Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-13-2012, 12:31 AM
 
Location: Louisiana
9,168 posts, read 5,841,614 times
Reputation: 7758

Advertisements

Another thing...
Each bulb may contain a "small"
amount of mercury, but how much mercury
will be in all of the bulbs in the landfill?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2012, 12:33 AM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,512,780 times
Reputation: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem View Post
Yeah, nuthin' to worry about...



...just evacuate.
Those guidelines are for general mercury spills, such as those found with mercury thermometers, or CCFL bulbs. Conveniently located on the same page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EPA
What if I can't follow all the recommended steps? or I cleaned up a CFL but didn't do it properly?

Don't be alarmed; these steps are only precautions that reflect best practices for cleaning up a broken CFL. Keep in mind that CFLs contain a very small amount of mercury -- less than 1/100th of the amount in a mercury thermometer.
However, if you are concerned about the risk to your health from a potential exposure to mercury, consult your physician.

Like I said. "Don't worry about it."


Quote:
Originally Posted by speleothem
Another thing...
Each bulb may contain a "small"
amount of mercury, but how much mercury
will be in all of the bulbs in the landfill?
You know there is an edit button, right? We throw a lot of **** out, which is why it's always a good idea to recycle, but to pretend that CCFLs are going to be the great mercury scourge upon our landfills, you missed the part about it being 1\300 of that of a mercury thermometer. Or all the other FL bulbs ever made (and thrown away), or ****loads of other toxic metals, chemicals, and nonsense thrown away every year by people who don't dispose of it properly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 12:35 AM
 
2,548 posts, read 2,169,651 times
Reputation: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem View Post
Another thing...
Each bulb may contain a "small"
amount of mercury, but how much mercury
will be in all of the bulbs in the landfill?
Doesn't mercury come from deposits in land?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 01:20 AM
 
Location: Louisiana
9,168 posts, read 5,841,614 times
Reputation: 7758
Quote:
In Toronto, city officials require people to dispose of CFL bulbs at special hazardous waste facilities because they don't want the city's landfills to become contaminated with mercury. While used CFL bulbs are not legally recognized as hazardous waste, they are treated as such because they pose serious environmental threats when broken and released into the environment.
Silly Canucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 08:08 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,985,369 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Also to note, CCFLs contain roughly 1\300 of the amount found in a mercury thermometer. The EPA's own guidelines basically say "don't worry about it" if they break. You should clean then up properly, but they contain so little mercury, it isn't going to kill you.

That is not true.

Where does the EPA say this? Their guidelines even state you should leave the room for 15 min immediately after the break.

Also note the following study and the levels they tested in such occurrences.

Compact Fluorescent Lamp Study Report, Waste Management, Maine Department of Environmental Protection

The spikes are well above hazardous exposure levels.

Also consider that a CFL does not contain a proper ballast enclosure to which standard florescent systems have. These types of lights are sensitive to surges and can result in explosions (hence the need for a proper ballast enclosure).

I would be careful accepting summary statements from the EPA, they have a bad habit of talking out of two sides of their mouth (having conflicting information from different areas of their agency).

People being concerned about this is a legitimate complaint. The fact is, without the "green boom", these lights would have never passed safety qualifications due to their design. They were given a stamp of approval because of the politics involved.

If one is concerned about their energy usage and doesn't mind the price and light performance, they should either use LED or look into some of the newer technologies being developed. CFLs have far too many hazards and limitations compared to them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 08:13 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,829 posts, read 41,166,888 times
Reputation: 62345
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Ten million bucks for a $50 light bulb. I'd guess I have around 40 bulbs throughout my house. That's two thousand dollars to green up my home. How insane are these people.

"The L Prize was meant to ease this transition by enticing manufacturers to create affordable bulbs to replace the most common type, the traditional 60-watt.
A Philips spokesman declined to talk in detail about the bulb or its price because the product has yet to be formally launched. It is expected to hit stores within weeks and is available online. But the spokesman said the L Prize bulb costs more because, as the contest required, it is even more energy-efficient, running on 10 watts instead of 12.5 watts. It is also brighter, renders colors better and lasts longer.
Still, the contest set price goals. According to the L Prize guidelines, manufacturers were “strong*ly encouraged to offer products at prices that prove cost-effective and attractive to buyers, and therefore more successful in the market.†The target retail price, including rebates from utilities, was to be $22 in the first year, $15 in the second year and $8 in the third year."


Government-subsidized green light bulb carries costly price tag - The Washington Post
For that price they should come to my home and screw it in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 11:00 AM
 
24,487 posts, read 23,191,079 times
Reputation: 15103
Some of those curly fry light bulbs were 3 for $ 1.48 at Wal mart. They each only had about 60W lighting on 13W power usage but the prices have really come down. They don't last much longer than ordinary bulbs though I've found.
I'm seeing the new LED bulbs but they're pretty expensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,458 posts, read 59,959,019 times
Reputation: 24865
I switched some incandescent bulbs for summer use. I reinstall them for winter because we still have electric heat and I like being to read by the light of a heater. I also have a bunch of old thermostats around. You know the ones with mercury switches with a few grams of mercury each. IIRC there is also a small bottle of mercury I was going to use to resurface a couple of mirrors. I realize mercury is toxic but I am reasonably careful and have not fallen for the hype.

LED’s are a wonderful technology but I shall wait for the price to come down. They are way too expensive for summertime light.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 03:13 PM
 
47,070 posts, read 26,188,020 times
Reputation: 29559
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem View Post
Another thing...
Each bulb may contain a "small"
amount of mercury, but how much mercury
will be in all of the bulbs in the landfill?
Less than the mercury released from coal-fired power plants when providing the additional power required for conventional bulbs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Ten million bucks for a $50 light bulb. I'd guess I have around 40 bulbs throughout my house. That's two thousand dollars to green up my home. How insane are these people.
As the useful graphic in the article you linked to illustrates, the energy savings over the 10-year lifetime of the bulb makes for a considerable reduction in TCO - $228 vs. $83.

Meet the L Prize winner - The Washington Post

Granted, I may not run out to replace every lightbulb in my house. But if I ran a large-scale plant with 1000s of lightbulbs, well...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2012, 03:16 PM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,069,261 times
Reputation: 5455
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
What is 60,000 divided by 1,500? When you come up with a result of the difference in the life span between led lighting vs incandescent you might not be so shocked about $50 light bulbs.
The "life span" claims are BS. I've had to replace many of the curley cues I put in last year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:47 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top