Christmas light displays not such a bright idea, say campaigners
EVERY year, Helen and John Attlesey raise thousands of pounds for charity by decorating their home with Christmas lights – but they should be thinking about the environmental cost of their displays, campaigners have suggested.
The couple, from Soham, Cambs, who unveiled this year’s decorations this week, have focused their fundraising efforts especially on Great Ormond Street Children’s Hospital in gratitude for saving their grandson’s life after he developed epilepsy aged six.
But MPS and environmental campaigners have urged people who like to dress up the outside of their houses for Christmas to consider “the effect on our planet against having lots of lights above our doors”.
Andrew Griffith, Conservative chairman of the Dark Skies all-party parliamentary group, which wants to see a cut in light pollution, said: “While we all need some festive cheer, much exterior lighting is unnecessarily bright.
“Had it been in place in Bethlehem, the Three Wise Men would never have seen the stars let alone be guided to the baby Jesus by them.
“A good compromise would be for homeowners to use timers so that they do not stay blazing all night.”
Another member of the group urged people to show restraint.
Philip Dunne, Conservative MP, said: “I encourage those people to look at using LED lighting where possible to minimise the environmental impact.”
LED lights use only 10 per cent of the power of a conventional string of incandescent Christmas lights.
Shailesh Vara, the Conservative MP for North West Cambridgeshire, said: “It is time for serious action if we are to ensure a safe and better planet for the generations to follow.”
“We’ve got to weigh up the effect on our planet against having lots of lights above our doors,” said a Green Party spokesman, while a Conservative former environment committee member added: “We do need to celebrate Christmas in moderation. If that means using fewer lights and less electricity during celebrations, then that has to be good.”
Mrs Attlesey, 70, admitted the lights cost “a lot of money” with a monthly bill “in the hundreds”. But even if the cost to their own pockets is not uppermost in the minds of the Attleseys, they are mindful of their impact on the planet.
Mrs Attlesey said: “Cop26 has put the issue of climate change in people’s minds and I’m very proud to have always used LED lights because they’re more environmentally-friendly. I would advise anyone else with Christmas lights to use the same as us.
“People are unlikely to scale back on what they buy, but they should use LEDS where possible.”
The Energy Saving Trust says the UK could fill 15,500 hot air balloons with the carbon dioxide produced by our Christmas lights each year.
Gocompare has calculated that a display of 100 five-watt bulbs, switched on for six hours a day over the festive period, will consume the equivalent of an extra 22.8 days electricity consumption for an average household.
Almost a quarter of people will put fewer lights up this year because of the sharp increase in energy costs, with 12 per cent saying they won’t put up any for fear of large bills, according to a poll.
Gareth Kloet, from Gocompare energy, which commissioned the survey, said: “Higher energy costs and also the environmental implications of Christmas lights are causing people to rethink the way they decorate their homes this December.”