Compact Flourescent Bulbs Issue

[Guest guest]

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/

Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf

This suggests that the EPA thinks it is okay to dispose of compact

flourescent bulbs in regular trash.

I haven't spent much time on this issue, but I was under the impression

the recommendation / requirement would be to dispose of them with other

hazardous materials.

Anyone care to comment? My " green " sister forwarded this to me when I

mentioned the CFLs were bad.

Anne

[Guest guest]

>

> http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/

> Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf

>

> This suggests that the EPA thinks it is okay to dispose of compact

> flourescent bulbs in regular trash.

>

> I haven't spent much time on this issue, but I was under the impression

> the recommendation / requirement would be to dispose of them with other

> hazardous materials.

Jeez. My reading of it is that if a CFL breaks you follow mercury-spill

guidelines, ie no

vacuuming etc. But yes, depending on the state, they are saying you can put

unbroken

CFLs in the regular trash. Where if course they will get broken. Idiots.

They point out the amount of Hg in a CFL is much much less than that in an Hg

thermometer, and say that exposure to small amounts is OK. How is it that all

the Hg in all

those used lightbulbs is a small amount? At least they last a really really long

time...

Nell

[Guest guest]

It says on the boxes for the bulbs not to dispose of them in the trash

but to bring them to a hazardous waste collection center. I noticed

that many Green people are pushing these bulbs and seem oblivious to

the environmental hazards of them...their push is that they save

electric. But they don't save anything else when they emit mercury

everywhere...

I weighed the options and think that if people want to save electric

so badly,and resources...TURN SOMETHING OFF. Or buy Green power

generated from wind. If we all pushed for wind energy and renewable

energy we would save a ton more and not need to put mercury in our

houses and landfills. They need to go after bigger fish, than the

average consumer. How many companies leave the office well lite all

night, same with stores that are closed? We just need to stop burning

coal for electric...that is the answer...

By the way, the last I heard, they are planning to do away with

standard argon light bulbs in order to force us all to buy these new

bulbs. SCARY!

I was in Walmart the other day, about 5 isles away from the bulbs..I

heard a crash..some lady dropped one and broke it. We hauled out of

there like the place was on fire! What are the chances that was

cleaned up?

Sorry, I got on my soap box again....but I think the energystar

initiative is not connected to the EPA. Check the boxes of the

bulbs..if you dare go near one...

I have 5 boxes in my garage bagged to go to the hazmat. I won't use

the bulbs.

>

> http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/

> Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf

>

> This suggests that the EPA thinks it is okay to dispose of compact

> flourescent bulbs in regular trash.

>

> I haven't spent much time on this issue, but I was under the impression

> the recommendation / requirement would be to dispose of them with other

> hazardous materials.

>

> Anyone care to comment? My " green " sister forwarded this to me when I

> mentioned the CFLs were bad.

>

> Anne

>

[Guest guest]

>

> They point out the amount of Hg in a CFL is much much less than that

in an Hg

> thermometer, and say that exposure to small amounts is OK. How is it

that all the Hg in all

> those used lightbulbs is a small amount?

I think that was the same argument for mercury containing vaccines -

that the amount in the vaccine wouldn't be enough to do anything.

Someone forgot the concept of aggregation....

Anne

[Guest guest]

My . 02 - if the use of CFL was being pushed by the other side of the

aisle the " greens " would be all over the mercury issue. It is a matter

of who's pushing and where they want to focus the attention. You can

bet that not many of them hang racks of laundry around the house to dry,

or even use a clothesline. Just getting rid of the clothes dryer, or

letting it sit idle for months on end (as we do) would save a whole lot

more energy than mercury containing CFLs - and with NO adverse

environment effects. If my kids complain about stiff jeans, I say - oh,

well. You won't even remember the stiffness after they've been on for 5

minutes. How many " greens " still use hair dryers, microwaves, electric

ranges, toasters - all things that use a large amount of electricity -

more than a simple bulb. It is just that the bulb is where they care to

focus their energy right now. And, yes, I believe 2012 is the date

that incandescents are supposed to no longer be sold. I even saw

someone the other day say that incandescents contain mercury too, so it

isn't an issue with CFLs. Let the spin begin.

