‘Green’ light bulb ends up costing plenty
Envirowackos looooooove telling up how much money we could save by switching to those annoying high-cost, low-energy use
Brandy Bridges of Ellsworth, ME., learned that these things are neither “green,” nor are they good for her family budget when she broke one of the mercury-filled devices trying to install it in her daughter’s bedroom:
Aware that
CFL s contain potentially hazardous substances, Bridges called her local Home Depot for advice. The store told her that the CFL contained mercury and that she should call the Poison Control hotline, which in turn directed her to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.The DEP sent a specialist to Bridges’ house to test for mercury contamination. The specialist found mercury levels in the bedroom in excess of six times the state’s “safe” level for mercury contamination of 300 billionths of a gram per cubic meter. The DEP specialist recommended that Bridges call an environmental cleanup firm, which reportedly gave her a “low-ball” estimate of US$2,000 to clean up the room. The room then was sealed off with plastic and Bridges began “gathering finances” to pay for the US$2,000 cleaning. Reportedly, her insurance company wouldn’t cover the cleanup costs because mercury is a pollutant.
Given that the replacement of incandescent bulbs with CFLs in the average U.S. household is touted as saving as much as US$180 annually in energy costs — and assuming that Bridges doesn’t break any more CFLs — it will take her more than 11 years to recoup the cleanup costs in the form of energy savings.
The punchline:
It’s quite odd that environmentalists have embraced the CFL, which cannot now and will not in the foreseeable future be made without mercury. Given that there are about five billion light bulb sockets in North American households, we’re looking at the possibility of creating billions of hazardous waste sites such as the Bridges’ bedroom.
I’m wondering how many of those shrill Chicken Littles who fought expansion of the
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
I’ve had two of these things fail spontaneously, crack and spew a fine, white powder in my living room. Neither one lasted as long as an incandescent.
I’m trying to determine if some brands are better than others. I haven’t had any trouble with GE fluorescents. I’ve had major problems with the FEIT brand. I’d be interested in comparing notes here with other CFL users.
I’d check your home for mercury contamination.
Um…. use LED lightbulbs? They use far less energy than even flourescent bulbs with much less environment headaches.
If you notice the city of Peoria has been switching out incandescent traffic light bulbs with LED ones for a few years now.
Before getting your panties too twisted, you might want to a little research. I suggest starting at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp#Environmental_issues. You might also want to read what the EPA has to say: http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.pdf.
Wal-Mart is behind a a BIG push for CFLs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/02/business/02bulb.html?ex=1325394000en=7cdfdd70524b7590ei=5088partner=rssnytemc=rss
Of course … bigger markup.
The cost listed in the original article is BS. You can go to Menard’s and buy a 6 pack of 60 watt equiv. for $8 or even less when on sale. I have had the entire house and barn and shed replaced with them for over a year. I especially like using the 150 watt equiv ones in place of 100 watt incand’s in the barn and shed. More light and still way less power used. My normal electric bill is (new price) $85 (2006 price $50) and we have an electric dryer, 2 refrigerators and a deep freeze.
I have tried some LEDs but they are way too pricey and emit less light and are still too directional. Give them a couple more years.
Check your place for mercury contamination, MDD.
Ben: My panties stopped twisting after I switched to thongs. But … thanks for the input.
Don’t forget that even if your CFL doesn’t break you are still going to put it in the trash where the mercury and other heavy metals will end up buried in the ground. So much for saving the environment. Not to mention that not a single CFL is made in the USA.
So, go ahead and use your CFLs which contain heavy metals, are made in China (where they have little to no environmental regulation on their factories), which take a huge amount of materials and energy to produce, and just MIGHT save you a little $$ IF they work like they are supposed to.
Or, you can use your American-made incandescent bulb that is made of glass and a little metal.
Forget it, Tony. Once a envirowacko gets the idea they are being clever or more carbon-neutral that THOU, nothing will get them to change. Look at their contempt for nuclear power, which is safe and clean and absolutely HATED.
I love nuke plants and could care less if China pollutes their land to provide us with cool stuff.
I got way too tired of replacing incandescent bulbs and can’t wait to have one of my CFL’s fail so I can send it on its way to the landfill.
Ummm … here’s a simple question. How do they know that the mercury levels they found in that house were due to the shattered CFL lightbulb? Yes, CFLs have small amounts of mercury in them, and that would be ONE logical conclusion. However, there’s no way to know for sure unless they had tested the room before the CFL shattered.
