Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Does switching off lights in a heated building save energy?
    • CommentAuthorJoiner
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Errr.
    • CommentAuthorrhamdu
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    It's complicated.
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    In energy terms? how complicated can it be?
  1.  
    Posted By: tonyDoes switching off lights in a heated building save energy?
    It depends what is providing the heat. In my heated building, the lights all have a COP of about 1 (we have very few CFLs). If I turn them off, the heat has to be made up by the heating system, which, in my case, has an annual average COP of around 2.7. So yes, switching off the lights does save energy during the heating season.

    But it's more complicated. Many houses over here are heated by gas or oil, which emit CO2, whereas our electricity is almost 100% hydroelectric. So switching off the lights, in the heating season, increases CO2 emissions in these houses. Therefore, it could be argued, it's better to keep the lights on, especially if they're *not* CFLs. Same thing for other "phantom" loads too. It's better, in this specific case, to keep them on, rather than off.

    The results are most certainly different for a UK-type generation mix though.

    Paul in Montreal
    • CommentAuthorjms452
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010 edited
     
    If you mean money or CO2 - in all but an very narrow (almost contrived) set of scenarious - Yes!
    •  
      CommentAuthorDamonHD
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    If you assume all kWh are the same then maybe not, but then if your thinking is that simplistic then I have a nice bridge to sell you. And a French tower.

    Heat energy is nothing much like the (presumably electric) high-grade energy to run lighting. Mixing them up is a financial and CO2 error of a factor of circa 3 in UK energy terms.

    Rgds

    Damon
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    I was trying to talk about energy.

    I agree with Paul about the heat pump being a more efficient way of using input energy, here in the UK they are very rare.

    In the case of building heated with heat pumps the answer is yes but for the rest?
    •  
      CommentAuthorDamonHD
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010 edited
     
    But what do you mean by "energy"? A kWh of electricity is considerably more valuable and versatile than a kWh of heat. Using a kWh of heat as a side-effect of lighting instead of a kWh from the heating system may use the same number of kWh overall, but those kWh are very different animals. (One of the reasons I find the PassivHaus specs baffling.)

    Rgds

    Damon
    • CommentAuthorjms452
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Well if you mean energy - then this isn't created or destroyed just changed in form or moved around.

    So even in Paul’s heat pump doesn't 'save energy' per se. It does use less electrical energy than direct electrical heating but the 'saved' energy is pumped in from somewhere else.

    So the question might need to be more specific (unless you want an interesting but increasingly diverging and academic debate).
    • CommentAuthorjms452
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010 edited
     
    Q. Does switching off lights, in a thermostatically heated building, cause more heat energy to be transferred outwardly through the exterior-surfaces/foundations of the building?

    A. No (if the curtains are closed)

    I might have missed something but I think that that's about right
    • CommentAuthorevan
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    From the EST newsletter I just received:

    "If all 26 million UK homes swapped one string of standard fairy lights for LED lights, during the 12 days of Christmas alone -financially, it would save nearly £8.5m. That’s enough to pay the weekly energy bills for 370,000 homes!"

    Hmm.
  2.  
    Posted By: jms452So even in Paul’s heat pump doesn't 'save energy' per se. It does use less electrical energy than direct electrical heating but the 'saved' energy is pumped in from somewhere else.
    It does save paying for the energy or emitting CO2 though - the energy that's pumped in has come directly from the sun.

    Posted By: jms452I might have missed something but I think that that's about right
    Only a tiny proportion of the energy that goes into a running a lightbulb ends up as light (if it's incadenscent) - a larger percentage for CFLs and LEDS but all the other energy that goes in comes back out as heat - which is useful, though may be a source of CO2 emissions depending what was used to generate the electricity in the first place.

    Paul in Montreal.
  3.  
    Posted By: jms452So the question might need to be more specific (unless you want an interesting but increasingly diverging and academic debate).
    Of course the question needs to be more specific - but it just goes to show that there is almost never a simple "correct" answer. It all depends. In my case, as I demonstrated, switching off the lights during the heating season saves energy (and energy = $$ in these discussions). But for my neighbour, who heats with oil, it will increase his CO2 emissions if the lights are out since the heat has to be made up from his heating system (assuming the thermostat is at the same setting in both cases).

