Ikea lightbulbs’; this time the business is Sky, who, in their new campaign to be CarbonNeutral, have sparked a race for optimum energy efficiency between manufacturers of digi boxes.

Suppliers will go the extra mile to improve their environmental credentials when winning business is at stake; a realistic and slightly depressing fact that should be a cue for to the government and consumers alike to put pressure on market leaders.

Bethan

]]> By: Neil http://whataboutchina.co.uk/2008/08/01/qu-are-energy-saving-bulbs-the-brightest-idea/comment-page-1/#comment-38 Neil Sat, 02 Aug 2008 08:42:36 +0000 http://whataboutchina.co.uk/?p=71#comment-38 We can try to save energy by using low-energy light bulbs. Presently these are based on a technology that uses mercury. Traditional forecasting or planning would attempt to establish whether the energy savings are more substantial than the disadvantage of dispersing more mercury. The real answer is that it is usually not possible to answer these kinds of questions with any degree of certainty. Ikea used The Natural Step planning methodology in developing their low-energy bulbs. As a result, they found a supplier in China that used a third as much mercury as other suppliers. The other suppliers were duly notified about the reasons for choosing Chinese low-energy bulbs. It is obvious what the effect of this announcement was, not least its virtual guarantee that funding would be put into new research. Tomorrow’s alternatives, heading towards no mercury, are under development. the key to the whole thing is the closed technical loop idea of the recycling program put in place by Ikea. Without that it isn't much of a step in the right direction towards sustainability. The systematic increase of mercury in natural systems is a serious problem but by looking to reduce the amount used in production and then eventually substitute it for something else along with a recycling system is a great step over the old bulbs. thx Neil We can try to save energy by using low-energy light bulbs. Presently
these are based on a technology that uses mercury. Traditional forecasting or planning would attempt to establish whether the energy savings are more substantial than the disadvantage of dispersing more mercury. The real answer is that it is usually not possible to answer these kinds of questions with any degree of certainty.
Ikea used The Natural Step planning methodology in developing their low-energy bulbs. As a result, they found a supplier in China that used a third as much mercury as other suppliers. The other suppliers were duly notified about the reasons for choosing Chinese low-energy bulbs. It is obvious what the effect of this announcement was, not least its virtual guarantee that funding would be put into new research. Tomorrow’s alternatives, heading towards no mercury, are under development.
the key to the whole thing is the closed technical loop idea of the recycling program put in place by Ikea. Without that it isn’t much of a step in the right direction towards sustainability. The systematic increase of mercury in natural systems is a serious problem but by looking to reduce the amount used in production and then eventually substitute it for something else along with a recycling system is a great step over the old bulbs.
thx
Neil

]]>