Republicans and Lightbulbs

[MattRose]

Are you ignoring how unsafe CFL bulbs are compared to incandescents? Have you prepared in the event one breaks? Will you shoo children out of the house and dispose of the broken bulb in the proper manner?

Good for the environment does not always mean good for the average Joe Consumer.

I was going to address the safety issue in the first post, but I'm glad you brought it up. The amount of mercury in a CFL bulb is enough to be dangerous, I admit. If you live in an area where electricity is produced by coal, then the lesser energy required for the CFL bulb more than offsets the mercury put into the air by burning the coal used by the incandescent bulb. Also the CFL is only dangerous if it breaks. Why they don't make them nearly impossible to break does seem odd. By the way have you ever broken one of those long flourescent bulbs? Did you evacuate the neighborhood? They are far easier to break and they have more mercury. Do you have any of those time bombs in your house right now?

In 2000 there were 145 metric tons of mercury added to the solid waste stream in the United States. If 200 million CFLs, each containing 5 mg of mercury were placed in the solid waste stream in one year, they would add only 1 metric ton, or less than 0.7% of the total annual mercury load in the waste stream. So that argument is not valid, and I realize you didn't offer it. I just wanted to address this in case you were curious.

Do you really think that your kids will be exposed to a lot of broken CFL bulbs? While nobody wants to introduce a new hazard to their home, CFL bulbs aren't going to seriously impact anyone's health if compared to hazards already present in the home. I'm referring to the inherent dangers of carbon monoxide (gas heating), gas itself, electricity, fire, etc. If you have already eliminated all of these hazards, then by all means stay away from CFL bulbs.

My point is the risk of CFL bulbs is insignificant compared to what you're already exposing your family to today.

 

[craigerNY]

Regulating light bulbs is a misdirected approach. The aim was to reduce pollution created by energy production. Therefore the problem is pollution created by energy production. Why pursue an indirect solution? Especially one as menial as lightbulbs? If the price of energy were a reflection of the pollution it creates then people would choose more efficient lifestyles which includes buying more efficient products such as lightbulbs.

Government meddling in the energy industry keeps prices artificially low enabling us to pollute frivolously. Remove subsidies, stop coddling energy companies with ridiculously small liability caps, stop providing subsidized security for oil companies with our armed forces, stop giving them tax breaks and watch the market put an honest price on energy which will be far higher than it is now. Then watch people shop smartly. This lightbulb legislation addresses the symptom of an already meddling government.

 

[MacNeil, D.]

Cfls tend to come in 3 colors now: cool white (it sounds like you're thinking of these), soft white, and warm white. You should check out the latter 2.

honestly, I'm surprised, I will check them out.

 

[chris4243]

Please answer the following to show your grasp of this issue:

1. About how much mercury is in a typical low mercury cfl?
2. About how much mercury is in a typical fluorescent bulb? Has this bothered you? Why or why not?
3. About how much mercury is in 2 kilograms / 4.4 pounds of tuna? Has this bothered you? Why or why not?

And also, how much more mercury will get emitted by the power plant if you use an incandescent vs a CFL?

 

[grasping the after wind]

And also, how much more mercury will get emitted by the power plant if you use an incandescent vs a CFL?

The power plant is not confined to your living space. It's like comparing the amount of arsenic in the total water supply and the amount that might be dropped into the glass you are drinking.

 

[chris4243]

The power plant is not confined to your living space. It's like comparing the amount of arsenic in the total water supply and the amount that might be dropped into the glass you are drinking.

No, the mercury from coal power plants goes into the air, probably near where you are, then finds itself into the local rivers and then the ocean. It's being constantly emitted and not contained nice and safe inside a glass bulb. But what if the bulb breaks, you say? The MSDS for mercury says,

http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/96252.htm
Exposure Limits Chemical Name ACGIH NIOSH OSHA - Final PELs Mercury 0.025 mg/m3 TWA; Skin - potential significant contribution to overall exposure by the cutaneous route 0.05 mg/m3 TWA (vapor) 10 mg/m3 IDLH 0.1 mg/m3 Ceiling OSHA PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels) are based on an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) exposure.

So let's keep it less than 0.025-0.1 mg/m3, and levels of 10mg/m3 would be an immediate health concern. The mercury inside one of those bulbs is about

Do CFLs contain mercury?
CFLs contain a very small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing – an average of 4 milligrams (mg). By
comparison, older thermometers contain about 500 milligrams of mercury – an amount equal to the mercury in
125 CFLs. Mercury is an essential part of CFLs; it allows the bulb to be an efficient light source. No mercury is
released when the bulbs are intact (not broken) or in use.
Most makers of light bulbs have reduced mercury in their fluorescent lighting products. Thanks to technology
advances and a commitment from members of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the average
mercury content in CFLs has dropped at least 20 percent or more in the past several years. Some manufacturers
have even made further reductions, dropping mercury content to 1 mg per light bulb.

about 4 mg, but let's go with 8 mg just in case you got one of the ones with more mercury.

