Ideas for Saving Energy & Advancing Alternatives
My opinion, and some info on Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (I'm gonna get flamed for this)
I'll get some flack for this, but my family refuses to keep these in our house.
CFLs are often marketed as having "minimal" levels of mercury, but the fact is that the mercury in one bulb is enough to contaminate 6,000 gallons of water below safe drinking levels. But on a more personal level, I don't want these around my daughter. Years ago, when we were on the CFL bandwagon, a bulb broke on our floor. Luckily we knew the cleanup drill (which, depending on who you talk to, involves between 4 and 11 steps). But very few people do. Now that we have the yoda, there is the very real danger that, when she's mobile, she could get her hands on a compact fluorescent bulb and break it. If I care about lead, dyes, and other toxins in my household, why would I keep these things in my house? The yoda can do without neurological damage.
Back to the environment-at-large issue: There are very few certified recycling locations for CFLs, and millions of CFLs are likely to end up in our landfills. Moreover, the Solid Waste Association of North America (swana.org) says that CFLs are likely to shatter in landfills even if packaged properly. Perhaps what burns me up the most is that CFL manufacturers do not prominently display disposal, recycling, and clean-up instructions on packaging, presumably because such transparency will likely damage sales. In the UK, where the general public , arguably, is more environmentally aware (I remember reading about "killer tomatoes" in the Economist years before I could even spell GMO), the CFL hazard disclosure debate is heating up.
I don't expect to change anyone's mind about CFLs, just as no one will ever change my personal choice to steer clear of them. I know it's a CFL love fest all up in here, but if you do promote the use of CFLs, please SPREAD THE WORD regarding proper disposal and cleanup, as SustainGigs did in his recent video post. Clean up is especially critical if you have a little one.
As for me, I'm looking forward to GE's launch of its efficient incandescent bulb in 2010. Until then, we're switching out our bulbs for LEDs. The extra cost is more than worth the peace of mind.
More on the heated debate and info on CFL cleanup can be found here.
Pink Yoda
Director, Association of Light-Emitting Diode Manufacturers
CFLs are often marketed as having "minimal" levels of mercury, but the fact is that the mercury in one bulb is enough to contaminate 6,000 gallons of water below safe drinking levels. But on a more personal level, I don't want these around my daughter. Years ago, when we were on the CFL bandwagon, a bulb broke on our floor. Luckily we knew the cleanup drill (which, depending on who you talk to, involves between 4 and 11 steps). But very few people do. Now that we have the yoda, there is the very real danger that, when she's mobile, she could get her hands on a compact fluorescent bulb and break it. If I care about lead, dyes, and other toxins in my household, why would I keep these things in my house? The yoda can do without neurological damage.
Back to the environment-at-large issue: There are very few certified recycling locations for CFLs, and millions of CFLs are likely to end up in our landfills. Moreover, the Solid Waste Association of North America (swana.org) says that CFLs are likely to shatter in landfills even if packaged properly. Perhaps what burns me up the most is that CFL manufacturers do not prominently display disposal, recycling, and clean-up instructions on packaging, presumably because such transparency will likely damage sales. In the UK, where the general public , arguably, is more environmentally aware (I remember reading about "killer tomatoes" in the Economist years before I could even spell GMO), the CFL hazard disclosure debate is heating up.
I don't expect to change anyone's mind about CFLs, just as no one will ever change my personal choice to steer clear of them. I know it's a CFL love fest all up in here, but if you do promote the use of CFLs, please SPREAD THE WORD regarding proper disposal and cleanup, as SustainGigs did in his recent video post. Clean up is especially critical if you have a little one.
As for me, I'm looking forward to GE's launch of its efficient incandescent bulb in 2010. Until then, we're switching out our bulbs for LEDs. The extra cost is more than worth the peace of mind.
More on the heated debate and info on CFL cleanup can be found here.
Pink Yoda
Director, Association of Light-Emitting Diode Manufacturers
Comment
-
Comment by Mark L. Miller on March 30, 2009 at 1:02pm - While we're all debating the relative merits of CFLs, more efficient incandecents and LEDs, let's not overlook the OBVIOUS....turn off lights in rooms where they're not needed, use fewer lights, conserve energy! All options should ALWAYS be aggresively pursued. Go camping sometime and discover how LITTLE you can really get by OK with. Just because we have light switches on every wall of our houses doesn't mean that we NEED to turn them on.
