Slashdot Mirror
Questions Arising On Mercury In Compact Fluorescents
Patchw0rk F0g sends in an article from MSNBC on how some environmentalists are having second thoughts on compact fluorescent bulbs. Their relative energy efficiency is unquestioned. The problem is the mercury — enough in one bulb to contaminate 1,000 gallons of water, even in newer low-mercury bulbs. The EPA has an 11-step cleanup process to follow when you break a CFL in your home. The specialized recycling facilities that are needed are thin on the ground — about one per county in California, one of seven states where it is illegal to dispose of CFLs in the general waste stream.
I really think LED will be the future of lighting in most situations. It's a long-lasting, mercury-free lightsource that can be targeted to any frequency. We are already seeing them used in Grow Light applications and other such things all the time. I think it will be a great day when we start seeing LED light installations just about everywhere we are using traditional lights today.
put the what in the where?
This was on the BBC some months ago.
They were relatively reassuring about the health implications:
Something to be aware of, but not hugely worrying.
I played with mercury as a child. We used to rub dimes on it, and push it around on a desk and i our hands. I had like 5 pounds of the stuff in a bottle, enough co contaminate the solar system if ne CFB contaminates 1000 gallons of water.
So I'll be dying soon, anybody want to buy a low slashdot ID?
Sheldon
Tag this post: getoffmylawn
is not requiring the stores that push CFL to set up a recycle system. Home Depot and Walmart are busy pushing cheap bulbs from GE/China. They claim that they will last 5-7 years. Half of mine have burned out within 3 years. I have 8 bulbs waiting to recycle. Worse, I saw a GE/Made in China bulb catch on fire. I now buy Phillips/made in mexico only bulbs, but it does not solve the problem of mercury recycle.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
For one thing, some of us have light-induced migraines. Fluorescent-lights are often a contributing factor. Whether it's the light spectrum output, the AC frequency, or some placebo, whatever, in *my* case, fluorescent lights seem to be a *major* contributing factor. I'm all for efficiency, but this case, Incandescent light is one of the few things that I have a hard time letting go. I *need* incandescent light in order to make my living... Nary that, just to survive.
I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable
There's a much more substantial danger with asbestos. cigarette smoke. CO from your furnace, or from your attached garage. Radon. Electricity from the wall socket. And lead paint. These things seriously injure or kill thousands per year.
And now you tell me that mercury from my breaking-lightbulbs spree will kill my family tree? Good God!
The amount of mercury in a modern lightbulb is thousands of times less than what is found in a mercury thermometer or a thermostat. And let's not even begin to discuss the amount of mercury within traditional fluorescent bulbs and the amalgam in some fillings.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
The article barely mentioned the real facts. The power production for regular light bulbs over the lifespan of a CFL generates 2-3x as much mercury as is in the CFL. They are just fine.
Now it is a bit of a problem right now finding a place that will recycle them. Ikea is doing it, and Walmart is thinking of rolling out recycling bins in their stores. But industry needs a lot more motivation to start taking these back. Ideally most municipal recycling programs would allow the bulbs to be placed in their bins (maybe in cardboard protectors or something. A decent article would have focused on this aspect of the story, and it was again just mentioned in passing.
Wikipedia has a fuller discussion on this point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp#Mercury_emissions
Honestly, this is my biggest problem with the environmental movement in the US today, it's never satisfied with even the slightest amount of progress. Fossil fuels are unacceptable because they pollute, but so is wind power because it interferes with migration paths. Incandescent bulbs are inefficient but we can't use CFL's because they contain mercury. We want the fuel efficiency that diesel engines already offer but we can't buy them in the US because of sulfur emission regulation. Everything has trade-offs. Sometimes you just have to pick the lesser of the two evils and go with it.
1. Mercury oxide is as toxic as metallic mercury. The worst are mercury alkyls since they are the most readily absorbed
2. Mercury in filling is amalgamated with other metals and practically stable against leaching or vaporisation. Some studies have suggested you absorb more mercury by having old fillings drilled out than by leaving them in for a lifetime.
