It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What government makes it illegal for people to buy a decent light bulb that is not harmful to people

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I fail to understand why you think mercury lingering in the air at 6 times over the safe levels after one CFL breaks is “small exposure.” If the DEP, who are trained specialists and have the proper measuring equipment, say it’s 6 times over the safe level hours after the bulb breaks and to call an environmental cleanup firm… who are you, what credentials, certification, measuring equipment do you have other than words from an anonymous blogger to say the amount of mercury released from these bulbs “5 minutes” after they break is “a small amount of mercury in your body”?




posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
For those concerned about the mercury vapor from a single broken CFL lamp, I recall many years ago in a factory complex with many hundreds of light fittings each having 3 x 5' 60W flourescent tubes we had organised teams regularly bulk replacing those tubes using mobile scaffolding. The tubes came in boxes of 30 or 50 tubes (not sure which) and they put the old tubes back in the new tube's cardboard sleeve and filled the box with old tubes. There was then a bit of a contest to see who could manage to break ALL the old tubes in the full box of old tubes with a single hit so how much mercury vapor was being liberated there? not to mention the amount of phosphor dust (carcinogenic they say now) floating about afterward and no-one batted an eyelid at this practice as long as they cleaned up any broken glass that escaped.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by soleprobe
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I fail to understand why you think mercury lingering in the air at 6 times over the safe levels after one CFL breaks is “small exposure.” If the DEP, who are trained specialists and have the proper measuring equipment, say it’s 6 times over the safe level hours after the bulb breaks and to call an environmental cleanup firm… who are you, what credentials, certification, measuring equipment do you have other than words from an anonymous blogger to say the amount of mercury released from these bulbs “5 minutes” after they break is “a small amount of mercury in your body”?


Lets look at the basic logic of what you are saying:

Mercury lingering in the air.

Um...mercury is a metal. A fairly heavy one at that. "lingering in the air" is not what is happening here.

You put far too much faith in credentials, and have given up your own common sense.

I am not giving you an anonymous blogger. I am linking to a source that cites THE EPA. If you want to talk credentials...they are the idiots who decided what a "safe" level of mercury actually is. If they see it as being ok to clean up....

You seem to miss the point here. Mercurcy IS dangerous. But you cleaning up a bulb has nothing on the fact that your landfill (and soon the groundwater underneath it) is literally filled with this stuff. And you are worried about that little bit from cleaning up one bulb?

Yeah, enjoy your salmon.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
A quick question for all you who are so worried about the scant mercury you get from cleaning up a single CFL:

Did you by into global warming? if you did, then YOU are as much to blame for the real issue here. I kept saying all along that the climate would always fluctuate, but that i was more concerned about mercury in my fish.

a major GW solution was CFL bulbs. Now look at you. Freaking morons who promoted GW as the mindless drones of Al Gore, instead of thinking for their damned selves. Who the hell thought it was a good trade off to fill our landfills with mercury tainted bulbs?

And we are really sitting here contemplating the miniscule exposure from cleaning up a broken bulb???

In my experience, the "chicken little's" are ALWAYS wrong. No thanks. I will use my own common sense, and fairly robust understanding of how the human body works, instead.
edit on 1-1-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Um...mercury is a metal. A fairly heavy one at that. "lingering in the air" is not what is happening here.


"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."

"per cubic meter" means "per cubic meter" of air. Since DEP arrived some time after the bulb broke... the mercury was in excess of six times the state's "safe" level "per cubic meter" of air. If traces of mercury were not "lingering in the air" six times above the safe limit per cubic meter of air then what was the mercury doing in the air? Floating? Hovering?


Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
And you are worried about that little bit from cleaning up one bulb?


If the breaking of one bulb will release enough mercury to exceed a state's safe limits by six times hours after it breaks then I do worry about "that little bit from cleaning up one bulb" even if the EPA says it's OK to do so.


Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
THE EPA. ...they are the idiots who decided what a "safe" level of mercury actually is. If they see it as being ok to clean up....


You source the EPA who you call "idiots" and yet you trust them when they say it's ok to clean up.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Something I have noticed with CFLs and even some regular size florescent lights is that they generate a huge electromagnetic field around them compared to incandescent bulbs.
I have a multimeter that has a built in EMF function and if I get it even four feet away from a CFL bulb it will start beeping like crazy and give me a full reading. With an incandescent bulb I can get the meter as close to the bulb glass as possible and barely get a reading.
This makes me wonder if that is why people are getting headaches, dizzy, and other problems from being around CFL bulbs?
It would make sense after all since strong electromagnetic fields are also known to cause those problems in sensitive people.

