Mapa de peligros por lahares del Complejo Volcánico Nevado

unpredictable tastes and don’t always react as you’d expect. Behavioural attitudes to lighting are no exception to this rule. Despite the significant reductions in price that have already occurred and the availability of new high performing energy efficient lamps, particularly over the past 2-3 years, all the behavioural evidence available points to the differential in the initial purchase price being the main factor which influences purchasers. This is true of individual consumers, public administrations and private companies despite the clear evidence that total cost of ownership of an energy efficient lamp is many times lower than its traditional equivalent (up to 15 times longer depending on the lamp)”

(ELC, 2007a, p. 5). A Philips Lighting manager moreover claimed in a presentation held at an OECD workshop in Berlin in 2007, that consumers do not understand ‘the overall but long-term benefits’, which are the ‘total costs of ownership benefits’ (Philips, 2007a, p. 7) and therefore attach more value to the initial purchase price than to long-terms savings when taking a decision about which lamp to buy.

Furthermore the federation states that a lack of feeling responsible for saving energy by switching to more efficient lamps is another aspect of this barrier as “[m]any private and commercial users (people in rented accommodation, offices, small companies) do not pay directly for the buildings’ energy use therefore [have] no sense of responsibility” (ELC, 2008a, p. 12).

“Due to the nature of the higher efficiency products these inevitably are considerably more expensive, we would estimate that the price to the customers will be 5 to 7 times higher than at present, in many cases the additional costs would not drive economic savings so consequently the majority of the cost burden for these changes would be picked up by the consumer” (Vito, 2009a, p. 90). This comment made by the ELC in the context of the Consultation Forum perfectly indicates that consumers do not only benefit from the switch to energy efficient lighting as the higher price can be seen as a burden. According to the IEA, “Incandescent lamps are very cheap to manufacture and purchase but are extremely energy inefficient […] and hence are expensive to operate. A typical 60W GLS lamp may only cost USD 0.3 to purchase […]” (Waide, 2010, p. 15). Furthermore the IEA states that “prices have also fallen substantially over the preceding decade such that high-quality CFLs now cost slightly over USD 1 at factory gate prices in China but can retail at much higher prices in the shops” (Waide, 2010, p. 17). What becomes obvious from these statements is that the initial purchase price for the consumer is higher in case of the CFL compared to the traditional lamps and constitutes a huge barrier for consumers to switch to energy efficient lighting. When taking the viewpoint of a manufacturer of CFLs, one can state that the profit margin of CFLs seem to be much higher compared to that of ILBs which points to the industry’s interest in pushing forward market transformation towards energy efficient lighting.

4.2. Market (Organization) Barriers

Within this part issues resulting from market failures or the need of newly organizing the lighting market in order to discontinue the incumbent technology of ILBs and further stimulate the uptake of energy efficient solutions are portrayed from the industry actors’ point of view. These are the limited availability of proper replacements, the dominance of inefficient technology as well as CFL production capacity issues.

Limited availability of high-quality, low cost EEL replacements

The discontinuation of the incumbent technology of ILBs means that alternative replacements that show adequate levels of quality as well as a proper purchase price have to be made available to satisfy consumer needs, however the lighting industry states that this constitutes another issue as portrayed in the following ELC statement. “This is particularly challenging as many of the ‘energy

4.2. Market (Organization) Barriers

efficient’ lighting products on the European market are not only non-compliant with basic safety, functionality and CE performance standards; they also have very low lifetimes. Consumers regularly feel ‘let down’ by low quality products as a result of poor market surveillance” (ELC, 2007a, p. 5). After revisiting the VITO14 study, the ELC stated its special concerns about a too ambitious timing of a phase out which will possibly result in “a shortage of adequate light sources for a large range of applications and luminaires in the EU” so that the limited availability of alternatives might lead to ‘empty shelves’ for the European consumers (ELC, 2008b, p. 11).

The technology of LEDs was still lagging behind and not yet marketable when the discontinuation of ILBs was discussed, as the price was still utterly high, and also problems with the light output had to be solved. Hence, this technology could not act as an adequate substitute for ILBs in the short-term. Philips reported on the future of LEDs but also existing shortcomings as follows:

“LED technology will also have a big future impact in the home. We already have decorative LED light bulbs for the home, which can replace incandescent light bulbs where only a decorative effect is required both indoor and outdoor. These don’t just use less energy; they slot into existing light fittings and also provide the consumer with a new lighting experience, using colors. I should stress however, that the light output of these current LED light bulbs is not yet comparable to an incandescent lamp”

(Philips, 2006a, So what has Philips been doing to encourage this switch?, para. 14).

Inefficient technology still prevalent

The European lamp manufacturers state that another discontinuation issue is related to the prevailing ILB technology which is still being offered and purchased within the European market.

“The lighting market is also one of the few markets where although new efficient technology exists, old and/or inefficient technology is still readily available on the market” (ELC, road map, 2007, p. 5). Moreover the percentage of inefficient lamps used in Europe’s domestic lighting is huge as stated by the ELC: “Approximately 85% of lamps currently in EU homes are energy inefficient” (ELC, 2008a, p. 10).

A Philips representative also highlighted the issues related to the inefficient technology that is still being dominant and calls for untacking the potential of energy efficient solutions. “There is also a striking unbalance between the amount of electricity used by incandescent bulbs, their sales volumes and the work they actually perform: Incandescent bulbs consume 25 % of all electricity used for lighting in the world, but they only produce 4 % of all electric light. This is despite the fact that they represent 2/3 of all global lamp sales!

Huge savings can thus be made in the way we are lighting our offices, roads, shops and factories. It would be a real shame, if we let our nostalgia for a century-old, inefficient bulb, obscure the need to switch to more energy efficient technologies” (Philips, 2007b, para. 11-12).

Production capacity of EEL

The European lamp manufacturers were concerned about their production capacity meeting the demand for energy efficient replacements due to a proposed phase-out of inefficient technologies.

“A switch to more efficient domestic lighting will require significant manufacturing changes within the ELC Member companies. Lamp manufacturers currently produce 8 times more “traditional” lamps than the more energy-efficient equivalents. This is why we have proposed a time-phased approach in

14

Vito is an independent research and technology organisation which was commissioned by the European Commission to compile the preparatory study for energy-using products focused on domestic lighting as a product group. For further information see: www.vito.be/en