To put the whole problem with the CFB mercury in relation, 100 Million light bulbs at 5 mg each contain a total of 500 kg of mercury.
The EPA estimate for mercury emissions from coal fired power plants is 50,000 kg a year.
I'm aging rapidly, I bought a new game and had no idea if my machine was good for it.
If you are in an office or school, look overhead and determine what type of lighting you have. There are a lot of places where it is fluorescent lighting in the long tube format.
Said tubes also contain mercury. But few, if any people, seem to consider these as part of the mercury contamination controversy.
If these tubes aren't a problem because they are disposed of properly, couldn't the CFLs be put into the same disposal chain?
And if the tubes ARE a problem because of improper disposal, shouldn't they also be mentioned along with the CFLs?
Mercury is NEVER EVER Nontoxic.
It cannot be made nontoxic (despite what the amalgum "alchemists" of dentistry will tell you.)
The ADA will lie to their graves about Mercury's toxicities in the body from the mouth and lungs the lungs. HCL acid, AKA "stomach acid", does a great job of dissolving swallowed Mercury fillings and their residues readily dispersing the Mercury into the bloodstream.
Definitions of harmless vary.
Mercury vapor is heavier than air, it will not just float away.
Please read the MSDS for Mercury..., any questions?: http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/M1599.htm
Gallium OTOH is a much more expensive and LESS toxic alternative in some devices, but not all.
, they will STILL reduce the overall mercury emission into the environment over their lifetime, compared to equivalent incandescent bulbs.
Mercury (and uranium!) is present in the smokestack emissions from coal-burning powerplants. By reducing the amount of electricity used, CFLs actually reduce overall mercury emissions. And since the mercury they do contain is in a sealed glass tube (as opposed to being spewed into the atmosphere and settling out onto the ground), their toxic content is easily managed through recycling efforts.
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
500kg of mercury is less than 10 gallons and that's the same as 100,000,000 CF bulbs.
If you eat 11oz of Yellowfin each week, you'll consume the same amount of mercury as eating 1 CF lightbulb each year, or 4oz of swordfish each week.
No. Elemental mercury at room temperatures is a liquid with extremely low vapor pressure, and will eventually (and slowly) evaporates. Long-term exposure (years) to high concentrations (break a CFL bulb and grind it onto the floor, every week, for a decade, in an unventilated room) mercury vapor is a bad thing. Oxides of mercury aren't really the point -- but for what it's worth, they're even less reactive than elemental mercury, and elemental mercury at room temperature isn't terribly bioreactive. You could swallow some (although I don't recommend it!), and you'd likely suffer no ill effects beyond some spectacularly shiny turds.
The scary MSDS sheet that someone else posted below speaks of mercury in its vapor form. Most metals, when heated to the boiling point, will present immediate dangers to life and health, and mercury is no exception. Because mercury boils at 365C (675F), liquid mercury is a Very Bad Thing to expose to fire.
The kind of mercury you really have to worry about is when it hooks up with organic compounds; dimethyl mercury is a potent neurotoxin.
The reason we worry about CFLs being introduced into the waste stream is that the minute concentrations of elemental mercury can work their way into (and up) the food chain, and because interesting chemistry can happen when water leaches through waste dumps, and/or through fish.
The reason CFLs are still a Good Idea is because the burning of coal also results in mercury emissions. If a CFL consumes 8 watts for 10000 hours, and is then disposed of into the waste stream, its mercury must be added to that released by 80kWh of coal-burning. (Actually, more like 40kWh of coal-burning, assuming 50% of your power can come from nuclear, geothermal, hydroelectric, natural gas, solar, or wind.) In contrast, ten mercury-free incandescents (consuming 100W for 1000 hours each, times ten bulbs for the same 10000 hours of light) produce zero mercury waste by themselves -- but they also produce the waste associated with 1000kWh (at 50%, 500kWh) of coal-burning. Since (500-80=) 420 kWh of coal-burning introduces more than 5mg of mercury into the atmosphere, you're still doing the environment a favor by using a CFL, even if you just throw it into the garbage 10000 hours later when it finally expires.