We will continue to use incandescent, until they come out with truly

viable LEDs or force it off the market. In the meantime, we keep lights

out when not being used, paint the house bright, light colors and all

ceilings a reflective semi-gloss white - which allows us to use lower

wattage bulbs when we do need light. Very few windows have curtains or

blinds, and during the day, no lighting is required. In the evening,

only low light anyway as the body needs to get ready for sleep. We run a

2200 sq foot house on $60 of electricity a month average. During

cooling season, with the thermostat set at 82, we might go up to $90 a

month. We still haven't found a way to keep the humidity out other than

the air conditioner - and it does cause a mold problem, but we are

working on it. Anyway, I just get so tired of people saying you can't

use a mercury thermometer because it might break and has " more " mercury,

but they will put upwards of 50 CFLs in every house and that is okay? I

actually counted how many bulbs we have in our house that would need to

be replaced. Tell me that isn't going to add up to much in a public

landfill with a populations of millions being forced to use nothing but

these mercury laden bulbs.

Then there is the whole psychological effect of the unhealthy spectrum

of light they produce along with the already skyrocketing ADD/ADHD, CFS,

and other problems weighing our people down - another day. . .

Done ranting. Sorry, it just ticks me off when people are so deceived,

blinded, or whatever you call it.

P.

who was saving electricity in environmentally friendly ways long before

it was " cool "

anneecbrynn wrote:

>

>

> >

>

> > They point out the amount of Hg in a CFL is much much less than that

> in an Hg

> > thermometer, and say that exposure to small amounts is OK. How is it

> that all the Hg in all

> > those used lightbulbs is a small amount?

>

> I think that was the same argument for mercury containing vaccines -

> that the amount in the vaccine wouldn't be enough to do anything.

> Someone forgot the concept of aggregation....

>

> Anne

>

>

[Guest guest]

I would love more info on this. Is there a web-sight that explains it? I am new

to all this and know abs. nothing about this light bulb issue. Would love to

learn more. Thanks : )

Re: [ ] Re: Compact Flourescent Bulbs Issue

My . 02 - if the use of CFL was being pushed by the other side of the

aisle the " greens " would be all over the mercury issue. It is a matter

of who's pushing and where they want to focus the attention. You can

bet that not many of them hang racks of laundry around the house to dry,

or even use a clothesline. Just getting rid of the clothes dryer, or

letting it sit idle for months on end (as we do) would save a whole lot

more energy than mercury containing CFLs - and with NO adverse

environment effects. If my kids complain about stiff jeans, I say - oh,

well. You won't even remember the stiffness after they've been on for 5

minutes. How many " greens " still use hair dryers, microwaves, electric

ranges, toasters - all things that use a large amount of electricity -

more than a simple bulb. It is just that the bulb is where they care to

focus their energy right now. And, yes, I believe 2012 is the date

that incandescents are supposed to no longer be sold. I even saw

someone the other day say that incandescents contain mercury too, so it

isn't an issue with CFLs. Let the spin begin.

We will continue to use incandescent, until they come out with truly

viable LEDs or force it off the market. In the meantime, we keep lights

out when not being used, paint the house bright, light colors and all

ceilings a reflective semi-gloss white - which allows us to use lower

wattage bulbs when we do need light. Very few windows have curtains or

blinds, and during the day, no lighting is required. In the evening,

only low light anyway as the body needs to get ready for sleep. We run a

2200 sq foot house on $60 of electricity a month average. During

cooling season, with the thermostat set at 82, we might go up to $90 a

month. We still haven't found a way to keep the humidity out other than

the air conditioner - and it does cause a mold problem, but we are

working on it. Anyway, I just get so tired of people saying you can't

use a mercury thermometer because it might break and has " more " mercury,

but they will put upwards of 50 CFLs in every house and that is okay? I

actually counted how many bulbs we have in our house that would need to

be replaced. Tell me that isn't going to add up to much in a public

landfill with a populations of millions being forced to use nothing but

these mercury laden bulbs.

Then there is the whole psychological effect of the unhealthy spectrum

of light they produce along with the already skyrocketing ADD/ADHD, CFS,

and other problems weighing our people down - another day. . .

Done ranting. Sorry, it just ticks me off when people are so deceived,

blinded, or whatever you call it.

