Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
In case you didn't know, incandescent light bulbs are to be banned in the US by 2014
Zindaihas
Member UncommonPosts: 3,662
The reason is to save energy. Fluorescent light bulbs use less energy and last longer than incandescents. Now I don't have a problem with that per se, I'm all for saving energy. But the problem I do have with it is that fluorescent lights contain mercury, which is a toxic substance. So, if the bulb lasts until it burns out, it must be disposed of as hazardous waste, not simply thrown in the garbage. That's an inconvenience. Hopefully they will set up some kind of easy drop off location for these bulbs by then so it will be as easy as going to the grocery store.
But worse than that is if the bulb breaks. Apparently, you're supposed to call a hazmat crew to come and clean it up and I've heard stories that it can cost upwards of $2000. Wow, that would pretty much wipe out the savings of buying a lifetime of fluorescent bulbs.
Here's the article on mercury in fluorescent lights
The top article says that Australia was the first country to ban the incandescent light, which takes effect in 2010. Any Aussies out there reading this? How's that going for you?
I am so glad the world is ending in 2012 so I don't have to deal with this dilemma.
Comments
Actually for broken CFLs, the EPA recommends isolating the room (i.e. shutting interior doors, leaving room) and airing it to the outside for 15 minutes. Then it recommends carefully, using gloves, scoop all of the glass into a box and pick up any small pieces with sticky tape. It suggests using wet paper towels for final cleanup stepl. It suggests disposing of any clothes or bedding directly impacted by falling shards (stuff that may have contacted the shards after breaking is fine post-wash). Then it recommends disposing of the waste in a manner suggested by local government.
Given the EPA is pretty much the most paranoid institution ever, your $2k cleanup is pretty bogus.
Yes, that's probably the cleanup fee for a mercury thermometer, mercury-containing materials with visible amounts of the stuff, and other situations involving amounts of mercury 10s, 100s, or even 1000s of times greater than the amounts in a CFL.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
Not to worry, the ban will never happen.
After all, the world is gonna end in 2012.
Beat me to saying the same thing...
Actually, the biggest problem I see with the fluorescent bulbs is that most "every-day" joe's and jane's don't realize they are a hazard when they break. As to the recommend procedure for cleanup, how are you supposed to seal off a room that is central to the house? I mean, think of new houses now days, kitchen and breakfast area open to a family room which is open to a central hallway and most likely either a formal dining or living room. No doors except those into bathrooms, pantries, laundryrooms, and bedrooms. What if the chandelier breaks? All those bulbs breaking in a central open area to the house. What if you have small children? And what if this happens when the central air is on?
Anyhow, everything we have in our homes are dangerous to some degree or another. The question is whether or not we are going to educate people before the dangers outweigh the benefits. Just like we all know to test the water before puting an infant in for a bath, keeping electrical appliances away from the tub (having GFCI's), storing meds where kids can't get to them, locking guns in safes or using trigger locks, etc.
Screw the environment. I'm stocking up on incandescent bulbs. It's only $0.98 for a pack of 6 compared to the $13 tag for CFLs. It took 5 packs to redo my whole house. That was about $70 with tax. From the time I switched I monitored the savings. I have saved about $2.00/mo on my electric bill. At that rate it will take 3 years to recover my investment at which I would possibly have to replace them again.
They are not worth it.
This wont happen because some congres man will find out he has to replace all his dimmer switches to ;p
Honestly Some of this is getting Insane...wait it allready is..
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude; greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams
From what I heard, (so it might be wrong), apparently if the room is sealed off and doesn't have windows, you close the door and just don't go in it for 2 days (it's not so great if it's your only bathroom though).
If the room is an opened area in your house, and cannot be sealed off, open every window in the house and come back in 24 hours.
Actually, you're helping the environment, incandescent are way, way better for the environment than Fluorescents. Fluorescents use a little less electricity of course, but that is far outweighed by the manufacturing and disposal of hazardous that is now being carried out on a massive scale to create lightbulbs that save a tiny amount of electricity...Is electricity bad for the environment?
If you favor hazardous-waste lightbulbs then "Yes"
If you favor electric cars slowly rolling down our roads then "No"
Environmentalist always fail to see the big picture, even when it comes to the environment, sure they do good things here and there, but they are too quick and blindly follow they leaders without thinking , also they are too quick to attack and defend, that's way they often accidentally fight on the wrong side. (Also why they sometimes damage property, failing to see the resources it'll cost the environment to rebuild)
All in all, they probably do make the world a better place, slowly but surely, in a 3 steps forward, 2 steps backward sort of way.
