The biggest drawback to these light bulbs is the small amount of mercury contained in them. As stated in this handy factsheet created by Energy Star, the average CFL contains 4 milligrams of mercury. I know you’re scratching your head trying to visualize 4 mg. Remember the old thermometers you had to stick under your tongue when the “hand to the forehead” wasn’t enough. That contained 500 mg (125 CFLs) of Mercury! That’s not saying the Mercury in CFL’s doesn’t matter, it just means that we have to be reasonable with objections.2: Many places now recycle CFLs for you! Use this handy recycle station finder from Earth 911 to find a place to recycle yo....
About 50 percent of the electricity produced in the U.S. is generated by coal-fired power plants. When coal burns to produce electricity, mercury naturally contained in the coal releases into the air. In 2006, coal-fired power plants produced 1,971 billion kilowatt hours (kwh) of electricity, emitting 50.7 tons of mercury into the air—the equivalent amount of mercury contained in more than 9 billion CFLs (the bulbs emit zero mercury when in use or being handled).
Approximately 0.0234 mg of mercury—plus carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide—releases into the air per 1 kwh of electricity that a coal-fired power plant generates. Over the 7500-hour average range of one CFL, then, a plant will emit 13.16 mg of mercury to sustain a 75-watt incandescent bulb but only 3.51 mg of mercury to sustain a 20-watt CFL (the lightning equivalent of a 75-watt traditional bulb). Even if the mercury contained in a CFL was directly released into the atmosphere, an incandescent would still contribute 4.65 more milligrams of mercury into the environment over its lifetime.
3: Coal burned to produce electricity to power incandescents emits more mercury than CFLs would!
Of course this mercury is spread out in our environment, and not right in your home, but on a national policy perspective, I would encourage everyone to use CFLs so our collective environment (and thus the land we live on and the food we eat) is less contaminated. Now, if I had a small child at home, I would still use CFLs, I would just be ever vigilant to ensure the CFLs didn't break in my home. If one did break, I would follow these steps to clean up a broken CFL properly.
I just wonder if all of these people concerned with mercury in CFLs refused to put a thermometer in their mouth when they were little? Remember, an old mercury thermometer had 125 times more mercury than a CFL!!! And you put it in your mouth!!! Where was all the outrage then?
Make your own choices, but make sure you have the facts and you put everything in perspective!
So to all the Energy Pros, what do you recommend when a friend or customer asks about CFLs and why?
Comment
Comment by Brad Buscher on April 28, 2011 at 8:34am
While a variety of containers are marketed for transportation of fluorescent lamps and CFLs, many don't provide sufficient protection against mercury vapor emitted from broken lamps. As this article states, consumers should properly dispose of these lamps if broken or burned out. If a lamp burns out, consumers can learn how to safely package CFLs here: vaporlok.blogspot.com/2010/05/layers-of-protection-packaging-used.html. If a bulb breaks, consumers can learn more about clean-up procedures here: www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup-detailed.html
I liken the CFL to the incandescent, what the cassette tape was to the LP. An intermediate step to where we eventually will be. I think the future is in LEDs, though they need to come down in price. I first started using CFLs about 6 years ago, just replacing each bulb as it burned out, one at a time. We've never broken one, but we do make sure we dispose of them properly, we've had maybe 3 burn out in that time. I simply don't see why folks would want to pay more on utilities, so for me the answer is purely about economics. I like to save money. Here are a few post I've made in the past on the subject:
http://ourdailygreenlife.blogspot.com/2011/03/smoke-mirrors-and-lig...
http://ourdailygreenlife.blogspot.com/2011/01/led-lightbulb-green-c...
http://ourdailygreenlife.blogspot.com/2009/06/fluorescent-green.html
Comment by Dennis McCarthy on April 8, 2011 at 10:14am The use of cfls should be viewed this way - how many more decades will they be around. One
Are they being phased out for a variety of reasons - absolutely!
How much mercury should you come in contact with - zero - it IS a neurotoxin
What will chase the cfl mfgs out of existance - LEDs circa 2011- 2015
Cfls are a 20th century solution and as we are living in the 21st century - let us
get on with the migration to SOLID STATE LIGHTING already!
Comment by Evan Mills on April 6, 2011 at 3:51pm Good. I wrote some stuff on this back in the dark ages....
http://www.iaeel.org/IAEEL/newsl/1994/ett1994/LiEn_1_94.html
http://www.iaeel.org/IAEEL/NEWSL/1993/tre1993/LiEn_a_3_93.html
http://www.iaeel.org/IAEEL/newsl/1993/tre1993/LiEn_b_3_93.html
Cheers....
Comment by Evan Mills on April 6, 2011 at 10:51am Think of it as one very small nibble of swordfish....
http://www.recyclesolvent.com/docs/dangerous-mercury-in-cfl.pdfHome Energy Pros was founded by the developers of Home Energy Saver Pro (sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) and brought to you in partnership with Home Energy magazine.
Joe Huang posted a discussion
Tom Delconte commented on Tom Delconte's blog post Lykans $29, Vampires $0 !
Joseph Lamy commented on Jim Gunshinan's blog post The Universe Is Made of Stories
J.C. Martel replied to J.C. Martel's discussion Disasters & sustainable energy
Judi Lyall joined allen p tanner's group
Judi Lyall replied to David Starrett's discussion I am looking for a good IR camera in the group Energy Auditing Equipment for Sale, Trade or to Purchase
Tom Maides commented on Jim Gunshinan's blog post The Universe Is Made of Stories
Laurie DiDonato posted an event© 2013 Created by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
You need to be a member of Home Energy Pros to add comments!
Join Home Energy Pros