Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) bulbs contain mercury, albeit very small amounts (approximately 5 mg.) There is no doubt that mercury is harmful to the environment and to humans. Now I know we all must go Green, and in spirit I agree, however I’m troubled with where the mercury inside these bulbs will eventually end up.
The government wants us to replace our incandescent light bulbs with CFLs in order to save power yet little is mentioned about the proper disposal once CFLs burn out. Perhaps you’re thinking that since they’re such little mercury inside each bulb that this really isn’t an environmental issue? Well, multiply that small amount by millions of bulbs and over time and it will certainly add up.
General Electric recommends that if you can’t find a local facility that handles the disposal of hazardous waste that the bulb should be placed in a plastic bag and thrown away. And if the bulb should break, special measures must be taken. For example, don’t handle the broken bulb, do not use a vacuum to clean it up, open up a window, etc. Wow, what is this, nuclear waste? Sure makes you miss the good old days of the incandescent, don’t you think?
I know that CFLs use considerably less power than the average lightbulb and reportedly last much longer, it’s just that I enjoy the soft warm light provided by incandescent bulbs.
To take this a bit further, consider the rechargeable batteries used in hybrid vehicles of today. Where will I take the batteries in my Toyota Prius once they fail to hold a charge? After all, all batteries die at some point. If they’re like typical rechargeable batteries, say Ni-Cad or lead acid, then they probably will need to be recycled or disposed of by a hazardous materials agency.
Not so easy.
July 17, 2009 at 9:24 pm
I am hopeful that the technologies can be developed to produce (less)non-toxic and long lasting batteries – the energy infrastructure issues for electric vehicles would be appropriate if ranges could be extended to 200-300 miles – the Chevy Volt concept is interesting but GM must beat the market – the restructure will help.
I also prefer incandescent light.
I so agree that the consumer waste impact from the disposal of CFC’s and batteries is negating the trace energy conservation when viewed in comparison with industry waste.
CFC’s and consumer conservation are not going to make the huge impact that we need now during this global restructure opportunity. Some nations are planning better than we are.
The cap and trade concept has the potential to reduce the industry waste – The amount of change people can stand could be dissipated somewhat during this economic downturn add some sensible influence from our neighbors in the world and a new way of trade can be born: we could start developing the technologies and supply chain to support a necessary alternative energy industry. This could create the real jobs that will not be thrown away as we run dry of traditional sources of energy.
I hope it can happen and would direct my vote to most any promising initiatives – this industry will have to be subsidized – or cap and trade will direct capital to greener factories as a way of reconciling its balance sheets in the search for profit. I would imagine that this system will be subject to manipulation and stray away from its true intention by way of corporate influence.
I hope that opportunities don’t get placed in a plastic bag and thrown away.