That got me thinking. Where I come from turning off the lights as you leave the room is more or less a habit for people. I mean, why leave the light on when you aren't in the room? That's why they put the switch next to the door.
I do most of the work, but you still need to be "switched on" to the issue! |
What isn't great is that people offload responsibility for turning off the lights when they buy these bulbs. They leave them on 24 hours a day and say "oh they are energy saving." The house I moved into when I first got to Sweden had an obscene amount of lights and they were all on all day. I went round turning them off because it feels strange to leave it on as you leave the room, but it was a losing battle. In the kitchen especially it was an energy black hole: there would have been 20-25 light globes in there.
Also, the place where we have our office at university leaves its lights on seemingly all the time. The main room is something like 200 square metres and has all the lights on, even during the day and on the weekends. Hardly an environmental usage of energy.
It's about personal responsibility. By buying the energy saving globes (which I wholeheartedly support and support because they're cheaper in the long run though the globes cost 10 times more) people think they have done their part and don't need to worry about anything. They shift any blame and responsibility on the energy saving bulb.
Normally a bulb might be on in a room for 3-4 hours a day (lets suppose), but when it is energy saving people forget where the light switch is and just leave it on all day. It uses three times less energy, but is left on for six times longer. Its clearly more energy.
People need to reduce their usage with better bulbs and still remember to turn it off. The maths are simple and the problem of global warming still exists. That's a bright idea — pun intended.
There is a well known effect (somewhat relevant here) that increases in efficiency usually result in increased usage, meaning constant or increasing resource demand, rather than a drop in resource demand.
ReplyDeleteThe "Jevons Paradox": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox