ChristiansUnite Forums

Light-bulb ban craze
exceeds disposal plans 
Facts about CFLs, heir to incandescents,
downplayed in government-enviro push

As state and foreign governments enact forced phase-outs of incandescent light bulbs, consumers are being kept in the dark about the many downsides of compact fluorescent lamps, replacements being billed as an environmental and energy-savings panacea.

Across the U.S., schoolchildren are being urged to replace incandescent light bulbs in their homes, state legislatures are following the leads of foreign governments in banning the sale of the bulbs in the future and the federal Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency are highly recommending the switch to CFLs. Businesses like Wal-Mart are also pushing CFLs hard, as are environmental groups. But safe disposal plans and recycling centers for the mercury-laden compact fluorescent lamps, seen as the future, lag behind the hype.

So, too, does the truth about what will become mandatory, fine-imposed handling requirements for CFLs by homeowners and businesses.

While CFLs arguably use less energy and last longer than incandescents, there is one serious environmental drawback – the presence of small amounts of highly toxic mercury in each and every bulb. This poses problems for consumers when breakage occurs and for disposal when bulbs eventually do burn out.

Most consumers, even those already using the CFLs, do not realize the long-term dangers the bulbs pose to the environment and the health of human beings.

While the EPA is on the CFL bandwagon as a means of reducing carbon-dioxide in the atmosphere, which it believes contributes to global warming, it also quietly offers advice on cleanup of broken bulbs that might give consumers pause to consider dumping those incandescents any time soon.

When a CFL breaks, the EPA cautions consumers to open a window and leave the room immediately for at least 15 minutes because of the mercury threat. The agency suggests removing all materials by scooping fragments and powder using cardboard or stiff paper. Sticky tape is suggested as a way to get smaller particles. The EPA says vacuum cleaners and bare hands should never be used in such cleanups.

After final cleanup with a damp paper towel, the agency warns consumers to place all materials in a plastic bag.

"Seal and dispose of properly," says the EPA. "Wash hands."

But disposing of properly might be a tough thing to do, because CFLs should never be thrown in the trash like their old-fashioned incandescent predecessors. They need to be turned into recycling centers, which are few and far between.

When laws banning incandescent bulbs take effect, so do the mandatory fines on consumers and businesses that dispose of the new CFLs improperly.

Though the amount of mercury in each bulb is small – about 4 milligrams – the potential environmental hazard created by the mass introduction of billions of CFLs with few disposal sites and a public unfamiliar with the risks is great.

To address the concern, Wal-Mart announced earlier this month that its suppliers – mainly in China – have agreed to reduce the amount of mercury in the bulbs. Yet the announcement itself came as something of a shock to many consumers who were blindsided about the risks of mercury.

Mercury is probably best-known for its effects on the nervous system. It can also damage the kidneys and liver, and in sufficient quantities can cause death.

With an estimated 150 million CFLs sold in the United States in 2006 and with Wal-Mart alone projecting sales of 100 million this year, some scientists and environmentalists are worried far too many will wind up in garbage dumps.

When sufficient mercury accumulates in a landfill, it can be emitted into the air and water in the form of vaporous methyl-mercury. From there, it can easily get into the food chain.

"Disposal of any mercury-contaminated material in landfills is absolutely alarming to me," says Steve Lindberg, emeritus fellow of the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

The answer, of course, would be recycling and disposal centers. However, it is questionable whether consumers can be counted upon to bring their burned out and broken bulbs to special collection centers voluntarily. That's why most of the laws banning incandescents also include fines for improper disposal of CFLs.

Those provisions in the new laws may be as hard to find for consumers as the fine print on CFL packaging warning them not to breathe the dust from broken bulbs. LampRecycle.org offers a good sampling of existing regulations.

Many waste centers that are set up to accept CFL recycling currently have only one collection day per year.

