Fluorescent light bulbs... more trouble than helpful?

Question

So I just read this article:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,362102,00.html

My question is this: even if yes, they can save electricity, they seem to have dangerous levels of mercury (remember how we USED to have mercury thermometers and now you can't just go out and buy them?)... so what next? What do you think will be the next bulb we can use that won't be dangerous?

Answer 1

LED bulbs and flashlights are available but pricey.

Answer 2

People make the statement that each bulb has just a trace amount.  Still each home has dozens of bulbs, each neighborhood has thousands of homes, each state has millions of neighborhood, and now there's massive amounts of mercury that has the potential of finding its way into the water system.

We should use nuclear power, then it wouldn't matter which bulb you used.

By the time your grand kids come around, no one will be able to eat wild fish because they will be too toxic.

Answer 3

The mercury levels aren't very dangerous.  If you break one (and when was the last time you broke a lightbulb open?), you just need to follow the EPA cleanup guidelines and you'll be fine.

http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index....

And as long as you don't break them, they're no hazard at all.  People talking about all the lightbulbs in your house containing a lot of total mercury - are you planning on going around using them as piñatas or something??

CFLs only have an amount of mercury the size of the tip of a ball point pen.  Plus by reducing energy consumption, they reduce total mercury emissions because mercury is the byproduct of burning coal.  See this chart:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mercu...

But if you're still concerned about CFLs, you can always go even greener and switch to LEDs which consume even less energy and last even longer.  

http://greenhome.huddler.com/products/ca...

They cost a lot up-front, but over their lifetimes LEDs are comparable to CFLs and much cheaper than incandescents.

http://greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/lifeti...

Answer 4

the levels of mercury are scary I took them out of the nursery when I heard about that

Answer 5

Led bulbs

-save energy

-last 10 times as long as fuorescent bulbs without depending on the number of ignitions.

-are not dangerous

Answer 6

Yes, like with any environmental issue, there's always a flip side.  But the small amount of mercury in the bulb is nowhere near the amount of produced by generated by generating the extra power needed to run an incandescent bulb.

Answer 7

You also need to look at the largest contributer to atmospheric mercury, coal burning power plants.  If you use CFLs you are lowering the amount of energy you use by 1/4 in lighting thus lowering your total coal mercury emission.

Answer 8

Yes, they do have mercury, and the bulb itself doesn't work well in certain conditions such as cold garages and basements, or hanging upside down.  They are also much more expensive and some people have been documented as having a sensitivity to the light they emit. Many of the bulbs have been known to burn out before their 5-7 year predicted lifespan. Most communities don't even have adequate facilities to recycle them as intended.  So all that mercury in some places is ending up in landfills.  This is one of those things that got rolling before all the kinks were worked out.  I've heard the next type of light bulb that will be coming out that is safe and cheap will be an LED bulb.  There won't be mercury in it fortunately.  I'm assuming you already know there's a national law on the books that will virtually outlaw the incandescent light bulb in favor of CFL's.  Instead of mandating that consumers can only use one type of bulb which may or may not be safer than another, let the free market decide.  If I want a good old fashioned incandescent bulb that doesn't contain mercury, why should I be prohibited to want to have a mercury-free house?

EDIT:  To add to Dr. Jello's comment.  Not only do the trace amounts of mercury add up when everyone has them.  But why do environmentalists feel that it's ok to endanger my family with a light bulb they feel worthy of usage by forcing me to put it in my home?  Is it just because it's a little amount?  Because a little amount is enough to make a person very ill or even kill them (and I'm not exaggerating).  I'm glad they've taken on the daunting task of minimizing a real threat to my family and restricting my liberties forcing me to buy a toxic product.