Elsevier

Energy Policy

Volume 31, Issue 3, February 2003, Pages 259-272
Energy Policy

Disseminating energy-efficient technologies: a case study of compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) in India

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(02)00038-1Get rights and content

Abstract

Disseminating energy-efficient technologies, even when they may appear to be technically perfect, is always a tough task, more so in economies with low purchasing power and educational levels. The compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) is one such well-known product that consumes only 20% electricity for the same light output as given out by the ubiquitous incandescent lamp and which, if adopted in a big way, has the potential of reducing peak electric power loads very significantly. However, in India, the CFL sales are still not growing in the expected manner. The current study was accordingly undertaken to investigate the underlying reasons and to determine the most effective ways in which an efficient technology like this could be popularized. The task involved the designing and administering of questionnaires to some 900 respondents from 100 locations representing various socio-economic, educational and professional backgrounds in and around Delhi, and analysing the results in terms of an importance index. Based on this feedback, the authors recommend an aggressive implementation of the formula standing for EDucation, POlicy support, STAandards, Demonstrations and INdustry involvement (EDPOSTADIN) at least for popularizing CFLs.

Introduction

In India in 1999–2000, electricity consumption in the domestic sector was 86.6 billion kWh, accounting for almost 22% of the total electricity consumption, which stood at 395 billion kWh (Statistical Outline, 2000–01). As more and more Indian villages and localities get access to electricity, the proportion is only going to increase further, and should touch 25%, which is generally the norm in countries like the USA (Rocky Mountain Institute, 1997). By using the most efficient sources of electric light in the most effective ways, it may be possible to save at least 50% of this electricity, or almost 43 billion kWh at current consumption levels. This is no mean figure because although the Indian power sector has been growing by about 6% in recent years, it is still characterized by huge gaps between demand and supply; with the peak demand–supply gap in certain regions reaching even 25% (TEDDY, 2000–01).

Normally, the Indian households use incandescent bulbs because of their low initial cost. This device is very inefficient converting only 10% of the electricity consumed into light. A compact fluorescent lamp (CFL), using the principle of passing a discharge arc through a gas in a compact tube shaped fixture, is known to provide lighting very efficiently. A CFL, in fact, consumes 4–5 times less energy for the same lumen output. CFLs now fit the sockets of incandescent bulbs and claim to last up to 13 times more than the standard incandescent.

From the point of view of environmental sustainability also, the use of CFL is desirable since a single CFL reportedly prevents the emission of 500–1000 kg of carbon dioxide, and 4–8 kg of sulphur dioxide every year in the USA (Polsby, 1994). Since the Indian coal has higher sulphur content, and since almost 75% of Indian electric generation comes from coal burning plants, the environmental benefits of using CFLs in the Indian context should only be higher.

Section snippets

CFL experience worldwide

A number of studies have reported the experience of using CFLs in many countries. These deal with a variety of topics; from technical issues of operating conditions, etc. to experiences in doing retrofits, from case studies of utility finance programmes to national campaigns in consumer education and so on (Specifier Reports Abstracts, 1993; Lighting Research Centre, 1998; Parker and Schrum, 1996; Fernstorm, 1994). The studies almost everywhere underline the very important role that governments

Ascertaining an appropriate dissemination frame work

In the Indian context, it is necessary to underline that although good quality CFLs cost 10–30 times more than their incandescent counterparts, making the former look exorbitantly priced from an individual's point of view, economy in operation or usage pays well for their high prices. CFLs, therefore, make good financial sense, on a life-cycle basis. The calculations in Table 1 indicate that the extra initial cost of $3.50 ($6.50 for 1 CFL–$3 for 10 equivalent incandescent lamps) can be

Methodology

For the policy research portion, an exploratory, structured and non-disguised1 questionnaire was developed that would address the objectives outlined above in a comprehensive manner. The questionnaire was pilot tested before being finalized. In view of the limitation

Analytical framework

The responses were analysed through bi-variate frequency/percentage distributions, charts, etc. For finding out the relative importance of various reasons, for example, for liking tube lights or being unhappy with their performance, the respondents were asked to indicate the importance of various reasons on a 3-point scale. The less important reason was assigned the score of 1 point, whereas the reason considered important was given the score of 2 points and the very important 3 points. These

Awareness and usage of CFLs

Queries about the awareness of CFLs revealed that about 2/3rd of the individual respondents were aware of the new product in the market Table 2.

