You'll be hard pushed to find any 'energy saving' product that doesn't actually take more energy/money to manufacture & use than it saves compared to the original solution (low energy bulbs, solar panels, double glazing etc. etc.), and/or causes excessive environmental damage during manufacture or disposal (e.g. mercury in low energy lamps, toxic byproducts of solar panel manufacturing), and/or has an excessively low service life (output half-life of low energy bulbs, short service life of wind turbines) and/or is unacceptable from a reliability or performance viewpoint (solar power, wind power etc. etc.).
Energy saving, renewable energy and the rest is something that is very open to hype from those supplying the products, or those tricked into believing they actually work.
After all, the real best solution is often not the obvious one - remember that a Jeep is the overall best vehicle to buy from an environmental impact viewpoint due to the low *lifetime* energy usage in development, manufacture, service & disposal, while the 'green' option of something like a Prius is incredibly damaging overall.
Then again, if I could charge someone £1000 for an 'energy saving' bulb that only saves £1 worth of energy a year, and get away with it, then I'd be out there too shouting about saving the environment.
And for the record, the south of England is sinking due to post-glacial rebound, so the possibility that London may get wet someday isn't all down to sea levels, whatever people may like to pretend.