2. Isn't there more mercury in a filling. In other words, we're breathing mercury vapors all the time - if we have fillings?
Yes and no. Yes, there is mercury in fillings. No, this mercury doesn't vaporize because it's a solid, locked up in the form of the other metals with which it's amalgamated. Elemental mercury is a liquid at room temperatures, and yet your fillings aren't liquid. The amalgam in dental fillings is an alloy of mercury and other metals -- and much as bronze is an alloy of tin and copper, or solder is an alloy of lead and tin (or silver, bismuth, and copper for lead-free solder), the physical characteristics of alloys are, while well-known and researched, not intuitively derivable from the physical characteristics of their component metals.
> 3. Isn't it interesting that In the meantime, manufacturers of incandescent bulbs are not going down without a fight. and then GE is mentioned?
GE's lighting products make money for GE whether you use incandescents or fluorescents, or LEDs. If they can make an incandescent with the same energy usage and up-front cost of a CFL or LED, that'll be a winning product. GE's financial interest in MSNBC probably has something to do with it, but the sentence would be just as applicable to other manufacturers of lighting products.
Ladies and gentlemen, a bit of math.
Amount of mercury in 1 CFL light bulb: 5 milligrams (source: TFA)
Amount of energy saved by using a CFL bulb instead of incandescent, over the lifetime of the CFL:
10,000 hours * 75 watts * 75% energy savings = 0.6 megawatt-hours
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp#Lifespan)
Fraction of that energy that would be generated by coal-fired power plants: about 50%.
(http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html)
Coal power plant energy savings: 0.3 megawatt-hours
Annual emission of mercury by US coal-fired power plants: 48 tons/year in 1999
(http://www.nescaum.org/documents/rpt031104mercury.pdf)
Power output of US coal-fired power plants: 1,900,000 gigawatt-hours in 1999 (about the same today)
Mercury emitted by coal plants: 48 tons / 19000000 GWh = 23 milligrams per megawatt-hour
Power-plant mercury emissions avoided by using a CFL bulb over its lifetime:
7 milligrams
So it's a wash. The amount of mercury in the bulb is roughly the same as what would be emitted by a coal-burning power plant, if you stuck with incandescent bulbs.
But the mercury in a CFL bulb is a lot easier to clean up than the stuff spewed into the atmosphere by power plants.
No problem; they'll just do what the printer ink cartridge manufacturers do: Build in a chip that commits suicide after some specified period of time. That could be in hours of operation, or even calendar time. In the latter case, you're virtually renting them.
First, I will overlook the nonsense about GW.
:) ).
Second, why to use CFL? BECAUSE of mercury. The vast majority of power plants in the world ARE coal plants. If you burn the CFL for an average 1 year period AND you break the bulb outside of your house, you will still have introduced less mercury into the atmosphere than had you used the best incandescent over that time. Why? Because even Western American coal has a lot of mercury, and that is considered some of the cleanest coal in the world. Burn Eastern American or worst of all, most seams in Chinese coal and the mercury content is ENORMOUS. So, if you want to lower the total mercury in the air and environment, then use the CFL. If you are concerned about a mercury bulb breaking in your home, do not use them in places prone to breakage. For example, do not put it in a lamp that can be tipped. Likewise, do not use them around the mirrors in the bathroom or the garages. AND most of ALL, do not put them in the kids rooms. If there is a breakage, you must ventilate the house for a while AFTER the clean-up.
