Rethinking the CFL February 15, 2009
Posted by millyonair in Rants, Social Commentary, Technology, Things Environmental.Tags: Cancer, CFLs, energy use, Environment, flourescent lights, mercury
trackback
Less than brilliant, but oh-so-21st-century!
As an environmental science major at Texas State University, I get exposed to a lot of “green” ideas: composting, geothermal heating techniques, and solar energy, for example. Most of what I learn has been enlightening and informative. So when everyone in the department began raving about the importance of replacing traditional, incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent light bulbs, I went along with it. After all, the benefits seemed obvious. Sure, a box of those cute little twirly bulbs was several times more expensive than a package of regular light bulbs, but by switching, I could save myself $43.80 per year in energy costs. It was printed right there on the box. It made good financial sense. Beyond that, I could console myself with the knowledge that my light fixtures were responsible for less toxic ick in the atmosphere; CFLs use less electricity, which means the power plants were generating less pollution on my behalf.
Since the introduction of the CFL, I have invested in about seven of them. So far, I haven’t noticed any significant decrease in my electricity bill. Maybe that’s because I was already in the habit of turning off lights that I wasn’t using. But, what is more disappointing to me is that I don’t like the light they produce. The first time I installed a CFL and turned on the lamp, I was instantly disheartened. The cozy reading nook which had once been bathed in tranquil, amber light was now awash in glaring sterility. Soothing? No. Relaxing? No. It felt like a reading nook at a doctor’s office, like there should be a shabby pile of out-of-date bass fishing magazines and tattered Highlights for Kids piled up beside the chair. But did I unscrew the bulb and re-install the faithful, chubby little incandescent bulb which had been doing me right for months? No. I didn’t. I sighed, and resigned myself to my inferior lighting situation for the sake of the environment.
But now that I’ve been reading about it, I’m pretty sure that CFLs are the opposite of good for the environment, because there’s mercury-a known neurotoxin-inside them. Ever broken a light bulb? Yeah, me too. What are you supposed to do if you break a light bulb full of poison? The packages I’ve purchased don’t say. But the EPA says to leave the room for fifteen minutes, turn off your AC or heating system, open a window, and forbid anyone from walking through the contaminated area. Then, you’re supposed to “Carefully scoop up glass pieces and powder using stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a glass jar with metal lid (such as a canning jar) or in a sealed plastic bag. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder. Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes. Place towels in the glass jar or plastic bag. Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.”
I see CFLs all the time now. And I have to wonder: How many people know that if they break one, they’ve suddenly got a little haz-mat situation on their hands? This begs the question, what are you supposed to do with the CFLs that expire? It is inadvisable to throw them into the garbage because of the mercury in them, which has the potential to leach into groundwater, or somewhere else mercury shouldn’t be. TCEQ says that it’s legal to dispose of CFLs in household trash (the agency recommends sealing them in a plastic bag first) if there isn’t a place to recycle them locally, but that doesn’t make me feel good. Some stores, such a Home Depot, offer CFL recycling drop-off centers. But how many people are really going to make a special trip in their already-busy schedules to drop off a few old light bulbs at a recycling center? It’s hard enough getting people to recycle aluminum cans and paper.
I’m not against innovation. And I’m definitely not against reducing energy consumption. But this is one environmentalist who cannot advocate the substitution of sketchy innovation in place of easy-implemented lifestyle changes, like turning off the lights in empty rooms, and powering down computers at the end of a day. Emissions from power plants are a nasty problem, and I know- there’s mercury in those, too. But why hasn’t there been a big campaign to get people to reduce their energy consumption? I’ll tell you why.
Dolla dolla bills, y’all.
heeeello creepy light bulb ! I can’t believe it doesnt say anything on the package !
At first I thought you were a football fan (CFL – Canadian Football League) …lol, my mistake. Anyway, you may hate me for this, but I like my CFL’s
I’ve got the ‘daylight’ color in my room and it’s great for anything …including reading. I’m not sure about the place where you are, but here you can get different colors (soft, warm, cool etc) for whatever you need it for. There have been tests that compare the reg. light bulb with warmer cfl’s and many people couldn’t tell the difference. Also, I think that EPA site you link to is referring to the fluorescent bulb (tube thingys) and not cfl’s …which have significantly less mercury (now less than 2mg compared to 500mg in the classic thermometer). Here’s a link to their cfl page Home Depot in my town has been recycling them for a few years now as well. They’ve also been condemned for their UV exposure too …but I’ve seen a few sites that report 8 hours of cfl light equates to about 1 min. in the sun. The big UV concern emanated, again, from the industrial fluorescent light and not the cfl.