-
Comment by SustainGigs on November 23, 2008 at 5:05pm - Seems like a non-issue to me. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/05/ask_treehugger_14.php
-
Comment by rripken on April 14, 2008 at 9:02am - Another place to check out is deal extreme. They have some cool CREE flashlights and also a selection of LED lightbulbs.
-
Comment by Robert Barrosa on April 14, 2008 at 8:39am - I just ran across this company: http://www.creells.com/residential.htm . They have some very cool LED products. Still a bit expense but huge energy savings per bulb. The technology is really coming along.
-
Comment by rripken on March 24, 2008 at 10:41am
- I have to agree that I've had second thoughts about CFL's lately. I still have them in the house but I am looking for alternatives. Maybe LED's, halogen or solar tube skylights. In my opinion the problem with CFL's is that it is not a question of IF, but WHEN, these lights will go out. The other day, my wife was in the bathroom and she saw a CFL flicker and then emit a yellow smoke cloud. We had talked about what to do if the CFL's break - she immediately grabbed my son and left the house for an hour. I came home from work and cleaned it up. I have no idea what went wrong with the bulb - maybe it was harmless. But I have to treat the threat seriously. Brownouts during a storm caused a number of CFL's to burn out and now I have a dedicated storage area in the garage for burned out CFL bulbs. IKEA is the only place I know to dispose of them and the nearest IKEA is an hour drive. I've asked my family and friends what they do with the old bulbs and everyone just puts them in the trash.
-
Comment by pink yoda on March 20, 2008 at 3:01pm -
As stated, not trying to change anyone's opinion or suggest that they reach out of their budget for LEDs. Simply saying that it's extremely irresponsible to sell or promote CFLs without the appropriate cautions. As for the "everything can be hazardous" argument I simply choose not to add CFLs to my personal mix. If I took that approach, I might say, "hey, who cares about the lead paint in yoda's room" or "why not leave all my electrical outlets out for her to stick a fork in"? You do what you can to protect your home, and if there's an alternative to a product I consider dangerous, I'm going to use the alternative, because I have a choice. At this point I'm not willing to sacrifice yoda's health or the environment at large to reduce CO2 footprint on behalf of CFL manufacturers or carbon reduction junkies -- unless recycling and disposal process is dialed in and we know more about the net effects. The "everything is a tradeoff" argument can be used by those who elect to use non-renewable energy sources or inefficient incandescents or cheaper environmental pollutants as well. It seems to be a selective "argument" depending on which side you're on. And therefore it's a non-argument. Why do we push for one over the other if it's all a tradeoff? Because we need to weigh those tradeoffs, and that's why we all have differing opinions on what technology is ultimately better or worse than the other, and express them in a forum such as this. The UK is spending $150 billion dollars on cleaning up their nuclear "tradeoff." As for cost, the right technology for the planet is often the more costly technology, hence grants and incentives for the use of those technologies. LEDs are no different. If one can't afford LEDs, one needs to get educated on CFLs, and use them if they must, but be aware of the hazards to their home and environment.
GE's high-efficiency incandescents (HEIs) will initially replace 40 to 100 watt bulbs and the company expects them to be 2x the efficiency of regular incandescents. The ultimate goal is to get to 4x, which will put them at near parity with CFLs. There's a sense that GE doesn't have til 2010 to introduce these lamps, and I agree. WalMart has a goal of selling 100 million CFLs by the end of this calendar year, and I find this to be scary, not hopeful. Mark my words, this s--- is going to come back to bite us later.
-
Comment by andy on March 20, 2008 at 12:10pm -
You make some good points and obviously there are trade-offs with anything. There are many things around the home that are hazardous and lightbulbs are only managed when replaced. With CPLs that can be a very long time. I can see an argument for not using them in say a table lamp if you have small children that might knock over the lamp. I can't imagine too many scenarios when wall mounted lamps would have an issue.
Recycling is a big issue. We can only hope that as CPLs get more popular there will be more places to recycle them and people will get educated about the need to do so.
LEDs are an option, but really out of reach on most people's budget. Do you have more info on GE's incandenscent? Will it really be as efficient as CPLs or LEDs?
About
Wattopia Related Stuff
A Word From Our Sponsors
© 2010 Created by sandra on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
You need to be a member of Wattopia to add comments!
Join Wattopia