If you are still concerned about the mercury in your home AND want to lower your OVERALL energy bill, then get some LED lights. They will pay for themselves over a 1-2 year period, though hard to believe with a $1/watt bulb. Of course, like CFL, the light takes getting use to. I wanted to replace some halogen hockey pucks (10 watts each) in our kitchen with led pucks (2.5 watt), and the wife said not a chance after seeing it in action. Funny thing is that the leds was actually brighter. But, happy wife, happy life (of course, that statement ignores sociopathic ex's
You could make the same argument about low-flow showerheads or toilets or plumbing fixtures in general (how long to those last).
People still remodel, new houses are built, old houses are destroyed, people break them, someone will come up with a new lighting mechanism (maybe that aluminum foil micro plasma lighting will become popular), and people will go through another replacement cycle.
This particular topic has been discussed at least once as an article on slashdot, and almost every energy related topic ultimately wanders onto mercury in fluorescent light bulbs.
However, here's the abbreviated facts (and I apologize I'm not going to go look up all the numbers again, but if you don't take my word for it, you can look the numbers up yourself):
A typical compact fluorescent light bulb has about 5 mg of mercury in it. All NEMA manufacturers voluntarily agreed to this a maximum. This is roughly as much as is contained in 50 cans of tuna. The FDA recommends consumers limit their intake of tuna to 1 serving per week, so that's about the same as a year's supply of tuna. So is this enough to be a health hazard? Not really.
First of all, the tuna contains the compound methylmercury, which is formed by bacterial action and bioaccumulates much more readily than elemental mercury. A greater portion of the latter passes through the body unretained. Secondly, you eat the tuna. Nobody eats a light bulb. Not to mention, the FDA recommendation is conservative, except in the case of children and pregnant women.
Generally, the lightbulbs don't get broken until disposal, and therefore completely contain the mercury, but if it does, it can safely be disposed of in the garbage. The EPA recommends that you not touch the pieces with your bare hands, so use a broom and put it in a bag. Most of that tiny amount of mercury is actually condensed on the phosphor that lines the bulb, and therefore fairly effectively immobilized, although it will slowly evaporate.
Is it an environmental hazard? Again, not really.
The EPA has calculated, based on the US's current power source mix, that the mercury contained in a CFL is more than offset by the power savings, which reduce the amount of mercury released into the atmosphere by burning coal. Additionally, don't forget that the mercury is trapped inside the bulb until broken. Even then it's at best a small concern. Most of the mercury in the environment is naturally occuring, although in specific areas industrial pollution has resulted in significantly elevated mercury levels.
Additionally, due precisely to disposal concerns, many CFL retailers have implemented recycling programs so you can drop off you dead CFL's and they will dispose of them properly. Not only that, but non-commercial users are actually allowed to dispose of fluorescent bulbs in the trash in most cities. Sound bad? The average US citizen produces about 4 pounds of landfill waste per day. Mix in half a dozen CFL's per year with the trash of an average household, and the amount of mercury ends up being about the same as natural occurs in the earth's crust.
Again, you don't have to believe me, but if you search around for the relevant information (natural abundance of mercury, trash produced per capita, USDA recommended limits on tuna intake, EPA datasheets on mercury and methylmercury, etc) you can verify everything I just wrote.
PWM (Pulse Width Modulation - Highly efficient brightness control) can go at 200khz or more.
No matter how much you whine, you cannot see that.
If you can, then your only deluding yourself that you can.
One thing that should be remembered about the current regulations for mercury are very strict in contrast to the levels associated with deterministic effects. This is perfectly natural since the natural occurrence of mercury is in such low concentrations. In fact almost all practical problems with mercury and how to deal with it are somehow linked to the inability to accurately measure it at the concentrations it begins to harm organisms.
