Are We Being Told The Truth About The Danger of CF Lights?

Question

One CF Light breakage can put 335 times the safe level of mercury into the air according to the Maine Ambient Air Guideline .

http://www.maine.gov/dep/rwm/homeowner/cflreport.htm

The EPA tells us we need to shut off the Heat or AC and leave the room for 15 minutes after a bulb break.

http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm#fluorescent

All clean up materials need to be thrown out, stored in a sealed metal container and disposed of as toxic waste in some areas.

Mercury is known to harm the brain and liver. Why would you want this product in your home around your family?

Why would anyone want these lights around their children? Is their health worth a slightly lower electric bill?

Shouldn't it be the goal of all people to remove all toxic metals from their home instead of bringing more of this substance in?

Why doesn't congress pass a law demanding CF bulbs to be mercury free?

Is our government being honest about the dangers of these bulbs?

Answer 1

How would you know either way.

Answer 2

Yes.

If you're concerned about this, you'd best remove every long fluorescent bulb from your house.  They contain 2-10 times as much mercury, and are MUCH easier to break.

You're probably staring at a fluorescent bulb right now.

There's nothing special about a CFL except that they fit where an incandescent bulb would.  Their compact nature makes them harder to break than a long fluorescent, less leverage.

Answer 3

I bought some of these things last year and use them.  I'm aware that I'm saving money, which was my only reason for buying them in the first place.  There are dangers involved with them, for sure.  They give off a less-bright light than the incandescent bulbs, so I'm not going to buy them again.  Overall I'm disappointed in them.  And yes, the mercury concern is a valid one...I think they should be withdrawn from use.

Answer 4

Why should they start telling the truth now??  

They (government and scientists) didn't bother to tell us that corn ethanol would actually end up spewing more pollution than regular gasoline... not to mention the Billions of taxpayer dollars that subsidized the scam!

It's all about the $$Bucks$$!

Answer 5

I think most people know about the mercury in these bulbs, and there are lots of places to recycle them once they burn out. You do realize the problem with coal don't you? If you live near a coal plant you are getting a lot more mercury than what is in the bulb.  The level of mercury in the bulbs is low and you can buy bulbs with a very low mercury content, you just have to be a smart shopper and look for it.  Plus, the smaller the amount of electricity we use the fewer nuclear power plants are built and they are really scary, what do they do with the waste?

Answer 6

No I don't think most people want more mercury in their homes, in the air after being broken in dumps and landfills, and in the oceans (when we already have a lot of mercury in fish).  And most of all CFLs are ugly, give off an ugly light that can give you a headache because of the blinking--if we wanted fluorescent light all day, we might as well stay at school/work 24/7!  And Meagan's right--they're all made in China and we all know how safe Chinese products are because of their...high quality control standards. : |

Edit: We know that there are products out there that contain mercury--it's even gotten into our food supplies.  So...does that mean that we should put much more of it into landfills and in every lamp and light fixture in every home when we don't have to?

"Mercury is a cumulative heavy metal poison which occurs in its elemental form, inorganically as salts, or organically as organomercury compounds; the three groups vary in effects due to differences in their absorption and metabolism, among other factors.[1] However, with sufficient exposure all mercury-based toxic compounds damage the central nervous system and other organs or organ systems such as the liver or gastrointestinal tract."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poi...

Answer 7

Exactly! And they dont even mention LED light bulbs, which use a fraction of a CFLs energy. Its because they dont own stock in Big LED, like they do with CFLs.

Al Gore is a lying hypocrite who need to shut up and get away from America.

Answer 8

fortunately they don't break as easily as the other kind.   I think many of the clean air/ clean water rules are excessive- all the better to create lawsuits against anyone who'd dare use chemicals, of any kind, for any purpose - but mostly just those who have enough money to interest a lawyer. (businesses).  If you've ever tried panning for gold, you'd realise there's a good tablespoon of lead, in each shovel full of dirt - it's the black stuff you end up with after panning. People who worry about every little thing should get a hamster ball to live in.