The quality is just like anything else …if you buy cheap ones they’ll prob. be from China and they’ll prob. give out sooner. A few that I found in the dollar store did just that already. But they’re getting better …like anything over time. I hear the next craze is the white LCD. Many clubs that I go to have replaced their ‘cans’ (the big spotlights you see hanging from the ceiling and pointing to stage) with lcd spots. They’re nice and can be controlled easily for colors etc. …but I hate them cause there’s no heat! It was nice being able to preform and get all sweaty at the same time …but now you stay cool
I also have an lcd ’stand light’ for reading music …battery powered, and it doubles as my night light in bed. I hate its color …and would rather have my cfl on. But I’m sure that’ll all change as well when things eventually get tweaked …like everything does. OK, this comment is too long. You officially have my permission to edit!
Oh, I thought this was a great post, of course! And I’m glad the truth is coming out. Don’t believe the facts in the post, read these links:
http://www.wattworks.com/CFL%20Hazards.htm
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/01/more-risk-with-cfl-light-bulbs.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=72133
http://homerepair.about.com/od/electricalrepair/ss/cfl_epa_cleanup_7.htm
Thanks for those great links! And for telling me about it in the first place!
Here’s another one.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-506082/Environmentally-friendly-light-bulbs-skin-cancer.html
I would love to see more of these type posts, but you know that already I’m sure!
As with anything, you just need to follow the money! It reminds me of Andrews, Texas that is willing to accept toxic soil from New York dredged up out of the Hudson River loaded with PCB’s
just because there is not much going on their town. This town has long accepted the oil and gas industry and the noxious fumes and hazards that come with it. Now 81 car trains filled with contaminated soil will run from New York out to Texas . Andrews is funding their high school indoor pool, and concert hall with some of the money the waste management company is bringing in. I hope the kids will live to to enjoy it.
Ewww! That’s gross and sad!
Here’s a quick quiz- how many light bulbs have you accidentally broken over the past 1 year/5 years/10 years?
This fear over mercury from a broken CFL is misplaced, IMO, given that the CFLs are a lot more efficient than incandescent bulbs, which turn *most* of the electricity into heat and not light, and thus are responsible for more mercury being released into the environment at the coal power plant which supplies the electricity.
And if there’s a concern regarding CFLs breaking, well, here’s a simple and easy solution – be extra careful when handling and replacing them. Many cities already have hazardous waste disposal facilities (stuff that’s a lot more hazardous than CFLs), and have started accepting CFLs too.
Hello, Amit.
Thank you for reading and leaving your thoughtful comments here!
To answer your quiz: I broke a light-bulb just the other day! Maybe I’m just clumsy, but I would estimate that I break anywhere from 2 to five light bulbs a year (but not a CFL, because, as you suggested, I am extra-careful with those).
I agree that CFLs are more efficient, and I understand why. The main points I was trying to raise in this post were: 1. CFLs are an environmental contaminant, and most people aren’t aware of the potential hazards as well as the extra attention they need to pay to clean-up and disposal of these bulbs. For example: I was in the thrift store a few months ago, and a customer knocked over a lamp with a CFL bulb in it. The lamp and the bulb both broke. No one acted like it was a big deal, and when I explained the precautionary steps needed for cleanup to the lady working in the store, she looked at me like I was crazy. I didn’t hang around to see if she took my advice, because, like the EPA advised, I left the area. I would be willing to bet, however, that the bulb fragments were swept up with a broom and tossed right into the regular old trash without being sealed. Because that is a way, way easier way to handle a broken light bulb; people, even when they know better, still tend to do what’s most convenient. And 2: I do not enjoy the light produced by CFLs. Efficiency aside, I find the ambiance to be inferior.
Though I am admittedly a bit of a laggard when it comes to advances in technology, I am not against progress, especially progress made for the sake of the environment. I’m all for a more efficient light bulb. But I don’t think we’ve satisfactorily solved the problem. What troubles me about the CFL phenomenon is that we are introducing toxins into our immediate environments and trusting that people are educated and motivated enough to do the right things and handle those toxins appropriately. It strikes me as even more ridiculous when a better solution is simply to use less electricity and turn off lights that aren’t being used. It’s so easy. Less electricity used = decreased emissions from power plants.
But the easiness of this solution is exactly why I’ll never be appointed Energy Czar to a presidential administration: it’s not scientific, it’s not slick, and it generates no profit.