Environmental impacts of lighting technologies — Life cycle assessment and sensitivity analysis

Abstract With two regulations, 244/2009 and 245/2009, the European Commission recently put into practice the EuP Directive in the area of lighting devices, aiming to improve energy efficiency in the domestic lighting sector. This article presents a comprehensive life cycle assessment comparison of four different lighting technologies: the tungsten lamp, the halogen lamp, the conventional fluorescent lamp and the compact fluorescent lamp. Taking advantage of the most up-to-date life cycle inventory database available (ecoinvent data version 2.01), all life cycle phases were assessed and the sensitivity of the results for varying assumptions analysed: different qualities of compact fluorescent lamps (production phase), different electricity mixes (use phase), and end-of-life scenarios for WEEE recycling versus municipal solid waste incineration (disposal phase). A functional unit of “one hour of lighting” was defined and the environmental burdens for the whole life cycle for all four lamp types were calculated, showing a clearly lower impact for the two gas-discharge lamps, i.e. the fluorescent and the compact fluorescent lamp. Differences in the product quality of the compact fluorescent lamps reveal to have only a very small effect on the overall environmental performance of this lamp type; a decline of the actual life time of this lamp type doesn't result in a change of the rank order of the results of the here examined four lamp types. It was also shown that the environmental break-even point of the gas-discharge lamps is reached long before the end of their expected life-span. All in all, it can be concluded that a change from today's tungsten lamp technology to a low-energy-consuming technology such as the compact fluorescent lamp results in a substantial environmental benefit.

[1]  Lorenz M. Hilty,et al.  Electronic waste—an emerging risk? , 2005 .

[2]  Patrick Wäger,et al.  Smart labels in municipal solid waste — a case for the Precautionary Principle? , 2005 .

[3]  C. Turley Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) , 2010 .

[4]  Osram China Interpretation & Analysis to EU Commission Regulation(EC)No 245/2009 on Ecodesign Requirements for Fluorescent Lamps without Integrated Ballast,for High Intensity Discharge Lamps,and for Ballasts and Luminaires Able to Operate Such Lamps , 2009 .

[5]  Patrick Wäger,et al.  Does WEEE recycling make sense from an environmental perspective?: The environmental impacts of the Swiss take-back and recycling systems for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) , 2005 .

[6]  Greg Jacobs The Implementation of the Regulation of Electrical and Electronic Products (WEEE and RoHS Directives) – An evaluation of the Belgian situation in light of the review of Directive 2002/96/EC and 2002/95/EC , 2008 .

[7]  David Parsons The environmental impact of compact fluorescent lamps and incandescent lamps for Australian conditions , 2006 .

[8]  Lorenz M. Hilty,et al.  End-of-life impacts of pervasive computing , 2005, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.

[9]  B. Weidema,et al.  carbon footprint , 2020, Catalysis from A to Z.

[10]  Rolf P. Pfeifer,et al.  Comparison between filament lamps and compact fluorescent lamps , 1996 .

[11]  G. Müller,et al.  The Scientific Basis , 1995 .

[12]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[13]  B. Weidema,et al.  Carbon Footprint , 2008 .