Moving on from our step-2 blogpost on power-down policies that we have implemented within our operations, this instalment will discuss yet another methodology that has been used frequently within households as a cost/emission saving measure for many years.
The benefits of replacing traditional lighting devices such as halogen and incandescent bulbs with LED alternatives is numerous. By their very design, traditional lighting devices are fraught with inefficiency. The concept is simple, mains-power passes into the bulb and is converted into heat energy. This heating reaction is visible to the eye, IE: producing light. The issue comes with maintaining this reaction within the bulb, as heat radiates away from the lighting device a constant supply of power is required to maintain operation. Within electrical devices, heat production that is not the purpose of the appliance (heaters, ovens, etc) is often seen as a sign of inefficiency.
This being the case, the invention and implementation of a lighting device that doesn’t produce great amounts of heat would in no doubt save countless amounts of energy. LED circuits generate light through electroluminescence through arrangements of semiconductors, amplified by refraction though transparent reflectors and diffusers. This process allows an LED bulb to generate equivalent lighting properties to a traditional design while consuming as little as 10% of the power.
Secondarily to this, the heating elements within non-LED bulb designs are often highly fragile and have a limited lifespan. The solid-state nature of LED circuits lends not only to their physical resistance to damage, but their expected operation time. Dependant on the quality of the bulb purchased LEDs can last for up to 50,000 hours of operation. Compare this to the lifespan of the average incandescent bulb at 1,000 hours, the benefits are clear to see. LED lighting also omits the inclusion of gases such as mercury, argon and neon in their construction. While these aren’t particularly harmful to the environment, they are to the human body in the event of bulb breakage.
With all of this in mind, implementing LED lighting usage does have its drawbacks, especially on the scale of a large business and manufacturing premises like Lil Packaging.
LED lights are not cheap. In fact, they are more expensive than traditional bulbs by multiple factors of magnitude. In practice, while there may be the sting of the initial purchase on a large-scale, this pricing is offset by their lifespan eventually saving money. Another aspect to be aware of when replacing fluorescent tube lighting, while the fitting itself does not need to be replaced, a slight modification is to be made to bypass the ballast from the circuit. If this is to be completed by an electrician, the cost can soon mount on a large business premises.
Even with these drawbacks in mind, there is no doubt that our making the switch to LED lighting is the right thing to do, paying for itself in the long-term and more importantly, making our operations at Lil Packaging greener. To read on more of the ways that we are working towards Zero Carbon by February 2022 please read our previous entries in this series and subscribe to our mailing list to be alerted of new posts!
Lil Packaging Owner/MD Fred Lill is currently exhibiting a 2021 – 2022 presentation tour based upon the points in this blog series to key figures within the industry. If you feel that siding with Lil Packaging in our journey to reach Net Zero would be an asset to your event, contact us via the following to book – [email protected]
“Your presentation was outstanding. Very inspirational and you are clearly very passionate about what you do.”
Sarah Winterbottom - MD - Josero Ltd