    Paul in Montreal.
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Posted By: evanFrom the EST newsletter I just received:

    "If all 26 million UK homes swapped one string of standard fairy lights for LED lights, during the 12 days of Christmas alone -financially, it would save nearly £8.5m. That’s enough to pay the weekly energy bills for 370,000 homes!"

    Hmm.

    Does anybody know where you can "swap one string of standard fairy lights for LED lights" at zero cost?

    Hmm, indeed. Apparently the EST need to hire some accountants, or just resist the urge to make statements like that.
    • CommentAuthorjms452
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Paul,

    I agree totally.

    Was just trying to go back to energy and away from CO2 or cash as tony's brief.
  4.  
    Posted By: djhDoes anybody know where you can "swap one string of standard fairy lights for LED lights" at zero cost?
    Hmm, indeed. Apparently the EST need to hire some accountants, or just resist the urge to make statements like that.


    Exactly - each household would only save 32p (from the figures provided) - not much chance of getting a string of LEDs for that price. I guess over a period of several years or so might give a break-even. Worrying over tiny stuff like that is just a load of hot air ;) (Pun deliberate). Oh, and "energy bills of 370000 homes" - comes out to 22 pounds per home - that sounds pretty small for winter - esp with the cold weather you guys are suffering this year :D

    Paul in Montreal.
    • CommentAuthorevan
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Yeah, my quarterly bill just received was about 400. And I do turn the lights off.
    • CommentAuthorRobinB
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    I think it does save energy. Not much but a bit, just how much depending entirely what would do the heating otherwise.

    I've put in a couple of these lights on the stairs, not sure how cost/eco effective they are but the children (and the removal men) think they're cool and they work well. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Motion-Sensor-PIR-Light-Bulb/dp/B0039WY08O
    RobinB
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010 edited
     
    I dont think so. Either the heating does all the heating or the lights do some of it (how ever much energy they consume) and the heating does the rest

    The heat loss is fixed and the thermostat controls the temperature so the total energy loss is also fixed.

    Turning off the lights inside a heated building does not save any energy !!!!
    • CommentAuthorevan
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    You're assuming a "heated building" works under closed loop control Tony.

    Consider my living room. Right now, the temperature is probably around 10 degrees C. If I left a 100W light bulb on all the time, that's £10 worth of electricity wasted per month. Is there any less energy input from the heating? No.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDamonHD
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Tony, you're simply wrong, and/or trying to wind people up. You may not care about CO2 emissions, or you may already heat with electrical resistance heating which is potentially a scandalous waste, but it's much cheaper and environmentally friendly to do your heating with something more appropriate, such as natural gas or heat pumps or whatever.

    But the physics is crystal clear. Using a kWh of electrically-driven lighting (assuming even the energy that gets turned into light by the lamps gets absorbed by the building and turned into heat anyway) instead of some more efficient method is to throw away ~75% of the value of that kWh. And forces fossil fuels to be burned elsewhere on a typical grid that would not otherwise be burnt.

    You could heat or light your house by burning £10 notes, but there are far better uses for those things, to turn them into heat or light.

    Rgds

    Damon
    • CommentAuthorjms452
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    I agree with tony as per my previous refinement of the question:

    Q. Does switching off lights, in a thermostatically heated building, cause more heat energy to be transferred outwardly through the exterior-surfaces/foundations of the building?

    A. No (if the curtains are closed)

    The difficulty comes from the fact that 'energy' has a very specific scientific meaning which is different to the way we use the word in every day life. The term energy is NOT interchangeable for CO2 or money.

    You could see this as a wind up - or as question to prompt thought - leaving of preconceptions at the door.

    May be a better answer is:

    No (if the curtains are closed) but the answer is meaningless to our everyday lives, CO2 and money.
    • CommentAuthorevan
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Since we're going off at tangents:

    I'm not convinced that closing the curtains to prevent light escaping makes any measurable difference to the retention of energy in the property.