PS: I heard that people might start using these lightbulbs to trow in riots
PPS: I also heard that more people will need glasses (a special type), there's some eye problem where people can't see quite as well in florescent light, most of the time eye doctors see it in elementary-school students who are getting bad grades, or getting headaches in school. The problem is that florescent light is really flickering, just faster than normal eyes can detect.
This makes me laugh a little. Especially on the point of electric cars. Electric cars are in no way safe for the environment. Sure, they have zero emissions, but when you must recharge them they are using just as much energy and developing just as much waste (dependent upon the type of power plant used) as a regular vehicle. The only environmentally safe car in existence is the FM-4 v1.0 HumanCar.
From what I heard, (so it might be wrong), apparently if the room is sealed off and doesn't have windows, you close the door and just don't go in it for 2 days (it's not so great if it's your only bathroom though).
If the room is an opened area in your house, and cannot be sealed off, open every window in the house and come back in 24 hours.
Actually, you're helping the environment, incandescent are way, way better for the environment than Fluorescents. Fluorescents use a little less electricity of course, but that is far outweighed by the manufacturing and disposal of hazardous that is now being carried out on a massive scale to create lightbulbs that save a tiny amount of electricity...Is electricity bad for the environment?
If you favor hazardous-waste lightbulbs then "Yes"
If you favor electric cars slowly rolling down our roads then "No"
Environmentalist always fail to see the big picture, even when it comes to the environment, sure they do good things here and there, but they are too quick and blindly follow they leaders without thinking , also they are too quick to attack and defend, that's way they often accidentally fight on the wrong side. (Also why they sometimes damage property, failing to see the resources it'll cost the environment to rebuild)
All in all, they probably do make the world a better place, slowly but surely, in a 3 steps forward, 2 steps backward sort of way.
PS: I heard that people might start using these lightbulbs to trow in riots
PPS: I also heard that more people will need glasses (a special type), there's some eye problem where people can't see quite as well in florescent light, most of the time eye doctors see it in elementary-school students who are getting bad grades, or getting headaches in school. The problem is that florescent light is really flickering, just faster than normal eyes can detect.
Basically put, everything in this post is false.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
From what I heard, (so it might be wrong), apparently if the room is sealed off and doesn't have windows, you close the door and just don't go in it for 2 days (it's not so great if it's your only bathroom though).
If the room is an opened area in your house, and cannot be sealed off, open every window in the house and come back in 24 hours.
Actually, you're helping the environment, incandescent are way, way better for the environment than Fluorescents. Fluorescents use a little less electricity of course, but that is far outweighed by the manufacturing and disposal of hazardous that is now being carried out on a massive scale to create lightbulbs that save a tiny amount of electricity...Is electricity bad for the environment?
If you favor hazardous-waste lightbulbs then "Yes"
If you favor electric cars slowly rolling down our roads then "No"
Environmentalist always fail to see the big picture, even when it comes to the environment, sure they do good things here and there, but they are too quick and blindly follow they leaders without thinking , also they are too quick to attack and defend, that's way they often accidentally fight on the wrong side. (Also why they sometimes damage property, failing to see the resources it'll cost the environment to rebuild)
All in all, they probably do make the world a better place, slowly but surely, in a 3 steps forward, 2 steps backward sort of way.
PS: I heard that people might start using these lightbulbs to trow in riots
PPS: I also heard that more people will need glasses (a special type), there's some eye problem where people can't see quite as well in florescent light, most of the time eye doctors see it in elementary-school students who are getting bad grades, or getting headaches in school. The problem is that florescent light is really flickering, just faster than normal eyes can detect.
Basically put, everything in this post is false.
Great argument on your part on why it is false. I didn't know "Basically" was a reason.
From what I heard, (so it might be wrong), apparently if the room is sealed off and doesn't have windows, you close the door and just don't go in it for 2 days (it's not so great if it's your only bathroom though).
If the room is an opened area in your house, and cannot be sealed off, open every window in the house and come back in 24 hours.
Actually, you're helping the environment, incandescent are way, way better for the environment than Fluorescents. Fluorescents use a little less electricity of course, but that is far outweighed by the manufacturing and disposal of hazardous that is now being carried out on a massive scale to create lightbulbs that save a tiny amount of electricity...Is electricity bad for the environment?
