Shedding Light on the Human Cost of CFLs
Governments around the world are trying to phase out incandescent bulbs and are creating legislation that requires consumers to purchase only energy-efficient light bulbs such as CFLs or LEDs to light their houses, businesses and factories.
At first glance, it appears to be a great plan. But while these compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) or “green” light bulbs might be good for the environment, they are not so good for people’s health – if they are broken. CFL bulbs only function because of a small amount of mercury inside them that creates a chemical reaction that causes light.
It’s a minor amount, but the British government is concerned enough to issue a warning to consumers that whenever a CFL bulb is broken, the room should be cleared for up to half an hour to avoid any danger of inhaling mercury vapours.
That’s easy enough, but I wonder if the government has given much thought to all the factory workers in China, where most of the bulbs come from, who face constant exposure to the mercury.
A recent article from The Sunday Times highlights this problem, reporting that doctors, regulators, lawyers and courts in China are very concerned about what an increase in demand for CFL bulbs will do to the health of Chinese factory workers producing these light bulbs.
Making CFL bulbs requires the handling liquid or solid mercury. With continued contact, mercury accumulates and permanently harms the nervous system, lungs and kidneys.
Worse, it causes severe damage to foetuses and young children.
But it’s not just the factory workers at risk. The article also highlights the fact that this increase in demand for CFL bulbs has resulted in the re-opening of mercury mines in some poverty-stricken provinces in China. These mines, having caused so much damage to the local environment and its residents, had been closed by the government only a few years earlier in response to falling global mercury prices.
It really does makes you wonder whether the energy-efficiency of these green light bulbs is worth the cost.
Image: AZAdam
|
Bookmark |
































3 Comments
May 7th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Yes, the LED lights are much better because of the mercury factor and also are very efficient. Most green architects and designers are installing these instead of fluorescents and it’s important to urge vendors to sell them.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
The EPA has a 19 step — 19 STEP! – clean-up process for a broken CFL. Including clearing the room and sealing the broken bulb in a glass jar. Then after you have picked up every visible fragment you can vacuum for the remaining microscopic particles then take the vacuum cleaner bag and seal it inside of another plastic bag.
Hmmmm…..
May 8th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
A new LED will replace the CFL’s shortly. SEE:
“A £2 energy-saving lightbulb that lasts for 60 years has been developed by scientists at Cambridge University. The researchers have designed a bulb that is three times more energy efficient than today’s best offer and can cut lighting bills by 75 per cent.The bulbs are 12 times more efficient that conventional tungsten bulbs and three times more efficient than compact fluorescent “energy efficient” bulbs. They can burn for 100,000 hours and they illuminate instantly and can be dimmed, unlike energy efficient bulbs.”
http://theinfochief.com/
We can all relax, knowing that the new bulbs will last a lifetime and are not so breakable either! Progress!
Welcome! The comment box is all yours to say what you like. Just make sure you use a real name, not a site or company, so you don't get sent to the spam bin. (That makes us sad.)