Related Posts
Q: Energy efficient or traditional light bulbs?
I have mixed feeling about energy efficient bulbs. They aren’t easily disposed of and contain mercury –...
The European Union and climate change: Is globalization actually good for the environment? Historically, ecological politics and environmental activism have generally pitted themselves against the forces of economic and political globalization....
European Energy online communityThe European Energy online community www.european-energy.org – a platform for future generations – went on online during...
Think LED lighting: save money and help the environment
These days everyone is looking to save a little cash. What if we told you that you could...
Christmas in Hong Kong goes ‘light Green’
Designs made from tens of thousands of light bulbs brighten up the holiday season in downtown Hong Kong...
Tip of the Day
To save energy, remember to turn off the light when leaving a room
European Perspectives on the Environment: “Make Love, Not CO₂”
Europeans: what is a Green city?
Used under license from Shutterstock.com
EU Tube, the European Union’s Audiovisual Service youtube channel, produces informative and sometimes simply promotional videos about various issues concerning the EU. Many of EU Tube’s videos have an environmental bent, some getting their message across more effectively than others. As far as Green propaganda, I like this one: Make Love, Not CO₂. In 30 seconds it gives several simple visual tips on how to conserve energy and live more intelligently. It does so with just the right amount of judgmentalism and straighforwardness that selfish, modern, ADD-suffering young European Unionites need.
Contrastingly, in Green cities fit for life, EU Tube goes to the campus of the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium and asks several bright young things about what they think it means to have an environmental conscious city. Answers include green spaces, sustainability, waste management and the proper use of resources.
A Good Idea: Europe Says Goodbye to 100-Watt Bulbs
In related news, the European Union is banning wasteful 100-watt light bulbs in an effort to become energy-efficient by shifting to electricity-saving models. According to an August 26, 2009 article on grist.org, by September 1, 2012 the EU plans to have all incandescent bulbs phased out. Criticisms on the initiative include concerns about the amount of mercury in the new light bulbs and the claim that people with medical conditions related to light-sensitivity will still need the old type of bulb. The new energy-efficient models are estimated to save Europeans an average of €166 or $236 per year in electricity costs.
By Graham Land
Additional resources:
EU environment-related indicators
Tags: EU, european union, Green, light bulb, Make Love, Not CO2
2 Comments
You can also log in to post a comment.
Other Greenfudge.org posts
Lightning makes mushrooms grow, Japanese study shows
Research in Japan suggests that lightening strikes can significantly increase growth in some popular species of mushroom. According to a report in National Geographic, sudden bursts of electricity – of the strengths that might occur some distance from where lightning strikes the ground – cause mushrooms to multiply. A direct hit from a lightening bolt would fry a mushroom, but a diffuse jolt sparks a curious response. The latest results show that lightning-strength jolts of electricity can more than double the yield...
NBC’s ‘A Perfect Storm’ reports on dengue fever and climate change
In Malaysia there is a war against mosquitoes. And throughout the world, a warmer and wetter climate is triggering outbreaks of disease carried by the pesky – and in this case deadly – insects. According to experts, as many as 5 billion people could be at risk from dengue fever alone. Last month it even appeared in Florida – for the first time in 50 years. Watch this installment of NBC Nightly News ongoing segment 'A Perfect Storm' about the...
Video: Rachel Maddow Show broadcasts from BP oil spill ground zero
You can diagnose whether this country has a functioning media in this country by whether or not the country understands that this is a vile environmental mega-disaster. You can diagnose whether we have a functioning political system in this country by whether or not the result of this mega-disaster is change. –Rachel Maddow MSNBC's Rachel Maddow has been in Louisiana reporting on the spill from the leaking oil well in the Gulf of Mexico and broadcasting her show from what is essentially...
In Africa, diarrhea kills 1.5 million children every year
Diarrhea related illnesses are generally preventable and easily treatable, yet 1.5 million children in Africa still die every year from diarrhoeal diseases. 85 children die every day from such diseases in Kenya alone, according to the below video report from Al Jazeera English. Diarrhoeal illnesses are easily treated with rehydration salts and fluids. The diseases are often water-borne and usually associated with poor sanitation. Many of the victims are children of poor families in the developing world, where many parents aren't...
Air Quality is Brought to Light in Seoul
Have you ever wondered how clean or pure the air you breathe actually is? Did it ever occur to you that there could be different levels of air pollution or quality within the same city? Well, now, you can find out these things—at least if you live in Seoul, Korea. Located in the Peace Park across from the World Cup Stadium, the Living Light pavilion features an interactive map of Seoul’s 27 neighborhoods. The air quality of each neighborhood is shown...
2010 in the running to become hottest year on record
News items about carbon emissions, global warming and heating trends of our planet are hot these days. No surprise there, as scientists and world leaders are getting ready for the next round of United Nations climate talks next week in Cancun. Unfortunately, as I already pointed out before, nobody is expecting anything remotely exciting to come out of COP16. With a little bit of luck, some regulations about deforestation and some REDD financing schemes will see the light at the end...
More Streaming Trash: The Rampant Industrialization of China – Environmental, Political and Human Consequences
TOXIC: Linfen, China - VBS travels to the single most polluted place on earth, the coal-mining town of Linfen in Shanxi Province, China, where kids play in dirty rivers and the sun sets early behind a thick curtain of smog. - vbs.tv Linfen, China’s coal capital was named the most polluted city in the world by the Blacksmith Institute, an organization that focuses on identifying heavily polluted areas and providing help to the people who live in them. A city of over...