P.

who was saving electricity in environmentally friendly ways long before

it was " cool "

anneecbrynn wrote:

>

>

> >

>

> > They point out the amount of Hg in a CFL is much much less than that

> in an Hg

> > thermometer, and say that exposure to small amounts is OK. How is it

> that all the Hg in all

> > those used lightbulbs is a small amount?

>

> I think that was the same argument for mercury containing vaccines -

> that the amount in the vaccine wouldn't be enough to do anything.

> Someone forgot the concept of aggregation. ...

>

> Anne

>

>

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Guest guest]

>

> Sorry, I got on my soap box again....but I think the energystar

> initiative is not connected to the EPA.

Looks from the link as though it is an EPA and Dept. of Energy program.

Anne

[Guest guest]

>

> My . 02 - if the use of CFL was being pushed by the other side of the

> aisle the " greens " would be all over the mercury issue.

And your evidence for this would be...?

The fact is that global warming is a dead serious problem, one that's going to

make

autism pale if incredibly difficult steps are not taken. There are a lot of

tough choices

involved -- CFLs being one, nuclear power another. It's important for us who are

sensitive

to the mercury issue to speak up and make people aware of it, but I don't think

we need to

question the motives of those trying to do something about lowering carbon

emissions.

> How many " greens " still use hair dryers, microwaves, electric

> ranges, toasters - all things that use a large amount of electricity -

> more than a simple bulb.

Lots of us have given many of those thing up. That's what makes us green.

Nell

[Guest guest]

> My . ....... Just getting rid of the clothes dryer, ... would save a

whole lot

> more energy than mercury containing CFLs - ..... How many " greens "

still use hair dryers, microwaves, electric

> ranges, toasters - .......

Yes those thigns all use lots of energy, but only run for short periods

of time every day.

> 50 CFLs in every house and that is okay?

I think that's entirely the point - 50 bulbs that can be turned on for

hours every day. If you save just 30W on each one then that's the

equivalent of dumping your clothes dryer, microwave and hair dryer. And

it's arguably less hassle than trying to dry your clothes on a wet day

with no electricity.

Of course, there is the slight issue of Hg poisoning, but the

epidemiology tells us that mercury is lovely stuff with no links to

ADHD, ASD, etc.......Hmmmm, myabe I'll just avoid CFLs for now.

It's a complex problem and I don't think anyone really has all the

answers.

Liam

[Guest guest]

If that is the best viable technology, then the powers that be need

to try to mitigate the potential health hazards by slapping a huge

tax on each CFL which is wholly refundable when the unbroken CFL is

returned to a hazmat site unbroken.... Sadly, there can't (or

shouldn't) be any expectation that the majority of Americans are

going to dispose of these things properly without having some real

incentive to do so.

Anne

>

> > My . ....... Just getting rid of the clothes dryer, ... would

save a

> whole lot

> > more energy than mercury containing CFLs - ..... How

many " greens "

> still use hair dryers, microwaves, electric

> > ranges, toasters - .......

>

> Yes those thigns all use lots of energy, but only run for short

periods

> of time every day.

>

> > 50 CFLs in every house and that is okay?

>

> I think that's entirely the point - 50 bulbs that can be turned on

for

> hours every day. If you save just 30W on each one then that's the

> equivalent of dumping your clothes dryer, microwave and hair dryer.

And

> it's arguably less hassle than trying to dry your clothes on a wet

day

> with no electricity.

> Of course, there is the slight issue of Hg poisoning, but the

> epidemiology tells us that mercury is lovely stuff with no links to

> ADHD, ASD, etc.......Hmmmm, myabe I'll just avoid CFLs for now.

>

> It's a complex problem and I don't think anyone really has all the

> answers.

>

> Liam

>

[Guest guest]

>

> If that is the best viable technology, then the powers that be need

> to try to mitigate the potential health hazards by slapping a huge

> tax on each CFL which is wholly refundable when the unbroken CFL is

> returned to a hazmat site unbroken....

That is a great idea! And since CFLs last for 5-7 years, it's not like taking

them to the hazmat

would be something you'd have to do very often.

> Sadly, there can't (or

> shouldn't) be any expectation that the majority of Americans are

> going to dispose of these things properly without having some real

> incentive to do so.

ITA.

Nell