Incandescent outlaw?

[Highbeam]

I love the heat and quality of light from a clear incandescent 60 watt bulb in my desk lamp at work. The only place I use any incandescent bulbs in my home is in the oven and fridge and that's only because they came that way. I went all CFL a decade ago and now I am about 50% into LED. The LEDs are really very good. None of my thrills are being hampered by LED vs. incandescent. In fact, I get quite a thrill out of lighting my kitchen to blinding levels on 60 watts.

Still, I like my hot desk lamp.

Don't worry about CFLs, they are now an obsolete technology. Never were any good and will be the joke of history. Slow to warm up, short lifespan, stupid looking, and that mercury thing. LED is where it's at. That is, until the next best thing comes along.

 

[semipro]

Just another example how environmentalists limit of freedoms and reach in our pocket books in order to save Mother Earth.

George Bush an environmentalist?

 

[midwestcoast]

I have a serious issue with this lightbulb thing.

How good is it for society as a whole to legislate use of bulbs with mercury in them? How CFLs got the 'green light' in the face of that little item is a bit beyond my comprehension.

I also have issues with other 'green' things that really aren't very green at all, but I'll stop there.

First, the use of CFLs has not been legislated.
I agree it's not ideal to have mercury vapor in a consumer item. Especially something that can easily break & release it. The majority of these bulbs will not be "disposed of properly" by consumers. They'll go in the trash, get crushed & release some mercury. Unless the bulb is new though, most of the mercury will already be fused to the inside of the glass.
With the current energy sources in the U.S., and unless the bulb dies an early death, it will have more than offset the mercury it contains from increased efficiency & reduced burning of coal. Sorry, can't paste the tables here due to formatting:

http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/promotions/change_light/downloads/Fact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf

 

[seige101]

I have a serious issue with this lightbulb thing.

How good is it for society as a whole to legislate use of bulbs with mercury in them? How CFLs got the 'green light' in the face of that little item is a bit beyond my comprehension.

I also have issues with other 'green' things that really aren't very green at all, but I'll stop there.

The amount of mercury in a CFL lamp is negligible compared to the coal fired plant belching it out. More conservation = less coal fired plants = less mercury into the environment.

 

[midwestcoast]

...
Don't worry about CFLs, they are now an obsolete technology. Never were any good and will be the joke of history. Slow to warm up, short lifespan, stupid looking, and that mercury thing. LED is where it's at. That is, until the next best thing comes along.

Mostly agree. They are nearly obsolete. LED prices are dropping FAST and the light quality is improving just as fast.
I have some CFLs that are very good though. Really nice light in lamps, not too slow to warm-up, have lasted 10 plus years. I've had others that were the opposite in all qualities. And they all suck for outdoor use, appliance use & anywhere you just need a quick on-off.

 

[semipro]

Mostly agree. They are nearly obsolete. LED prices are dropping FAST and the light quality is improving just as fast.
I have some CFLs that are very good though. Really nice light in lamps, not too slow to warm-up, have lasted 10 plus years. I've had others that were the opposite in all qualities. And they all suck for outdoor use, appliance use & anywhere you just need a quick on-off.

Mostly agree. The later generation CFLs are quite good.
Their "soft start" functionality in the cold actually works well for our outside spots and our situation. I flip them on when heading to the woodshed or vehicle and they gradually ramp up in brightness. Going from full dark to full brightness is not easy on the eyes.

 

[jatoxico]

Just as point of information, all fluorescents contain mercury. So all the linear bulbs used in offices, hospitals, schools and on and on contain mercury as do the older circular and u-shaped bulbs that have been common in households for many years and always have. "Metallic" mercury (like in a thermometer) is not particularly toxic, even if swallowed (not recommended anyway). The vapor from from broken bulbs has the potential to be but exposure is considered safe if it occurs in an adequately ventilated space.

Bulbs should of course be treated safely like batteries and other potential chemical exposure sources found in the home/work.

 

[Pruning@trunk]

^^^ disagree with "slow1". If these LED bulbs are so good and they will be a money saver then they will sell themselves and one doesn't have to make laws to ban the other bulbs.

Oh wait, why would GE get into bed with the gov't? Oh that's right, they can make more money off the $10 bulbs than the .50 bulbs and then claim to hide behind saving the earth and being green and more efficiency, blah, blah, blah. Not sure why you people can't see this. It happens time and time again.

 

[semipro]

Just as point of information, all fluorescents contain mercury. So all the linear bulbs used in offices, hospitals, schools and on and on contain mercury as do the older circular and u-shaped bulbs that have been common in households for many years and always have. "Metallic" mercury (like in a thermometer) is not particularly toxic, even if swallowed (not recommended anyway). The vapor from from broken bulbs has the potential to be but exposure is considered safe if it occurs in an adequately ventilated space.

Bulbs should of course be treated safely like batteries and other potential chemical exposure sources found in the home/work.

jatoxico must mean "toxicologist" then
So, does the mercury released from coal power plants pose a greater risk?
I'm guessing the mercury is bound to particulate matter that exits the stacks and is then potentially inhaled as the pathway?

 

[Pruning@trunk]

George Bush an environmentalist?

