 |
Mercury Fears in CFL Bulbs Overblown? |
16 Comments |
| By Steve Balogh in Conservation, Green Living | March 30, 2007 | ||
I have noticed a meme circulating the internet over the past 2 weeks – fear of landfill contamination by an increase in the use of CFL bulbs. While there is trace amounts of mercury in CFL bulbs, and I do believe that there needs to be more public education from places that sell the bulbs to avoid them ending up in the garbage – I would like to note that the possible reduction in mercury emmisions from coal fired power plants outweighs the amount used to produce the bulb, over the bulbs lifetime.
This fact sheet (warning PDF also found at wikipedia) on the subject notes that there is approximately 4.0mg of mercury in a CFL bulb, and the emissions from a coal fired plant to produce the energy to run the bulb over it’s lifetime is an additional 2.4mg of mercury. Contrast that with 10.0mg of emissions for a conventional incandescent bulbs over the same 5 year lifespan of the CFL bulb. The incandescent is still producing more gaseous mercury contamination than the CFL. Also, the mercury contained in the CFL bulb remains in a form that can be recycled.
I do believe that end-of-life initiatives do need to be put into place. Following on the recyclable bottles and cans idea, perhaps a 25-50 cent “deposit” could be initiated by states upon purchase to help defer the cost of recycling the bulbs and help encourage the public to bring them back to stores and recycling centers after their long life and properly dispose of the bulbs. Money from unreturned bulbs could be passed on to recyclers to help reduce their cost.
In my opinion, the potential for reduction in energy consumption that CFL bulbs represent should not be derailed by the mercury concern. Over its lifetime CFL bulbs will be responsible for less coal plant emmissions, and maintain the mercury in a form that is recyclable instead of released in a gaseous form into the atmosphere. Proper handling and customer education will be key going forward. I fear that well placed articles like the ones circulating now will make the consumer look at CFL’s as a “dirty” choice to the incandescent. We need to keep educating the public that the power savings, and ability to recycle the bulbs far outweigh the risks.
Loading ...
Rebecca said,
My only concern with CFLs is the risk to a fetus if a pregnant woman broke a bulb and inhaled or absorbed the mercury. 4mg isn’t much, but it only takes a bit to cause a birth defect.
(I use CFLs, but if I ever have a baby I won’t handle them while pregnant.)
Scott said,
Tell that to the lady that has to spend $2,000 for an environmental cleanup in her home because one fell to the floor and broke.
michael said,
Apparently, that $2K cleanup was a little overblown.
http://bangordailynews.com/news/t/viewpoints.aspx?articleid=147836&zoneid=34
Angie said,
If you read the bulb information, CFL bulbs will last up to five years! Now, personally being a woman and all and having children myself, your unborn child will be in school before the bulb blows. If you’re that concerned over the bulb breaking, put an incadescent back into the socket and replace it later on. The likelihood of a CFL breaking is slim, unless you’re using pliers to get it out of the light socket. Your unborn child will reap the benefits of switching over to a CFL as you will be providing him/her with a cleaner, healthier environment! Still worried, have someone else change the bulbs for you.
Wright said,
its not an issue of when the light burns out. Its an issue of the light acidently breaking. With kids in the house, the liklihood of a light breaking skyrockets (who never saw a lamp accidently get broken while rough housing as a kid?) Even adults accidently break lamps, bulbs etc.
and its not so much the mercury in the landfull, as the mercury for recycle workers in the collection bins as bulbs break so easily. even if they were made to be 10x harder to break than a regular bulb, your still looking at ALOT of broken bulbs.
you cant be so shortsides when looking for the quick energy fix. turning off a light is probally the best sollution for both personal health and enviroment.
either they need to be made without mercury or assembled to be virtually indestructable.
joeblow said,
Nah, they dont need to be made indestructable.
They just need a warning label “if you are an idiot, you may not want to use these bulbs.”
Davis said,
CFLs contain 1-4 mg of mercury, the ubiquitous fluorescent tube contains up to 25 mg and the common household thermometer contains 400 mg. If a CFL is broken, the listed precautions should be observed.