Massive oil plume remains in Gulf of Mexico
Though around half of the oil spilt into the Gulf of Mexico following the Deepwater Horizon explosion in April remains unaccounted for, scientists have mapped out a 22-mile (35 km) underwater plume of petrochemicals. The fact that so much oil has remained underwater instead of floating to the surface is surprising to scientists and also problematic because it makes the oil more difficult to locate. This means that they don’t know what damage may still be occurring in the Gulf and...
Exposure to Air Pollution Increases Risk of Pneumonia
How many of you have a parent, grandparent, spouse or other person in your life that falls into the “senior citizen” category? If you do, then you may be aware of a lot of the health problems they already face. However, there is one big, nasty, global problem that affects their health in ways you may not be aware of: Pollution. Elderly folk who are exposed to large amounts of air pollution for a year or more have a higher risk...
Will the new Blade Runner film tackle environmental topics?
Philip K. Dick’s 1968 novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? describes a darkened, post apocalyptic future where the majority of mankind has left Earth to settle colonies on other planets. Animals are either endangered or extinct, giving way to a burgeoning industry in artificial life. Both android animals and humans have become so life-like that it is next to impossible to differentiate them from the natural life forms they mimic. For a novel written as early as 1968, Dick seems...
View all articles
Hi Peter, thanks for your informative response. It’s longer than the article! I guess you feel strongly about the power of the free market in solving many problems. But what if it doesn’t? To me it’s a kind of social engineering based on product availability, advertising and over all, money. More money = more “votes” as to what happens economically, environmentally, etc. Those with less purchasing power have a much smaller say, especially when compared to companies. It may work sometimes, but is it fair even if the popularity of certain products is determined to be to the detriment of all people and the natural world? Some equate democracy with the freedom to do whatever you want, others equate it with equal say and protection from those with more material resources. Experts should be elected to serve the people, not sycophants. This is not just ideological, but practical.
I realize the EU’s political capital is low and it is continuing to shrink. I may disagree with some of its decisions, but it should (at the very least) function as a form of positive social engineering along with informing the public as to why these measures are being enacted. If the ban turns people off from environmental issues, perhaps it was carried out poorly. However I don’t see a problem with a ban which will reduce energy consumption, especially if other bulbs can be purchased which fulfill the same function. The mercury content is a worrying point, I admit.
Furthermore, I think changing public policy and laws have a much higher and immediate environmental impact than personal choice as far as what kind of light bulbs we make like. You have good points about taxation and I can’t dispute figures about something that seems to be your personal crusade and area of expertise. But I don’t get the argument that if one harmful thing isn’t banned (cars) then another shouldn’t be either.
Thanks Graham
did not know about EU tube…
RE Light bulb ban
Unlike many people here in Europe against the ban,
I agree with the need to do something about emissions
(for all they contain, whatever about CO2)
But banning light bulbs is in my view not the way forward,
and I think people who are less in agreement with
the background arguments will just be turned off from cooperating in more important environmental measures.
Let’s think a little about this!
Europeans (like Americans) choose to buy ordinary light bulbs around 9 times out of 10 (European Commission and light industry data 2007-8)
Banning what people want gives the supposed savings – no point in banning an impopular product!
If new LED lights – or improved CFLs etc – are good,
people will buy them – no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (little point).
If they are not good, people will not buy them – no need to ban ordinary light bulbs (no point).
The arrival of the transistor didn’t mean that more energy using radio valves/tubes were banned… they were bought less anyway.
The need to save energy?
Advice is good and welcome, but bans are another matter…
people -not politicians – pay for energy and how they wish to use it.
There is no energy shortage – on the contrary, more and more renewable sources are being developed –
and if there was an energy shortage, the price rise would lead to more demand for efficient products – no need to legislate for it.
Supposed savings don’t hold up anyway, for many reasons:
http://www.ceolas.net/#li13x
onwards
about CFL brightness, lifespan, CFL power factor, lifecycle, heat effect of ordinary bulbs, and other referenced research
Emissions?
Does a light bulb give out any gases?
Power stations might not either:
Why should emission-free households be denied the use of lighting they obviously want to use?
Low emission households already dominate some regions, and will increase everywhere, since emissions will be reduced anyway through the planned use of coal/gas processing technology and/or energy substitution.
Direct ways to deal with emissions,
with a focus on transport and electricity:
http://www.ceolas.net/#cc10x
The Taxation alternative
A ban on light bulbs is extraordinary, in being on a product safe to use.
We are not talking about banning lead paint here.
This is simply a ban to reduce electricity consumption.
Even for those who remain pro-ban, taxation to reduce the consumption would be fairer and make more sense, also since governments can use the income to reduce emissions (home insulation schemes, renewable projects etc) more than any remaining product use causes such problems.
A few euros/dollars tax that reduces the current sales (EU like the USA 2 billion sales per annum, UK 250-300 million pa)
raises future billions, and would retain consumer choice.
It could also be revenue neutral, lowering any sales tax on efficient products.
When sufficent low emission electricity delivery is in place, the ban can be lifted
http://www.ceolas.net/LightBulbTax.html
Taxation is itself unjustified, it is simply a better alternative for all concerned than bans.
Of course an EU ban is underway, but in phases, supposedly with reviews in a couple of years time…
Maybe the debate in USA and Canada will be affected by the issues being raised over here?
Where there is a problem, deal with the problem:
Direct action on energy and emissions, without roundabout consumer bans, and without CO2 trading (with all its loopholes)….