If you favor hazardous-waste lightbulbs then "Yes"
If you favor electric cars slowly rolling down our roads then "No"
Environmentalist always fail to see the big picture, even when it comes to the environment, sure they do good things here and there, but they are too quick and blindly follow they leaders without thinking , also they are too quick to attack and defend, that's way they often accidentally fight on the wrong side. (Also why they sometimes damage property, failing to see the resources it'll cost the environment to rebuild)
All in all, they probably do make the world a better place, slowly but surely, in a 3 steps forward, 2 steps backward sort of way.
PS: I heard that people might start using these lightbulbs to trow in riots
PPS: I also heard that more people will need glasses (a special type), there's some eye problem where people can't see quite as well in florescent light, most of the time eye doctors see it in elementary-school students who are getting bad grades, or getting headaches in school. The problem is that florescent light is really flickering, just faster than normal eyes can detect.
Basically put, everything in this post is false.
Great argument on your part on why it is false. I didn't know "Basically" was a reason.
*YAWN*
You want me to start on how the post failed?
First, EPA procedure for cleanup is 15 minutes of airing out, not 24 hours. So first falsehood, first paragraph.
http://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm#fluorescent
Second, lighting is currently at 19% of the world's energy usage. CFLs cut energy usage by lighting by 75-80%. So this 'small gain' is actually not so small. It is also not outweighed by the 'waste' generated by making the bulbs. Also, they add less mercury to the environment than Incandescents.
On the first PS, throwing glass shards into a riot is far more dangerous than the risk of mercury contamination in an outdoor environment. Risk is absolutely minimal, risk of glass shards creating serious injury? Pretty high. So I guess it's an argument for... plastic light bulbs? Beats me.
On the second PS, the 60 Hz issue hasn't been an issue for more than a decade. They added ballast that entirely solves the problem, flickering far faster than any human can perceive.
So yes, it's basically completely false. And you supporting it? Completely nuts.
Do some basic research, really.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
for someone advocating research, you sure didn't post any about the biggest point of your post, which is the energy savings created opposed to the cost of manufacturing flourescent bulbs.
Oh and ps. on the electric car thing...lol, electric cars are a joke, everyone knows that by now.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
There is no way they can force people to use fluorescent bulbs. My friend with Epilepsy had all flourescent bulbs removed from her home because they were causing seizures, though this is rare it still happens and there is no way they can force her to use them legally. I actually called her and discussed this and she said if they ever tried she would sue them!
It is listed under possible seizure trggers:
www.epilepsy.org.uk/info/photo_other.html
http://energystar.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/energystar.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=5284&p_created=1216151825
Once again, easy peasy. I wish you didn't post and support absurd claims, then ask me to do the research to refute them. Wasn't even the biggest point of my post.
The point of my post is someone posted a bunch of unsubstantiated nonsense and you wanted it to be true, so you insisted someone else do the legwork to prove that the false claims were, in fact, false. Bad thinking.
I note you didn't ask him to support his garbage claims. Burden of proof much?
And as for the electric car thing, I didn't say anything about electric cars, but since this seems to be your favorite tactic:
The sum total of your argument is "Lol, electric cars are a joke, everyone knows this?"
Nice argument.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
I work with lighting fixtures on a daily basis. I've installed sockets for your standard bulbs as well as fluorescent bulbs and I'm indiferent to this whole thing. At home I got a couple of LED bulbs. They at least to me seem to produce a better light and last a hell of a lot longer then the CFL's and regular bulbs combined.
Speaking of the changing of dimmers that's good news to me. Means that I'll have tons of work
All of a sudden being an Electrician is just that much better. I guess you could say the future is quite BRIGHT...
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
I love LED's ! I would rather have them than either of the others. they have so many uses and last forever. the light from flourescents is just weird, no wonder people are having seizures from them. it is not easy on the eyes, haven't heard of any vision or seizure problems from LED's though, so hopefully they will go with them instead of those medically hazardous flourescents. They last forever, produce better light, and are more energy saving than any of the others.. it just makes sense.
Yep, that's what I'm saying. Sure the bulbs might seem pricey at the start but they never burn out. All you really need is a ONE TIME FEE ... I sound like a bad infomercial and you're set.
The LED bulbs they have now even come mounted on standard bases for your regular light socket. I'm sure in the next few years you'll see them making a more noticable presence in the industry.
No required quests! And if I decide I want to be an assassin-cartographer-dancer-pastry chef who lives only to stalk and kill interior decorators, then that's who I want to be, even if it takes me four years to max all the skills and everyone else thinks I'm freaking nuts. -Madimorga-
I never said I supported it. I simply was asking you to elaborate. An argument without the facts is simply bullshit.