Angela said,
I am a mother of an infant and a two year old and a lamp got knocked over and the lightbulb was vacuumed up and now we find out, that was dangerous. I never want to see another of those bulbs in my life! I am still waiting to see if I can continue nursing and if the mercury was removed from the home. I told my husband not to put them in a child’s room, but he did anyway.
loni said,
I was aware of the dangers of mercury contamination and was extremely careful when handeling them. When i went to turn on the light for the first time, the bulb cracked! So there i was with a contaminated bedroom (and pregnant no less)…they are not foolproof and more dangerous than you think. I will be incandescent untill they are made illegal, god forbid.
Rich said,
//I do believe that end-of-life initiatives do need to be put into place. Following on the recyclable bottles and cans idea, perhaps a 25-50 cent “deposit” could be initiated by states upon purchase to help defer the cost of recycling the bulbs and help encourage the public to bring them back to stores and recycling centers after their long life and properly dispose of the bulbs.
Like the deposits on aluminum cans, this is an idiotic idea.
The deposits on cans guarantee that *at best* I can recover some of the deposit. I say this because deposits are also taxed, did you know that? You pay by the can, but they do not return your deposit by the can, they do so by weight, I suspect that you get back far less than you paid, but I have not wasted the time to test this. Because of the deposit it costs me money to recycle. Rather than recouping the value of the aluminum, I waste time, energy and gas to lose more money on the deposit. Because of the deposit, I refuse to be robbed further even though aluminum cans are about the only thing that makes sense to recycle.
Deposits make recycling, of anything a bad idea.
Deposits are, in fact, a tax.
Pat Clark said,
Its not just us using cfl bulbs. Luxembourg will go incandescent free 2010. canada has the same media campaigns that are running in the US. massive bulb giveaways, massive billboard and radio and tv ads for the bulbs but NO EDucation on the fact they must be recycled. eon, energy star, dept of energy, epa …. look at the web sites, even cartoons to educate our kids about the bulbs… and NOTHING ABOUT RECYCLING. MY BOX SAID DISPOSE OF AS PER STATE LOCAL AND FEDERAL LAWS…..HA!
dave said,
Surely CFLs are not new in the United States. I have lived here in Europe for about the last 10 years and have not visited a lot but wow. Here in Germany we recycle them. Please refer to this link with your mercury concerens. (i typed in google “mercury emissions sources”)
http://www.tva.gov/environment/air/ontheair/merc_emis.htm
or this one
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/pollutioncontrols/overview_mercurycontrols.html
there are way worse things we do to our enviroment than use a CFL. SUV anyone?
please educate yourselves, google is easy to use.
mariama said,
Although the CFLs are healthier and safer than the traditional incandescent bulb, but they still contain some degree of mercury which is not good for children and unborn babies. I don’t kow if you have heard about the high power Aeon Lighting LED bulbs. Our Bulbs are completely MERCURY FREE, ENERGY EFFICIENT, LONG LIFE SPAN, BRIGHT, USER FRIENDLY, you name it.
If you want to know more about Aeon Lighting Technology Inc. visit
http://www.aeonlighting.com
James said,
Hi I was just wondering, what is the amount of mercury inhaled, considered to be a dangerous threat to younger and older adults. I am never buying those dumb things again
Rick Brown said,
Your numbers on CFL’s are right on according to the EPA. However, there are better alternatives than settling for the 4mg + the 2.4mg Hg to power the CFL for five years. For the same light output, the LED has no mercury and uses less that 2mg over that same five years. The LED doesn’t need to be recycled and isn’t breakable unless they are inside a glass bulb, in which case not too harmful. Also, LED technology is growing exponentially. Keep in mind that 1mgHg improperly disposed of can contaminate 1400 gallons of drinking water. In response to the fears of mercury from broken CFL’s to babies and kids, according to the same EPA article, a standard thermometer that we put in our kid’s mouths has 500mg of mercury! (Old household thermostats contain around 3000mg of Hg) Who’s paying attention to the disposal of these products? Finally, on the $2000 spill, check out Steven Milloy’s report for FOXNew.com. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268747,00.html) Take Fox News for what it’s worth!
JB said,
Mercury from a broken CFL pales in comparison to other sources of mercury in your home. Furthermore, mercury is much more dangerous when consumed than inhaled. What we should really be worrying about is all those coal power plants that release mercury into the environment, allowing it to bio-accumulate in our food web! For more info, check out this post: http://yourgreenfriend.com/mercury-in-cfls-should-i-be-concerned/