Consumers are discovering other downsides of CFLs besides convenience and safety issues:

    * Most do not work with dimmer switches

    * They are available in only a few sizes

    * Some emit a bluish light

    * Some people say they get headaches while working or reading under them

    * They cannot be used in recessed lighting enclosures or enclosed globes

    * Fires are seen as a slight possibility

When CFLs do burn out, they often create some smoke, which consumers have found alarming. This is a result of the plastic on the bulb's ballast melting and turning black. CFL manufacturers dismiss safety concerns.

Despite the drawbacks, Australia, Canada and the European Union have all moved to ban incandescent bulbs. California, Connecticut, North Carolina and Rhode Island, are all in the process of legislating an end to Edison's greatest invention. Even local towns and cities are getting into the act.

But the craze didn't start in Europe of Australia or Canada. It started in Fidel Castro's Cuba. His action in banning the incandescent bulb was followed up quickly by Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. Only then did the trend continue in the industrialized western nations.

Recycling experts say the solutions are at least five years away. Meanwhile, millions of consumers and green activists are being persuaded to make the switch now.

Governments may indeed be promoting a kind of lighting that is itself nearly obsolete. Fluorescent lights are nothing new. They've been around for a long time. And while they may save money, some say the public hasn't chosen them for good reasons – including, but not limited to, the mercury issue.

Some experts predict the next generation of lighting, though, is LED lights. They are made from semiconductor materials that emit light when an electrical current flows through them. When this form of light takes over, all bulbs will be obsolete. Your wall tiles can light up. Curtains and drapes can light up. Even your dining room table could be made to light up – at exactly the level you want. And the best news is – no toxic waste.

That's what is ahead in the next decade, according to some in the industry.

Nobody promoted CFLs as aggressively as IKEA. Not only does the retailer sell them, it also provides one of the very few recycling centers for the burned out bulbs. But even with a plethora of recycling centers, how will the public view the prospect of saving up dead bulbs and transporting them to recycling centers? And how about the danger of breakage in that process?

"The industry is currently aiming at totally mercury-free CFL lighting, but this is still five to 10 years away," admits IKEA.

Those who really care about this problem right now are those involved in the waste industry.

"Most agree more energy-efficient light bulbs can significantly curb air pollution, but fewer people are talking about how to deal with them at the end of their lives," explained a page 1 story in the April 2 issue of Waste News. It goes on to explain "there is no plan to address air and water pollution concerns that could develop if consumers improperly dispose of the mercury-containing devices."

What is totally crazy is that there is another form of light bulb that is now coming out that is better than the CFL's. It is a form that uses LED's. The new LED light bulbs have been produced for at least 5 years now. The initial cost of purchasing them has come down from the original $400.00 each to a current $14.95 for an outdoor "dusk" version. Interior bright whites are as low as $34.00 right now. The LED bulb has no more disposal impact than the incandescent bulbs as there are no harmful chemicals in them. The LED bulbs use far less electricity, a tenth of an incandescent. Compared to a 60 watt light bulb that is only 2.5 watts for the LED bulb to generate the same amount of lighting. The LED light bulb has a life expectancy of up to 60,000 hours. That is 60 times that of an incandescent and 6 times that of a CFL.

Even at current costs that makes the intital cost of the LED bulbs far outweigh the cost of either incandescent or CFL's. It is expected that the initial cost will come down even further as more of them are produced.

Why are these people not pushing the use of the LED light bulbs? MONEY, government control, taxes...         

I would say....MONEY.  Someone is most likely lining the pockets of the politicians, since they clearly have no concern for our safety or the condition of our environment.  Follow the money trail.....(http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb87/mom2bran/thmoney.gif)

I don't argue that at all. I added in the government control and taxes because with the CFL's there will be control and taxes added for the disposal of the CFL's creating the need for more government offices and control over what we do with them.

Yep.
A typical knee jerk reaction by people. 
If it is going to take 5-10 years for disposal to catch up to possible demand then hold off on anything for another 5-10 and LED's will be bigger and better any ways. 

However incandescent will still have special purpose applications and a complete ban would be ridiculous...but then again that is the way of the "activist"

Another thing about CFL's, it gives some of us migraines.