    Even though it does theoretically, it would be swamped by the far bigger effect that closing the curtains has on the insulation value and losses though convective/conductive transfer.

    Right?
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010 edited
     
    L=4 Pi C d^2
    L=luminosity, C= a constant and d=distance
    Sums up nicely the photon energy from a light bulb with regards to the distance from a spherical absorbing surface.
    The reason I mention this is that most of the 'heat', which is energy, will most of the time be at ceiling level where it will do little good.
    The comment about resistive heating is interesting, in itself it is a very efficient method of heating as it is extremely controllable and saleable. But as anyone with E7 storage heating will know it heats up the units regardless of external temperature. This is more a flaw in the design of storage heating than an inherent problem with resistive heating.
  5.  
    Posted By: SteamyTeaThe reason I mention this is that most of the 'heat', which is energy, will most of the time be at ceiling level where it will do little good.
    It will do just as well there as anywhere else as it's converted to IR and will thus radiate everywhere in the room.

    Posted By: SteamyTeaThe comment about resistive heating is interesting, in itself it is a very efficient method of heating as it is extremely controllable and saleable.
    More than 70% of people in Quebec heat via straight resistance heating ... though there are attempts to get them to migrate to heatpumps for obvious reasons (which, despite our harsh climate, still work well even with temperatures as low as -12C or worse).

    Paul in Montreal.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDamonHD
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Resistive heating generates *only* 1kWh of heat from 1kWh of electricity (and thus typically 500g of CO2 emissions in the UK for grid electricity).

    Using a heat pump would take maybe 1/3rd kWh of electricity to generate that 1kWh of heat, so 1/3rd the money and 1/3rd the emissions eg ~170g.

    Burning natural gas to get 1kWh of heat in a modern efficient boiler for example will cost 1/4 of the electric resistive heating and produce 190g of CO2 emissions.

    Occasionally the incredible controllability of electricity compensates for the horrible wastefulness of resistive heating by putting the heat exactly where needed very effectively minimising other waste, like in a point-of-use water point above a sink (not that I like them) or in a microwave oven, where they can avoid heating up loads of ironmongery between the heat source and the target.

    Rgds

    Damon
    • CommentAuthorwookey
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    Even if it were true that the lighting source heat energy is simply swapped for heating system energy, this still ignores the 6 months of the year when the heating is not on and the waste heat fro the light source is exactly that. OK, there are fewer lighting hours in that half of the year, but I'd say the best you can hope for is that 2/3rds of the lightbulb heat (energy) is 'credited' against heating-sytem heat (energy). And that's only a direct comparison when that heating system is resistance electrical heating, as Damon has pointed out. Normally it'll be much worse than that because electrical energy requires ~3 times as much energy as other forms of heat energy in its delivery (in the UK).

    And if you have cooling in the building (for summer), then the waste heat from lightbulbs counts double, because you have to use a load more energy to shift it out of the bulding.

    So all in all, effcient lighting is important and worth spending money on because lightbulbs are deeply inefficient heaters.
  6.  
    Posted By: DamonHDResistive heating generates *only* 1kWh of heat from 1kWh of electricity (and thus typically 500g of CO2 emissions in the UK for grid electricity).
    Using a heat pump would take maybe 1/3rd kWh of electricity to generate that 1kWh of heat, so 1/3rd the money and 1/3rd the emissions eg ~170g.
    Burning natural gas to get 1kWh of heat in a modern efficient boiler for example will cost 1/4 of the electric resistive heating and produce 190g of CO2 emissions.


    So, in the UK, switching off the lights costs money but saves CO2 so long as a heatpump is used for heating. Otherwise it neither saves money nor CO2.
    All this assuming a thermostatically controlled building, rather than a simple timeswitch for on/off of the heating system.

    Paul in Montreal.
    • CommentAuthorwookey
    • CommentTimeDec 15th 2010
     
    RobinB - can you measure the standby current of your PIR bulb? These are a brilliant idea, but all the non-battery implementations I've seen so far have terrible standby consumption. Often much larger than the savings made in power consumption, over the year. And the specs _never_ tell you what this is. I'd love to see an actual measurement for yours.
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press