You supported your argument. That's all I asked.
Just to disagree with you on a point - even CFLs are bad for the eyes for those sensitive to it. I have a degenerative eye disease called Keratoconus. All flourescent lights extremely bother my eyes, even CFLs. Yet another reason why I am switching back to incandescent bulbs.
I love how we're so eco-friendly when it comes to saving a few bucks on electricity.
lets forget about what the manufacturing of these products does to our environment, much less the disposal, or the cost of replacing existing lite sources and disposing the old. How many people do you really think dispose their flourescents properly? Right, they get thrown in the trash to leech into the soil.
same goes with battery powered vehicles. The amount of toxic waste produced by plants manufacturing these batteries is mind boggling. But if it saves you 5 mpg, I guess its worth it
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
To add, no one will recycle them. At the moment, I have only found companies which require you to pay a $2.00 disposal fee per bulb.
China is where the bulbs are made,why mercury,so as we know China is poising their people and rivers because of the way they dispose of the mercury during production.And these bulbs will in up in the land fill because people will not drive 30 miles the properly dispose of these bulbs.So we get mercury in the land fills that in up in under ground water supply's.
And every time you run your vacuum cleaner you spreed the mercury around the house and in the air.Their is no way to get the mercury out of the carpet unless you remove it.Do you remember the fuel additive that California mandated yrs ago that polluted the air and ground.same stuff here.Its just a matter of time.
I looked up the recycling place where I'm suppose to drop these bulbs off at ,, 40 miles from my home.
Tree huggers have control now and thats all their is to it.Get ready their is more coming from them.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
Actually the manufacture, etc. of those bulbs does not, as I showed, do more damage to the environment than the amount caused by the incandescents, which use 4 to 5 times more electricity.
The difference between a CFL and an incandescent is the difference between the worst SUV on the market and a Prius. And the additional cost? Doesn't do NEAR the damage generating all that electricity does.
As I quoted, light bulbs use 20% of the household's electricity. CFLs could cut that down to 5% or less.
The concept that this is somehow made up by some mythical pollution is absurd. No scientific study has concluded this, no research has suggested this, no one except gullable people willing to believe anything would think this.
If you actually think this is true, you have to believe that homeopathics cure all diseases including cancer, crystals really make your water pure, and that there are alligators in the New York sewers, because they're all as plausable as this nonsense that you're repeating.
Suddenly the same people who are complaining that we're running on a nanny culture, we're excessively paranoid, and that we're hysterical about the dangers of DDT and contaminated fish are suddenly crying wolf about levels of mercury that are provably, demonstrably safe. There will be invisible mercury particles in your carpet. How much? One atom? Maybe a thousand? Oh dears, oh noes.
No one thinks this is a dangerous level. There's mercury in the air your breathing right now. This very second, you are inhaling mercury. Breath in. Can you taste it? It's there, I assure you. There's too much coal burned in this country for it not to be (and coal has a lot of mercury, far, far more than CFLs).
When the Bush administration refused to cut mercury levels and loosened restrictions, you poo poohed. Oh, it's not dangerous.
Suddenly, now that we're talking about residue that will give you levels of exposure tens or hundreds of times lower than those, and we're all going to die of mercury poisoning.
I'm just asking for a little consistency here, folks. If the Bush administration's lack of restrictions on mercury in the air are fine, don't complain about exposure to a small FRACTION of that. Residue from years later? Don't make me laugh. You can probably find a few atoms of plutonium in there too, doesn't mean you'll die of radiation poisoning.
It's perfectly, utterly, 100% safe. And that, really, is that.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
There's no possible way this is a realistic goal. Flourescent lights are not a suitable replacement for incandescent in most applications where a lighting element is required. For example, automotive headlights, theatrical lighting, or any sort of lighting that requires a variable light output or fast "blink" capability cannot use a flourescent element. Plus there are all the safety lights, worklights, lights from old equipment, etc. that cannot or do not possess a flourescent alternative.
So if these energy saving folks haven't figured it out already, they soon will figure out that it is impossible to eliminate all incandescent lighting, because incandescent light has certain unique properties that flourescent lights can never duplicate. Likewise, the elements that create incandescent light have certain properties that are uniquely suited to many common applications; properties that flourescent light can never duplicate.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
dorsdnt the wolrd end in 2012 so how can this have an effect on us...really...someone tell me lol - kfrak she woke me up to earlyy omg!!!!!!!