Virtue is supposed to be its own reward. But Londoner Mike Butcher has found it makes him money too.

The digital media consultant and father of two replaced the 15 power-hungry incandescent bulbs in his home with low-energy ones that use one-sixth of the power and a fraction of the cost.

"I'm just an ordinary guy, and it seemed like a no-brainer to me, an easy thing to do," he said. "Not only does it make sense from a green perspective, it also saves us money."

Old-fashioned bulbs

With electricity prices up sharply to around ?0.11 (US$0.212) per kilowatt/hour in Britain and ?0.20 (US$0.263) per kWh in mainland Europe, running 15 old-fashioned hot bulbs costs the average household ?200 per year, a figure which can be cut by ?150 or more.

"When I called the electricity company, they told me how surprised they were about my low energy bill," Butcher said.

Energy-saving bulbs, which have a fluorescent tube rather than a filament, can be bought in most European countries for less than ?2 apiece, compared with up to ?20 a decade ago. And they last up to five times longer than old-fashioned bulbs.

"You're stealing from your own wallet if you don't buy these energy-saving lamps," said Henry de Gooijer, a project manager and consultant at Ecostream in the Netherlands.

Climate change bill

The British Government published a climate change bill on Tuesday setting targets for carbon dioxide emission cuts which could make the country the first to limit greenhouse gases by law. Part of the plan is to phase out high-energy bulbs.

Producers estimate that around 2.1 billion energy-inefficient bulbs are sold every year, mainly for homes, and around 3.6 billion are in use.

Butcher dismissed complaints that low-energy bulbs are dimmer. "My wife had to get used to the fact that when you switch them on, they're not as bright right away. But after 60 seconds or so they're as bright as a normal bulb," he said.

- Reuters