Who said I liked George Bush? Unlike you, I call a spade a spade and don't always support the party I vote for.

 

[semipro]

Would said I liked George Bush? Unlike you, I call a spade a spade and don't always support the party I vote for.

Exactly. Who said you liked George Bush? I didn't. It wasn't even inferred.
My point is that it was not an "environmentalist" initiative as you stated but more an economic one.

 

[midwestcoast]

So, does the mercury released from coal power plants pose a greater risk?
I'm guessing the mercury is bound to particulate matter that exits the stacks and is then potentially inhaled as the pathway?

There's a big difference between a single event exposure from a broken bulb and a chronic exposure from the environment.
I think there are several forms that are emitted, but the biggest problem with mercury exposure is that it transforms to methyl-mercury (i think that's the form anyway) after release and that bio-accumulates up food chains to us (mostly in fish & shellfish) in concentrations that can be harmful.

 

[Slow1]

^^^ disagree with "slow1". If these LED bulbs are so good and they will be a money saver then they will sell themselves and one doesn't have to make laws to ban the other bulbs.

Fair point. I attribute this to the failure of most consumers to consider full life cycle cost of the purchase. I believe that if this were the case we wouldn't need the legislation to push this. However there is a secondary benefit to the legislation in that it 'forces' the development/adoption cycle and thereby jump-starts the economies of scale that can bring down the cost of those $10 bulbs, thus an over-all benefit to all.

I'm not going to sit here and take the position that those with economic interests are un-involved in these rules/laws; on the contrary I believe that they are in general over-involved. However in this case I happen to agree with this one. Goodness knows I disagree with plenty of others. My agreement/disagreement with one rule doesn't (in my opinion) obligate me to take the same position on all other legislation.

 

[jatoxico]

jatoxico must mean "toxicologist" then
So, does the mercury released from coal power plants pose a greater risk then?
I'm guessing the mercury is bound to particulate matter that exits the stacks and is then potentially inhaled as the pathway?

Mercury, including liquid mercury can and does vaporize all by itself. Swallowed metallic mercury is not well absorbed into the blood (absorption of liq mercury is related to amount of vapororization) but vaporized mercury is different and inhaled mercury represents the major source of exposure and concern. Organic mercury (e.g methyl mercury) is highly toxic and readily absorbed through skin, membranes and what have you. Methyl mercury is the stuff that enters the food chain.

Regarding coal burning, I took a quick look and according to what I was able to quickly find, the major source of mercury in the atmosphere is due to the natural vaporization of mercury present in the earth's crust but human activities (of all types) is believed to contribute roughly the same amount as that from natural processes (so not insignificant) though it is a difficult thing to assess.

 

[Pruning@trunk]

^^^semipro. That is my point as well. These politicians or people who what to change policy and push the so called "environmental cause" is doing it not for environmental reasons but for economic gain. Example al gore and carbon credits or the farmers with ethanol or GE with light bulbs, or GM b/c of the volt or Wall Street b/c of easy money....need I keep going? They want economy gain for themselves at the expense of the people and hide behind false premises.

But the problem continues b/c the greenies over-look the way the money is being made because it is a step in what they think is the "right direction" that is namely, to save the planet and they are all for it because it is a religion for them.

 

[pen]

It's New Year's Eve.

Pour a drink and relax all.

Thread closed.

pen

 

[begreen]

Time out for the political opinions or this is heading straight for the can.

Looks like Pen beat me to it, though 10:40am is a little early for a drink.

 

[webbie]

^^^ disagree with "slow1". If these LED bulbs are so good and they will be a money saver then they will sell themselves and one doesn't have to make laws to ban the other bulbs.

Oh wait, why would GE get into bed with the gov't? Oh that's right, they can make more money off the $10 bulbs than the .50 bulbs and then claim to hide behind saving the earth and being green and more efficiency, blah, blah, blah. Not sure why you people can't see this. It happens time and time again.

Yeah, it happened when the cars replaced horses and the car lobbyists persuaded government to build and subsidize roads. It does happen all the time.

The difference in world views between you and others, it appears, is that you somehow equate "freedom" with the ability to pollute more, use more energy and in general distain progress. There have always been people who fail to look forward and lament the good ole days when soot covered everything and more people died from respiratory diseases.

In my book, the "freedom" to remain cancer free, to dig up less of God's Green Earth and to use as few resources as possible trumps the "freedom" of pollution.....even if it keeps a few less shekels in my pocket in the short run.

Example - the big big bad gubment keeps making more strict building codes in MA. This is against my freedoms. But when I get a $150 gas bill at this time of year for heating a house, cooking, drying laundry AND the fireplace, I blow a kiss to Regulation...

The entire purpose of regulation and government (in this sense) is to take a science and economic based approach which, in the long term, contributes to the general welfare and health/happiness of the people. A cheap light bulb doesn't seem as cheap when the incidence of childhood asthma hits record levels (as it has done now as a result of coal burning, etc.).

Is freedom to the freedom to make other people's children choke? Think about that over the New Year. Don't answer now.
(my grand daughter uses an inhaler - at 4 years old - because of a nearby coal plant largely).