The LED's don't cause that problem. There are those that are sensitive to UV rays which are associated with CFL's. This is not a problem for LED's either.

I know, I use LED's in the Church. :D 

Warning: Vacate room
when CFL bulb breaks 
Energy-saving devices called so dangerous
everyone must leave for at least 15 minutes

Thomas Edison must be rolling over in his grave.

Less than a month after the U.S. Congress passed an energy bill banning the incandescent light bulb by 2014, the UK Environment Agency issued guidelines calling for evacuation of any room where an energy-saving compact fluorescent light bulb is broken, releasing toxic mercury.

The warning comes a month before the British government begins its phase-out of tungsten bulbs, scheduled to be completed in 2011. The switchover to CFL bulbs will save at least five million tons of carbon dioxide emissions every year, the government said.

Health experts warned this week that people with certain skin ailments will suffer from the new eco-friendly bulbs which cause conditions such as eczema to flare up. Additionally, the bulbs have been linked to migraine headaches in some people.

The Environment Agency's latest advice focuses on the 6 to 8 milligrams of toxic mercury in each bulb.

Users who break a bulb should vacate the room for at least 15 minutes, the new guidelines say. The debris should not be removed with a vacuum cleaner, which could put toxic dust into the air, but with rubber gloves. The broken glass and all residue is to be placed into a sealed plastic bag and taken to a local official recycling site for proper disposal.

"Because these light bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, they could cause a problem if disposed of in a normal bin," environmental scientist Dr David Spurgeon told the London Daily Mail.

"It is possible that the mercury could be released into the air or from land-fill when they are released into the wider environment. That is a concern, because mercury is a well-known toxic substance."

The Environmental Agency noted that neither warnings about the bulbs' toxicity nor directions for proper disposal is printed on any packaging.

Such warnings aren't necessary, said one toxicologist who said a number of bulbs would have to be smashed simultaneously before there was a danger.

"Mercury accumulates in the body – especially the brain," Dr. David Ray, from the University of Nottingham, told the BBC. "The biggest danger is repeated exposure – a one off exposure is not as potentially dangerous compared to working in a light bulb factory.

"If you smash one bulb then that is not too much of a hazard. However, if you broke five bulbs in a small unventilated room then you might be in short term danger."

The most-immediate hazard from the CFL bulbs may be to Brits' pocketbooks. It costs about $1,300 to properly dispose of one municipal recycling bin full of bulbs – a figure that is sure to increase residents' tax bills.

Well in all fairness to the thread title... typical - especially during an election year that we put the cart before the horse.   Yes, the pros and cons of using CFL's should be made public knowlegdge prior to a sudden and rapid turnover.

As far as the mercury that has been an issue for ages w/flourescent bulbs.   I remember from my grade school days how that was a 'possible' danger.   

I have been using CFL's for many years now whereever possible as not all my appliances and fixed sockets allow for them.   

The bulbs themselves are expensive yet they have lasted incredibly long and there is a difference in the quality of light.     I have one still left in the package of which I purchased quite some time ago and I don't see handling instructions nor warnings per se on the packaging - it is mfd by GE.

The handling/warning instructions are not required by law so the companies won't put them on there in order to get more sold. I worked for a chemical plant that required special handling of fluorescent bulbs during disposal of them. While in the Navy if a fluorescent bulb broke we were required to employ hazardous chemical procedures, evacuate the area and use a hazardous spill kit to clean it up. Many of the diseases that children are experiencing today that did not exist several decades ago is thought to be from the lack of proper handling of mercury and the use of mercury in children's inoculations.

If you really want an economic bulb there are some new ones out that don't have the problem that cfl's present. They are called led lightbulbs. They cost a bit more than cfl's but they are by far safer, they last ten times longer than cfl's and use only a sixth of the energy to use them. They fit in any outlet that an incandescent bulb works in. No chemicals, no special disposal (in fact it would be a little over ten years before you had to worry about disposing them saving on the landfills in the long run).