With our busy schedules, we often complain about the rocketing electricity bills at the end of the month. It is the same for individuals, companies both private and public and non profit organisations. "Nothing spent nothing gain" is an old wisdom and it is time we think about it. Employing new technology is certainly more expensive, but what are the benefits? Our lives involve flourescent tubes whether one agrees or not. In terms of LED tubes replacing Fluorescents, the benefits are all too many. Most importantly, it cuts lighting costs up to 40%. So what is stopping the adoption?
It is the high initial cost that deters them. I agreed with that for a moment. As a trained auditor i look at fixed assets based on its lifespan and salvage value. LED tubes have longer lifespan and much higher salvage value than a fluorescent. The recycling of LED tubes are also possible as compared to Fluorescent. Last but not least, tax incentives are also available under section 14Q for renovation (lightings included). I believe many also knows about spreading the initial cost over over the assets' lifespan. This is in line with financial reporting standards under FRS16. This would have elimnate the prospects in dealing with a high initial cost. Through LED tubes, so much on electricity can be saved over the years.
Examining all these factors, i arrived at a conclusion. It is the mindset of people that prevents the EARTH from becoming healthy again. It is never easy to change our mindsets, but we have to keep trying. The first step is to think logically and dare to believe in yourself. My campaign: It is not about finding new energy sources, but changing the way we think. Using LEDs as compared to fluorescent maintains the same efficiency yet reduces the input. We have to think far. Lowering electricity consumption will increase Singapore's productivity and competitiveness. Many 1st world country are starting to change to that, do we wish to lag behind?