---

FX writer John Bullock looks at what sustainability really means, and what we need to be doing in lighting now and in the future.

---

Words by John Bullock

Someone once compared embracing a sustainable way of doing things to climbing a mountain. At first the air smells sweeter and the views get better, but eventually you find it more difficult to breathe without help. It's a decent metaphor for a process that depends on an entirely new way of seeing the world and how we go about our business. Join me for a stroll in the foothills.

It helps to start out with the broadest possible look at why sustainability is important. As a species we have been ripping whatever we feel like out of our planet with little regard for what might happen next. Now we're running out of all kinds of stuff and we're starting to experience the consequences of 300 years of nature-pillage.

That statement is considered political in some quarters - the commie ecoleft having a pop at the establishment right - which just adds to the general fug of confusion. And even when the Pope gets involved, there's still no certainty as to which way the route to Sustainability Summit is going to work.

Here's three broad headlines in the sustainability argument, roughly: what we need to do today, what we need to do tomorrow, what we need to do by the weekend - or something like that.

Climate change
I don't usually write about climate change as a component of sustainable behaviour, but I do write about the continual burning of non-renewable energy reserves...as if there were no tomorrow. But let's look at climate change because that's what's getting the greatest number of people exercised.

Some 97 per cent of the world's scientists who know about this stuff agree that climate change is caused by us - you and me, our friends and families - as well as all those nice people halfway around the world who make all those cheap products for us. And if we don't do something about it NOW, then we face cataclysmic weather changes that will destroy our ability to feed the world's people and which will dramatically change the contours of countries with a coastline. London is at risk as well as the Maldives.

The lighting industry has done fantastically well in shifting to a low-energy environment. The replacement of filament lamps by CFL and more recently by LED is a great story and one of which we should all be immensely proud.

Objective 1: To move exclusively to energy-efficient sources and to use lighting control to manage the use of those sources.

One of the most recent incarnations of the Pay-per-Lux system is at Schiphol Airport

The circular economy
Maybe it just helps to be an internationally known sports personality, but doors have opened for yachtswoman Dame Ellen MacArthur. She has been given a platform to speak to international business leaders about the importance of not throwing things away, and that is why the circular economy is now on the agenda of many global companies.

'Circular economy' is a new title for something that we've known about for a long time - the simple idea that we don't throw things away. It might be counterintuitive for a capitalist system that relies on overconsumption and planned obsolescence to want to hold on to things, but most of us recognise in our own lives how we're surrounded by objects that have outlived their original intention but still manage to hold on to a degree of usefulness: furniture that comes down the generations to us, favourite tools and appliances that might be held together with string but we wouldn't dream of being rid of them...my bicycle, which is now more than 30 years old and still as good as new, despite the mileage that it's expected to cover even now.

There are two chief thrusts in the sustainability argument in favour of the circular economy: firstly, the longer a manufactured item stays in service, the more the original energy and material resources taken to make that item is amortised across its years of life. This is a good thing. And secondly, while an item is in use we are not calling on yet more mineral resources to be dug out of the planet to replace it. Again, this is a good thing.

There is only one thing about the current circular economy that gives me cause for concern, and that is the monetisation of waste. The principle of the circular economy requires that the original makers retain a degree of control over the finished goods so that the materials within that product can be returned to the manufacturing loop in an efficient way. This sounds like a good thing - and there's no reason why it shouldn't be a good thing, except for one potential problem.

High Technology Lighting's Quartet downlight: fittings need to be designed to be broken down into individual component parts for effective recycling

At the moment, recycled materials - especially in the electronics sector, and therefore increasingly lighting, are often processed by the poorest people on the planet. There are horrendous statistics quoted by Dr Thuppil Venkatesh, director of the National Centre for Lead Poisoning in India: 'Half of children in a city like Bangalore already have blood lead levels at about 10 micrograms per decilitre, which has resulted in a reduction in their intelligence quotient. We are seeing more and more cases now because more and more electronic waste is being handled by our people.'

My question to global business leaders is, what level of intervention do they propose to change this appalling situation - or are they happy to stay with the status quo?

Objective 2: Lighting equipment should be designed to be taken apart so that long-life components (heat sinks and the like) can be reused. Electronic circuitry should be designed to alleviate the current toxicity of the recycling process.