     Outlawing the old bulbs is just more asinine enviro extremism. I didn't like the CF bulbs at first, but they're bright enough for most uses - they get brighter, after they've been on for awhile. I like to have an incandescant bulb for reading ,tho

Answer 9

Did you know that most coal burned in power plants contains mercury deposits? If you are so concerned about Hg, maybe you should disconnect from the grid in protest.

Many of the everyday products you use were made with mercury because it is so useful.

I think the government is being completely honest. MSDS's are available to anyone who requests them from the manufacturer. If you want to use these bulbs to save money, so be it. Just don't huff the broken bulbs and die a very agonizing and prolonged death.

Answer 10

Why be concerned about another piece of paranoid bureaucratic bullshit.

There is so little mercury contained in a CFL that they pose no  risk whatsoever from exposure to mercury.

They also contain much less mercury than the standard fluorescent lights which have been in use for the last 50 years or so.

Liguid Mercury is a totally safe element.

Even if ingested, it would simply pass through the body.

Even if a small amount were to react with the stomach acid it could only form an extremely small amount of mercurous chloride which is a non-poisonous substance and is used in medicine.

It is only dangerous in most of the compounds which it can form.

This is NOT the case with the extremely minute quantity of mercury used in these fluorescent lights.

A small quantity of this gas is required in order to function as a light, so making them without it would make no sense whatsoever.

The only dangerous part of any light is the glass which can break and cause injury.

Perhaps we should ban all glass since it could be potentially dangerous when broken!

This is simply another example of some bureaucrats trying to justify their purpose by issuing some nonsense which again has no scientific basis whatsoever.

I would like to ask anyone when the last time the government was honest about anything?

Let us try to keep things in perspective, and hopefully start finding some 'Common Sense'!

Answer 11

The environmental wackos are just trying to appease their new friends the Chi-coms (Chinese communists) since all of the CF bulbs come from there. NONE are produced in the US! They don't give a d**n about the environment. They're just trying to erode our freedoms and make us live in squallor. If they have their way, this once-great nation will rival Communist-era Russia or Third World countries in our low standard of living.

Answer 12

Mercury vapor is what make the lamp glow, so you cannot take it out.

Fluorescent and other gas discharge lamps have been in use for years in other forms.

I dropped my lighting energy usage by 75% with them. I treat them as I have treated an other fluorescent lamp for over 40 years, and take the necessary precautions. I also recycle them in an approved fashion.

What's the problem? There is no perfect solution for any problem.

People used to give their kids whole jars of liquid Mercury "Quick Silver" to play with. Not smart by what is known today, but it illustrates the miniscule risk posed by these lamps relative to the exposure of yesteryear.

Answer 13

The fact that the the governments are doing and publishing these studies shows that they are indeed being honest about the dangers of these bulbs.

According to the EPA, over the lifetime of these bulbs, they actually release less mercury into the environment than incandescents, because of the amount of mercury released from burning coal to power the more energy-hungry bulbs, not to mention all the other pollutants not released. The difference, of course, is that if these bulbs break, the mercury is released closer to the end user. This does imply a sort of selfishness in those who dislike bulbs that overall cause less pollution, but are concerned about the small probability that they might slightly pollute said end user's home or office.

The danger from that small amount of mercury is actually quite low, certainly lower than the danger from everything power plants release if incandescents were used instead.  Mercury thermometers contain over 100 times as much mercury, and used to be very common. Though many have broken in their long service history, reports of health effects from broken thermometers are rare.

The claim that mercury is up to 335 times the Maine Ambient Air Guideline is not exactly honest because that guideline is for chronic exposure, while the measurements were for instantaneous quantities. The OSHA limit for instantaneous exposure is actually 0.1 mg per cubic meter.

The thing I don't get is why some people so hate the concept of environmentalism that they'll hate whatever new technology that promises to help the environment. Compact fluorescents aren't perfect, and within 20 years, they'll probably be replaced by light emitting diodes, but they're far better than incandescents.