So what happens if you break a bulb in a room that is 20 ft X 20 ft X 10 ft, assuming it all the mercury instantly evaporates and was one of the bulbs with twice the mercury of an average bulb?
(8 mg) / ((20 ft) * (20 ft) * (10 ft)) = 0.0706293334 mg / (m^3)


It barely makes it into the range of concern. It's probably a good idea to ventilate it, but it isn't going to kill you. And if you used one of the low mercury CFLs with 1 mg mercury, it wouldn't make it into the range of concern. And that's assuming the mercury all left the bulb, which seems unlikely and would take quite a while to happen. Anyhow, when's the last time you broke a bulb of any kind?

Oh, and per their data, if you were to break one of those bulbs, contain the mercury in a bag and breathe it for 30 minutes, there's a 50% chance you would die. Though I'm pretty sure you'd asphyxiate first. You'd need several bulbs to kill yourself with their mercury by breathing it before you'd die from the mercury rather than from asphyxiation.

Oh and the MSDS are paranoid. For example, they recommend ventilating the area in the event you spill some salt.

 

[Umaro]

honestly, I'm surprised, I will check them out.

There's a fourth one, labeled "daylight," and I can't tell the difference between it and an incandescent bulb. Check that one out too. At the ACE I worked at we'd even demonstrate them for people so they could chose the right one for them.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Really? With all that is going wrong with America, you're concerns are on lightbulbs? I say, out with the old and in with the new, if it's more efficient and cost effective, then why would you be against that? Why? This is retarded.

Bachmann to Democrats: Don't Tell Americans What Lightbulbs to Buy - Michele Bachmann - Fox Nation

I believe most are complaining about the mercury in them,what dangers that can happen,if there dropped,since they have mercury in them.I have the new energy efficient lights bulb,in every light source,they look fine to me.I'm not concerned about the mercury at all.

 

[Spirko]

Why are Republicans trying to pass a law on lightbulbs? Isn't this an insult for taxpayers? Politicians aren't elected to make laws on lightbulbs.

Politicians aren't elected to do a great many things. What's more, politicians pass legislation every day that greatly exceeds their Constitutional authority.

Why weren't you asking why Democrats were trying to pass a law on lightbulbs when the Democrats banned traditional bulbs?

 

[Umaro]

Why weren't you asking why Democrats were trying to pass a law on lightbulbs when the Democrats banned traditional bulbs?

Wasn't the law passed in 2007 initially? Wouldn't that mean Bush could have vetoed it but didn't?

 

[Spirko]

Wasn't the law passed in 2007 initially? Wouldn't that mean Bush could have vetoed it but didn't?

Yes. Bush, who was president and not a member of Congress, could have vetoed it.

What is it about the simple fact that not everyone who disagrees with something a Democrat does is a Bush apologist that confuses you so?

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

I elect my senators to look for the best solutions for society. We don't have a freedom to buy/use whatever we want. My government should consider all the facts and then make decisions based on those facts.

Unfortunately in this case it seems like the typical micro-managing nanny-state response to the much larger issue of CO2 emissions. Light bulbs are only a tiny fraction of the overall equation. craigerNY seems to be the only person that gets it - in the medium to long term this legislation will add more bureaucracy while doing nothing for power consumption.

If the goal is to reduce CO2, there are basically two options – increase the price of power and let the market sort out consumption, or legislate at the source and force power generators to reduce emissions.

Only the stupid people would buy incandescent lights after studying the issue. I don't want "stupid majority rule" and neither do you.

Trouble is what you believe is stupid and what someone else believes is stupid are two different things. I switched to CFLs because they save me money, last longer and don’t degrade light fittings from excess heat. Chances are most people will make the same choice as me, but if someone wants to continue to run incandescent why should I object, since the issue is not the light source itself but the CO2 emissions.

Maybe the person who runs old fashioned light globes doesn’t have a plasma TV, and thinks that people who do are stupid. Maybe they don’t have an SUV and think people who do are stupid. Maybe they drive an old car and think people who upgrade their Prius every two years are stupid. Maybe they think people who travel overseas five times a year are stupid.

Thankfully governments aren’t yet setting out to ban such things. And hopefully you dont want them to either. Same goes for light globes.

 

[StopSignTheology]

I really disagree with the government telling businesses what they can and can't sell. The new lightbulbs make everything in the room look like ugh.

You must be a true Republican.

Well said.