Work
11.December 2009 - 00:00
Follow-up question to Question E 2255/09 concerning the Incandescent Lamp Directive
The reply given by Commissioner Andris Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission did not fully answer my Question E 2255/09 concerning the Incandescent Lamp Directive, particularly the effectiveness of the directive in reducing overall emissions.
In the reply the Commission states that during the preparation of the directive no significant issue was raised about varying impacts of using certain lighting technologies from one region to the other and that, because product requirements and functionalities are the same everywhere, a separate impact assessment for each and every Member State was not carried out.
The Commission also recommends consulting its answer to Question E 1090/09 by Ashley Mote. In its answer to Question E 1090/09, the Commission indicates that incandescent lamps are not an efficient way to regulate indoor temperature, that their location on the ceiling is inefficient, that heating is unnecessary in the summer period and may even result in increased cooling needs, and that not all rooms needing lighting need also heating.
However, various research projects by the Finnish University of Technology show that in practice all the energy used by incandescent lamps contributes to the heating of the home. Heat produced by incandescent lamps has to be replaced with heating and if the heating uses fossil fuels, the carbon footprint increases.
The lower the wattage of the lamp used to replace an incandescent lamp, the greater the need for additional heating. Research shows that if heating uses oil, replacing lamps increases oil consumption. Similarly, if electricity is used for heating, just as much electricity is used after lamps have been changed as before, because electrical radiators use more. In the case of combined heat and power, the decisive factor is how the electricity and heat are produced. In urban areas in Finland, they often come from the same power station. Changing lamps reduces electricity but increases heat [consumption]. This being so, it is the type of heating that determines the carbon footprint.
In view of the current ways in which electricity and heat energy can be produced in the EU, and the forms of energy in use, does the Commission consider that the sale of incandescent lamps has been banned too soon everywhere in Europe? Does the Commission consider that the product is not in fact used in the same way everywhere, bearing in mind that in practice heating is needed the whole year round in the Nordic countries?
11 December 2009
Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
The Commission's answer to Question E 1090/09 by Mr Mote(1) mentions the correction factors proposed by the United Kingdom (UK) Market Transformation Programme to take into account the heat replacement effect. Assuming those correction factors to be accurate, the overall benefits of Commission Regulation (EC) No 244/2009(2) are still substantial. Even if this benefit varies depending on specific circumstances such as the ones described by the Honourable Member, the use of low-energy lamps does not harm citizens in Nordic countries as they have in any case adequate heating appliances in their homes. Contrary to lamps, heating appliances are already specifically designed to produce heat in the most efficient way.
During the adoption process of the measure, the governments of the Nordic Member States did not raise the issue of the heat replacement effect, even though they were obviously aware of any local characteristics of energy use in households relevant for the measure.
In the absence of scientific evidence supported by several independent studies and acknowledged as valid by the governments of the affected Member States, the Commission does not consider it necessary to review the related requirements of the regulation. One of the objectives of the Ecodesign Directive(3) based on Article 95 of the EC Treaty is to facilitate the free movement of goods by imposing common requirements on products across the Member States. Therefore, any provision taking account of national specificities in the implementing regulations should also apply to products placed on the market in the other Member States.
(1) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 244/2009 of 18 March 2009 implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for non-directional household lamps, OJ L 76, 24.3.2009.
(3) Directive 2005/32/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-using products and amending Council Directive 92/42/EEC and Directives 96/57/EC and 2000/55/EC of the Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 191, 22.7.2005.
The reply given by Commissioner Andris Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission did not fully answer my Question E 2255/09 concerning the Incandescent Lamp Directive, particularly the effectiveness of the directive in reducing overall emissions.
In the reply the Commission states that during the preparation of the directive no significant issue was raised about varying impacts of using certain lighting technologies from one region to the other and that, because product requirements and functionalities are the same everywhere, a separate impact assessment for each and every Member State was not carried out.
The Commission also recommends consulting its answer to Question E 1090/09 by Ashley Mote. In its answer to Question E 1090/09, the Commission indicates that incandescent lamps are not an efficient way to regulate indoor temperature, that their location on the ceiling is inefficient, that heating is unnecessary in the summer period and may even result in increased cooling needs, and that not all rooms needing lighting need also heating.
However, various research projects by the Finnish University of Technology show that in practice all the energy used by incandescent lamps contributes to the heating of the home. Heat produced by incandescent lamps has to be replaced with heating and if the heating uses fossil fuels, the carbon footprint increases.
The lower the wattage of the lamp used to replace an incandescent lamp, the greater the need for additional heating. Research shows that if heating uses oil, replacing lamps increases oil consumption. Similarly, if electricity is used for heating, just as much electricity is used after lamps have been changed as before, because electrical radiators use more. In the case of combined heat and power, the decisive factor is how the electricity and heat are produced. In urban areas in Finland, they often come from the same power station. Changing lamps reduces electricity but increases heat [consumption]. This being so, it is the type of heating that determines the carbon footprint.
In view of the current ways in which electricity and heat energy can be produced in the EU, and the forms of energy in use, does the Commission consider that the sale of incandescent lamps has been banned too soon everywhere in Europe? Does the Commission consider that the product is not in fact used in the same way everywhere, bearing in mind that in practice heating is needed the whole year round in the Nordic countries?
11 December 2009
Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
The Commission's answer to Question E 1090/09 by Mr Mote(1) mentions the correction factors proposed by the United Kingdom (UK) Market Transformation Programme to take into account the heat replacement effect. Assuming those correction factors to be accurate, the overall benefits of Commission Regulation (EC) No 244/2009(2) are still substantial. Even if this benefit varies depending on specific circumstances such as the ones described by the Honourable Member, the use of low-energy lamps does not harm citizens in Nordic countries as they have in any case adequate heating appliances in their homes. Contrary to lamps, heating appliances are already specifically designed to produce heat in the most efficient way.
During the adoption process of the measure, the governments of the Nordic Member States did not raise the issue of the heat replacement effect, even though they were obviously aware of any local characteristics of energy use in households relevant for the measure.
In the absence of scientific evidence supported by several independent studies and acknowledged as valid by the governments of the affected Member States, the Commission does not consider it necessary to review the related requirements of the regulation. One of the objectives of the Ecodesign Directive(3) based on Article 95 of the EC Treaty is to facilitate the free movement of goods by imposing common requirements on products across the Member States. Therefore, any provision taking account of national specificities in the implementing regulations should also apply to products placed on the market in the other Member States.
(1) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 244/2009 of 18 March 2009 implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for non-directional household lamps, OJ L 76, 24.3.2009.
(3) Directive 2005/32/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-using products and amending Council Directive 92/42/EEC and Directives 96/57/EC and 2000/55/EC of the Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 191, 22.7.2005.