New Government environmental standards in Australia will phase out the 125 year old incandescent light bulb completely by 2009. It's assumed the bulbs will be replaced by newer more energy efficient LED or fluorescent bulbs. The Australian writes:"It will be replaced by the compact fluorescent bulb which costs $5 more, but saves an average of $30 a year, and is around 80 per cent more energy efficient. Mr Turnbull said new government standards will be in place by 2009. 'We are introducing new energy efficiency standards and these old lights simply won't comply, they will be phased out and basically over a period of time they will no longer be for sale," Mr Turnbull told Channel 9.'
The guys down under know whats going on. From 2001, all the houses were came standard with optic fiber for high-speed phone and internet connections. Recycling is mandatory, especially in Canberra... you can get fined for littering, and get fined double for not recycling in public areas.
ReplyDeleteThe water still circles down the other way, maybe that is a new form of the De Bono Creativity thing - wires your brain differently, so you think differently?
Keeping with the environmental sustainability theme of this post, and my bit in class on Monday about the lack of windows in our classrooms I wanted to share some info on the BofA tower going up in NYC (to be completed in 08).
ReplyDeleteAlong with translucent floor-to-ceiling insulating glass to contain heat and maximize natural light, which is conducive to more alert and productive employees, BofA will include these other amazing features. Wind turbines on the roof that generate elctricity for the building. LED lights, which automatically dim during the daytime. A greywater system, which captures rainwater and reuses it for tasks such as A/C cooling and plumbing. Men's urinals will actually operate with no water at all.
The most innovative sky scraper ever made.
This incandescent vs flourescent issue is really interesting to me. Back in early December 2006, there was a WSJ article (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116528077211340649-LLVDZMyeySP3bz6f6WAEvCZrzvs_20071205.html) that discussed this issue of "adoption of flourescent light bulbs". The article was basically asking the question of "why have marketers struggled trying to get a product that makes so much sense to be adopted on any type of large scale?" When I say MAKES SENSE, I mean, the cost/benefit is obvious. I wondered if it really is a marketing issue. I raised the question with a friend and they thought it was not a marketing issue, but rather, a product issue. Even though marketers try to trick the consumers by disguising the bulbs to look like regular light bulbs, they still perform different from incandescent lights. End consumers have not purchased flourescent light bulbs because they do not like the quality of the light--the human eye perceives the subtle flicker of a flourescent light bulb. I tend to agree. It's pretty funny, my friend also said the following when he saw this new legislation, "I suppose if you can't engineer a good product, can't create demand by good marketing, can't get consumer acceptance, you can always get the government to make you use it!" Unfortunately this happens more than we realize. I think the government can actually stifle innovation by allowing companies to profit on a product that consumers do not really want.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTheir toilets also have seperate buttons for a "half flush" and a "full flush." I won't elaborate on the proper use of each flush, but it saves a heck of a lot of water. Sadly though, you don't actually get to watch the water swirl down the other way with either one. Gotta use the sink for that....
ReplyDeleteApparently Stanford hosts a five day executive seminar titled “Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability” for professionals who are interested how to marry the interests of business with the interests of the environment. Copy and paste the link below for more information:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exed/bses/index.html
Managing these interests in the future seems to me to be a daunting and developing challenge awaiting tomorrow’s business leaders. In fact, the 2008 Presidential election, more than any previous ones, could see issues like global warming and energy policy take center stage.
I am glad people are starting to make envirnmentally sustainable decisions, but fundamentally, the reason that these technologies are not thriving yet, is because they are not as ecconomically viable as the good old light bulb. Sure there is the electrical savings over time, but that is still a hard sell to the general public.
ReplyDeletePlus ther is the whole look of the light. People just don't like it.
We need more inovation in cooler lighting technologies like LED. You reallly want to save energy, go with something that cuts energy usage by 70 - 90%, not just 20-30% reductions found in incandescent lights.
Scott Smith