Second, the speciation (division between different compounds) of mercury makes a huge difference in how the body absorbs it. The elemental form, found in old thermometers, switches and these CFL's, is practically biologically unavailable when liquid. There was a man in Taiwan who drank, IIRC, around a kilo without permanent effects. Oxidized mercury (HgCl2, Hg(NO3)2, and a few others) are also generally quite unavailable--several were used as syphilis medicine for quite some time--but led to a number of occupational hazards and poisonings. Mercury sulphide, on the other hand, is so unavailable that it's considered a "retirement path" in the mercury cycle. Among the variety of questionable Chinese medicine are "herbal balls," which have been found to contain up to 1.2 g (over a hundred CFL bulbs worth of mercury) of HgS. Finally, there are organic mercury compounds which are extremely toxic, but these are irrelevant except when they are produced by man in large quantities (though not necessarily on purpose) or when large amounts of inorganic mercury are available to anaerobic bacteria.
Almost all large-scale mercury poisoning has been due to the organic form entering the food supply.
However, though elemental, the form found in CFL's would most likely be vaporized if it got loose in your home. Vaporized elemental mercury is readily absorbed into the lungs, and can cross the blood-brain barrier, leading to temporary neurological effects in the few well-studied cases of household aspiration of the elemental form. Irritability and hyperactivity are typical symptoms.
Five milligrams is a good round number for the Hg content of a single CFL bulb. What is that for a person? 0.1 ppm? Well, the onset of symptoms in the victims of the Minamata disease (organic mercury poisoning) was a hair concentration of around 50 - 125 ppm (as mentioned, the margin of error on everything related to mercury is HUGE). Ca 100 ppm blood concentrations were found in the mothers of newborns in Iraq after an incident there with fungicide-laced grain in the 1970's. Again, uncertainty is the rule, and due to widely-varying affinities for heavy metals between different organs, there's very little one can predict in a given incident.
On a side note, while doing my thesis on a power plant mercury control system, I found my first grey hairs.
Back in the long ago, streetlamps were powered by gas. Every evening, a person called a lamplighter would come and light the streetlight. (The bars sticking sideways out of lampposts were not decorative. They were there so a lamplighter could lean his ladder against them so he could climb the pole.) Every morning he would go around and extinguish the streetlights.
Gas lights did not use an open flame for lighting (well, they did, but not for long). They used a special cloth "wick" called a mantle. This mantle glowed brightly when heated by the gas flame. Over time, the mantles would disintegrate, and new ones would have to be installed.
Now there were two once vibrant sectors of the lighting industry that have been virtually eliminated by progress. Sure, a few thousand people lost jobs. There were better, cheaper, safer alternatives, so people used them. The same thing will happen with the incandescent bulb makers, and the fluorescent bulb makers. LEDs are a better, cheaper, safer alternative. A few thousand people will be put out of work, and once vibrant sectors of the lighting industry will fade away. Sure, a few companies will hang on, doing specialty work, but count on GE, Sylvania, Philips, and their ilk closing a lot of bulb factories in the future.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
How can the first post be redundant?
If you eat 11oz of Yellowfin each week, you'll consume the same amount of mercury as eating 1 CF lightbulb each year, or 4oz of swordfish each week. ...You've apparently never tried to light a room with swordfish.
paintball
> A lens can diffuse the beam, and they currently exist in red, green, and blue forms that could
> be combined into the proper color temperature.
That won't work. There is a good reason white LEDs aren't just tri-color LEDs without seperate leads. See the slashdot story from this weekend about the artist exploiting the monochromatic light of LEDs to produce interesting effects when illuminating paintings. If you mix primary colors to get yellow paint, paint something with it and shine a yellow LED on it you see black. Oops! Guess that is why white LEDs use a deep blue or UV LED with a fluorescent coating inside the package. A LASER diode would of course be an even more extremely monochromatic light source than a normal LED, plus the unexpected problems of illuminating ordinary scenes with coherent light.
Democrat delenda est
100 microseconds every 10 miliseconds is only 100Hz. I'm not sure why car makers use such a low frequency, but I can see it as well and it is kind of distracting. I can also see colors in DLP projectors and TVs if I move my eyes quickly enough.