A leasehold future
The common description of our industrial culture is: It Takes - It Makes - It Wastes. We are all used to, and happy to celebrate, when good sales figures drive company profitability. After all, it's all we've ever known and we've never had to see the world any differently. But now we do.

Our first objective was to reduce the energy footprint of what we make and sell. The second objective is to find ways to reduce the need for more raw material by employing 'cradle-to- cradle' design philosophies and supporting the circular economy. Our third objective needs to embrace a new paradigm: that what we take from the earth needs to remain our responsibility throughout the product's life and beyond.

In this way, raw material in the form of a component can become a leasable commodity, to be used again and again. It will require coordination between the manufacturers of LED chips, LED modules and luminaires; but, then again, we've been here before. The 60W GLS lamp didn't change its size in almost a century, so why should LED metrics be different?

We are seeing the first initiatives in this direction in the form of Philips' Pay per Lux model. Inevitably, this is a strategy currently available only to those mega-companies with plenty of money to hand; the radical shift that needs to accompany this way of working (and remember, that this isn't just about lighting) is to create a whole new way of making money work positively for the environment.

Objective 3: Soon international governments will need to understand that the private capital system is no longer fit for the purpose. Access to finance (in its broadest meaning) needs to be made available in a wholly new way, to enable companies to develop, manufacture and distribute products that have been created in a sustainable framework. It requires understanding that shareholder short-termism cannot support a post-industrial model that requires a far longer strategic world view of the husbanding of natural resources.

Either that or we need to find a neighbouring planet or parallel dimension to rape and pillage in the same way that we've done to our own backyard.

Examples of Philips' Pay-per-Lux approach
The idea of a 'performance economy', developed by Walter Stahel since the Seventies, emphasises the importance of selling services rather than products. The idea is that manufacturers can retain greater control over the items they produce and the embodied energy and materials that, in turn, enable better maintenance, reconditioning and recovery. The theory is that customers also benefit, as they only pay for the service they need and use, and get a better service as the manufacturer has a greater interest in providing a product that lasts.

When architect Thomas Rau came to fit out the Amsterdam office of RAU Architects, he wanted to use the principles of a performance model throughout the space. When considering lighting, Rau did not want to purchase an expensive lighting infrastructure that he would eventually need to replace and dispose of, but rather light as a service, and just the right amount to suit the building.

He says: 'I told Philips, "I need so many hours of light in my premises every year. If you think you need a lamp, or electricity, or whatever - that's fine. But I want nothing to do with it. I'm not interested in the product, just the performance. I want to buy light, and nothing else." Philips created a minimalist light plan that made as much use as possible of the building's natural sunlight, again to avoid providing a surplus of material of energy.

High Technology Lighting's Quartet downlight: fittings need to be designed to be broken down into individual component parts for effective recycling

The company used an LED light fitting for ceiling systems, adapted to be hung in the high-roofed offices. A combined sensor and controller system, responding to both motion and daylight, helped keep energy use to a minimum.

Instead of a one-time sale, the arrangement is Pay-per-Lux, in which Philips maintains ownership of the materials. Rau Architects benefits from maintenance and service, and the option to adapt or upgrade the installation, with Philips able to recover the materials when necessary.

Having seen the potential of a performance offering, Philips went on to further develop the business underpinnings for this model, drawing up contracts that systemise the concept.

One of the most recent is the lighting upgrade at Schiphol Airport. Philips and energy services Cofely are jointly responsible for the performance and durability of the system, and ultimately its reuse and recycling at its end of life.

Lighting fixtures that will last 75 per cent longer than other conventional fixtures were specially developed by Philips Design in association with architect Kossmann.dejong as part of an extensive renovation. Fixture components can be individually replaced, reducing maintenance costs, meaning that the entire fixture does not have to be recycled, resulting in a greater reduction in raw material consumption.

'It is Schiphol's ambition to become one of the most sustainable airports in the world,' said Jos Nijhuis, CEO and president of the airport's Schiphol Group. 'The collaboration with Philips and Cofely marks a good step in this direction. Together we left the beaten path to develop an innovative, out-of-the-box solution.'