It is discernible from Table 3 that although about 67% respondents were aware of the CFLs, only 40% of them had bought or used CFLs and the majority of them had used the brand Philips. It was further noticed that the awareness was mainly through advertisements or through market and friends. Advertisements seemed to attract graduates and professionals

Conclusions

With the above mentioned feedback (as well from a number of other analyses which for want of space are not being carried out here), the study leads to the following conclusions:

  • The awareness about CFLs is not very good among ordinary consumers, particularly those with monthly family incomes of less than Rs. 10,000 ($250). This calls for cooperative, generic advertising by major CFL producers along with, if possible, the government/utilities.

  • CFL use was found to be very low even from that

Specific recommendations

Coming to the specific course of action for popularizing CFLs, it is recommended that:

  • Consumer awareness must be increased drastically, i.e., more intensive advertising efforts both by the government and the industry should be made in a series that highlights all the positive implications of using the CFLs at the individual as well as the national level.

  • Companies engaged in producing and marketing CFLs, in association with suitable government agencies, must also create an excitement about the

Towards an India-specific dissemination framework

While the above mentioned suggestions, feedbacks and advices very comprehensively help with the task of evolving a good dissemination strategy for CFLs in India, it is necessary to suggest a framework that can reasonably take care of some of those newer technologies (e.g. induction or LED lamps) that may have the potential of making even CFLs obsolete.

It may be useful to recall in this context some critical characteristics that generally make any ‘Innovation Diffusion’ successful or whose

References (20)

  • A.J. Gadgil et al.

    Conservation potential of compact fluorescent lamps in India and Brazil

    Energy Policy

    (1991)
  • A.J. Gadgil et al.

    Stalled on the road to the marketlessons from a project promoting lighting efficiency in India

    Energy Policy

    (1994)
  • Fermstrom, G.B., 1994. ‘Utilities: steps to successful lighting programs’ Home Energy Magazine Online,...
  • Gadgil, A.J., Rosenfeld, A.H., Arasteh, D., Ward, E., 1991. Advanced lighting and window technologies for reducing...
  • GEF (Global Environment Fund), 1994. Mexico High Efficiency Lighting Pilot Project 12248-ME. The World Bank,...
  • Jannuzzi, G.D.M., Santos, V.F.D., 1995. The costs and benefits of residential lighting programs in Brazil: in Internet:...
  • Lighting Research Centre, School of Architecture, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, USA. 1998. Long term...
  • Parker, D., Schrum, L., 1996. Results from a comprehensive residential lighting retrofit. Florida Solar Energy Center,...
  • Polsby, E., 1994. Marketplace: what to do when the lights go out. Home energy Magazine online, November/December 1994:...
  • Rocky Mountain Institute. 1997. Home energy brief # 1 lighting. RMI Publications, Colorado, USA: in Internet:...
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (53)

  • Energy efficiency and electricity expenditure: An analysis of risk and time preferences on light bulb use in Ghana

    2021, Resources, Conservation and Recycling Advances
    Citation Excerpt :

    These other factors include attitudes, perceptions, monetary incentives, ban on use of inefficient technologies, behavioral interventions, product attributes and socioeconomic factors (Di Maria et al., 2010; Mills and Schleich, 2010; Min et al., 2014, 2014; Figueroa et al., 2019). With regards to socioeconomic factors, Kumar et al. (2003) found income and education to be the dominant factors that affect the individual's adoption of energy efficient light bulbs in India. Similarly, Di Maria et al. (2010) in their work in Ireland found education, environmental attitudes and income to be significant drivers of households’ decision to adopt an efficient light bulb.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text