I'm using a homemade LED light as a desk lamp right now, and I can't see any flicker. The PWM chip controlling the voltage is running at around 300KHz, and I can dim it all the way to zero without any flickering. Even if it was running at a lower frequency, the filter capacitor is smoothing the voltage.
I used a 95 lumen Luxeon Rebel Star for the LED (but you can get up to 180 lumens with no additional power used) and a MAX774 for the PWM. The total cost was under $40, and it is at least as bright as a 15W halogen light. I took the circuit from a Maxim application note.
In 2005, coal-burning electric plants emitted 45 tons (=4.5E7 grams) of mercury in the US. That year the electric power production in the US was just over 4 billion Megawatt hours (4E12 kW-hr), so the emission is 1.1E-5 grams = 11 micrograms per kilowatt hour.
A 60-watt bulb that is on for typically two hours per day uses 44 kW-hours, so the emission of mercury due to such a bulb would be about 480 micrograms per year; or roughly 5 milligrams per ten years.
A 60-watt (equivalent) CF lightbulb has (by EPA standards, "no more than") 6 mg of mercury in it. If it is 4 times as efficient as an incandescent, it emits 120 micrograms per year, or 1.2 milligrams in 10 years. So the difference in mercury emissions is 3.6 milligrams in 10 years. So if the bulb lasts 17 years or longer, it would emit less mercury than the CF bulb.
The expected life of a CF bulb is between 6000 hours and 15,000 hours (between 8 and 20 years, at 2 hours per year), so overall, if you credit the lifetime figures, the mercury emission is roughly a wash.
The exact break even point depends on what fraction of the electrical power where you live comes from coal, as well, and whether the coal plants have scrubbers. (the numbers above are average for the US, where electricity is about 50% coal, in 2005)
Whether it's break-even or not over the lifetime of the bulb does not depend on how long you burn the bulb per day, except that CF bulbs last longer if you burn them longer-- so if you leave your bulbs on all the time, you get longer life from them.
(Unfortunately, I don't much credit these predicted lifetimes. The lifetime of a CF bulb drops the more often you turn it on or off, and my guess is that these lifetimes are for bulbs that are never turned off, not for typical household conditions nor for ratty NEO power. It's also quoted for "brand name" bulbs, not the cheapo ones you buy at the dollar store. If your CF bulb has an EnergyStar rating, by law it's guaranteed for two years. So you should keep a logbook of every time you replace a light bulb, so you can get your five dollars back, and you can email the EnergyStar program at cfl@energystar.gov to tell them about it.)
This reference goes through basically the same calculation.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
I think I've heard that argument applied to asbestos...
:)
Thing is, 100 years from now, they will still be hitting the dump. I don't know if the arsenic claim is true, or even worth worrying about. But I do know that "they never get thrown away" is not a very good rebuttal
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
If your electricity comes from coal, the power saved by a CFB prevents a greater amount of heavy metals (including mercury) from being dumped into the air, water and ground downwind of the coal plant. I like eating fish, how about you? This argument won me over, I hope it was not a lie designed to sell me a bunch of expensive light bulbs.
The service life of CFBs and regular bulbs makes me suspicious. CFBs do not last much longer than incandescent bulbs used to. I've had 2 of 12 burn out over a year or so despite the 5 year promise on the box. Incandescent bulbs used to be that good and halogen incandescent bulbs still last longer than CFBs. Ask yourself when the last time you changed your car headlights was.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I agree with Twitter. Quote: "If your electricity comes from coal, the power saved by a CFB prevents a greater amount of heavy metals (including mercury) from being dumped into the air, water and ground downwind of the coal plant."
This is not the first time a Slashdot article has misled us about mercury in compact fluorescent light bulbs. See this comment from a year ago: Misleading article. Quote from the second link in that comment: "China is also the world's largest emitter of mercury..." China's coal-fired plants emit TONS of mercury, and the mercury travels everywhere.
Is someone at Slashdot paid to post these articles, to sell LED or other lights? Or is it just ignorance?