So trying to consume less energy makes one an “envirowacko.” Huh. Let me pick up that gauntlet and do my best Human Torch impression …
Standard fluorescent bulbs have been around for decades and contain far more mercury than the new energy saving bulbs. Where’s the uproar about that? Why is this article targeting CFLs? Sounds like Steven Milloy is up to his old tricks again … giving people an excuse to continue to be lazy and do nothing about environmental and energy conservation issues.
Displaying fine journalistic acumen, Billy has apparently overlooked the fact that Milloy is a well-paid advocate of the tobacco and energy industries. Perhaps our illustrious Pundit might want to find a more impartial source for his “libertario-wacko” rants. Then again … who needs good, impartial and well-documented evidence when one has some unsubstantiated drek that fits with their poorly thought out preconceived notions?
And who would your “good, impartial and well-documented” sources be, Knight?
Also, what are the other possibilities for the mercury in the house?
I am getting used to the CFL light. It is much better than it used to be. But I want these bulbs to last as long as they are supposed to.
LEDs are promising, but they aren’t quite ready for prime time yet.
I favor nuclear power. We have an amazing paranoia in this country about nuclear, largely fueled by a few movie/media nuts. Unless humans revert to being tree-living berry eaters (which PETA would love), nuclear has to be part of the energy solution — at least in the short to medium term.
Regarding the dangers of mercury, I used to play with it as a kid. That probably explains why I ended up with a newspaper job. Seriously, though, how many people do you know with mercury poisoning? To find out what’s really dangerous, read the post on Josh Hancock. Who doesn’t know two or five or 10 people who have been killed in car accidents. Riding in a vehicle is BY FAR the most dangerous thing the average American does regularly. Be careful out there!
KiD: Would that all articles I select for comment written by people with impeccable Green credentials. I ask you, what specific fact did he get wrong. Did he make up the fact that this woman’s house was poisoned by mercury? Did he make up the fact that she was advised to have a hazardous materials clean-up done? Did he make up the fact that it’s going to cost her a huge amount of money? Is Miloy a “well-paid advocate of the tobacco and energy industries?” I’ll take your word for it, as I’m sure you wouldn’t make that up. I do now that I was recently described as being in the pay of Pioneer Railcorp. I must be, that person wrote, because some bloggers do take money.
The point of my post to to point out the subtle hypocrisy of some environmentalists. They rail about the things they are passionate about, and fail to even consider that the might, just might, be unintended consequences.
In 8th grade science class, we used to hold liquid in mercury in our hands. Didn’t wash up after either.
Dr. Knight: The original article mentions the fact that the elevated levels were found exactly where the bulb had broken.
Bill: Different kind of mercury.
“stopped twisting after I switched to thongs.”
** closes eyes, shudders and screams **
DON”T WANT TO KNOW!!! DON”T WANT TO KNOW !!!
She was warned not to vacuum up the mess as it would spread mercury throughout the house although you’d think that would drastically lessen the concentration and thus the threat.
Vonster says “Different kind of mercury”
My periodic chart lists only one.
Like a lot of elements it can take on different forms….the liquid that was often used in thermometers (that we played with in science class) or gaseous form in light bulbs.
But all the same element – HG.
Mercury evaporates like any liquid. Vacuum or not the mercury would spread around the house.
[...] Comments Emtronics on Sandberg and city dispute $110 clean-up billPeoriaIllinoisan on Can we talk mushrooms?Bill iii on Police accused of shooting unarmed mandiane on Police accused of shooting unarmed manMahkno on ‘Green’ light bulb ends up costing plenty [...]
[...] environmental clean-up. But the agency that gave this advice says NOW that they do no such thing. My original point stands: The advice to do an expensive clean-up was in line with old envirowacko thinking, namely [...]
I have found my light bulb at interlight
http://www.interlight.biz
They have good price on these and projector lamps, also a real good cross-reference
[...] last time I pointed out a report suggesting that something considered environmentally friendly might not be, I was shouted down. Seriously, it was like I advocated clubbing baby seals to death. We’ll [...]
You raise some good points. It’s too bad you do so much name calling in the process–it is a lot easier to take people seriously when they don’t refer to those who disagree as “wackos” and the rest of it.
[...] those carbon-friendly light-bulbs that the envirowackos are trying to shove down our throats might not really be environmentally friendly because they are filled with [...]