I agree that LED lights are the way of the future. Those things last almost forever and use so little energy. The problem is that when using LEDs that put out more lumins the amount of heat and energy consumption goes straight uphill. The highest wattage LEDs produced so far aren't that much better than CFLs at energy usage and still produce a lot of heat which is why they have built in heatsinks.
When it comes to low lighting applications LEDs win hands down. I hope in the future they figure out a way to bring the energy usage down with high powered LEDs and figure out a way to get more light range out of them so that they don't look so alien and cold like they do currently.
Luminescent panels are also a great technology that needs to be looked into more.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by soleprobe
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I fail to understand why you think mercury lingering in the air at 6 times over the safe levels after one CFL breaks is “small exposure.” If the DEP, who are trained specialists and have the proper measuring equipment, say it’s 6 times over the safe level hours after the bulb breaks and to call an environmental cleanup firm… who are you, what credentials, certification, measuring equipment do you have other than words from an anonymous blogger to say the amount of mercury released from these bulbs “5 minutes” after they break is “a small amount of mercury in your body”?


Well, did you read my post on the second page? Here it is again. The information presented in the article is gross misinformation resulting from ignorance, because not all forms of mercury are the same. That's the error.

These bulbs use elemental mercury, and only the vapor is toxic. It isn't absorbed when ingested like the organic and inorganic mercury compounds are. It passes out. It isn't absorbed through the skin, either.

With a single bulb, the amount that vaporizes on breakage will be so small and so diffuse that I think it would have very little significance. The remaining mercury on surfaces after the initial vapor release would likely be of little to no concern, as it can't be absorbed through the skin or even when eaten. It would only become a concern if certain chemicals came in contact with it and chemical reactions occurred.

Long ago people were poisoned by elemental mercury vapor when working with large amounts of it in open containers. And I even recall reading that persons working in a nasty Chinese bulb factory without ventilation were poisoned, too. But these people work with the compound itself before it goes into the bulb and are processing tens of thousands of bulbs every day and working with large amounts of mercury.

People worry so much about one of these bulbs breaking, but just taking a trip to the basement to grab some tools to clean-up the broken bulb will likely expose one to more significantly toxic particles in the air (radon, etc) than the bulb did, and so does probably a puff or two of a cigarette or being around other people smoking.

For that matter, millions of people get some gasoline on themselves every day in this country, and that's something that can be partially absorbed through the skin, is toxic in various ways, and has various carcinogenic components. But no one gives a hoot about that. And that's just one of many examples.
edit on 2-1-2011 by IamCorrect because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Mercury - it is your best friend.

Warm fuzzies all around. Never mind the Mad Hatter. He just likes to wave at people.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by liejunkie01
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Thomas Edison was a cheat. He stole all of his ideas from Tesla. I have been using fluorescent for years. If you change all of your bulbs you can notice a dramatic decrease in the electric bill. Incandescent is old technology that wastes alot of energy in the form of heat.
By the way my kids do not have three eyes or anything. I think that all of the warnings you posted are scare tactics from the industry that still manufactures incandescent light bulbs.
Change them, you will see savings.


I replace all of my halogen bulbs with incandescent bulbs in the winter and my electrical/heating bill drops by 30%.

They seem to be slightly more efficient than my heater for heating the house overall.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Yeah, enjoy your salmon.


Salmon is one of the fish with very low mercury content.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jaynkeel
What also pisses me off is the fact that the new compact fluorescent bulbs are not compatible with all my x-10 controlled light switches and adapters. Forcing me to upgrade and change out all of those items to accommodate the new light bulbs. What another marketing scam once again, and I have used those compact bulbs before they made absolutely no difference in my electric bill.



I have been telling people about this for close to two years and few people listen to me and even few believed me.
As far as being not compatible they are not compatible with light dimmer switches (there is a dimmable fluorescent but it does not work well), dusk to dawn light sockets, remote light switches, most timers and a great deal of other light controls. They may not work right in some generator and inverter systems. A great deal of light fixtures can not take or use them. They can not be use in damp or wet locations like regulator bulb can be. outside lights
The cost is so high per bulb it puts an end to a lot of lighting set ups.
Then there is the problem of throwing the blubs away once they go bad.

And the cold really hurts compact fluorescent bulbs. In cold weather if takes a few minutes for some of them to come on to full power.
All and all it is not going to be good for us at all in the end.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I prefer LEDS, they last for over 10 years and they draw no power...its the future get with the program people and save yourself some money.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
LEDS aren't very bright. They are not yet an alternative, even if you have the money for them.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:24 AM
link   
in all honesty ,

the money you are sepposed to save on energy is so minimal i can even begin to laugh,
i think i made a saving of 1000 bucks or so over a time span of 10 years

not to even mention the low LUX these new lights have, in short you need more lamps to get the bright home you once had which in return makes no saving on the electrical bill since you basicly go back to same ammount of watts you used to use with the old builds ,

thirdly just look at how humans handled batteries , how on earth does one even belive human kind will regard these new bulbs any better ,

yawn,

people have just been played and no one can do anything about it



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


cheep led lights are no better then anything else thats "cheep"
but when you buy lamps in general you dont buy em based on watt(energy they consume) you buy em based on lux (how brigth they shine) ,



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Here's some food for thought:
* An incandescent bulb is rated to last for about 1,000 to 2,000 hours. Dimming the light by 10% will double that. Dimming it by 20% will quadruple that. Dimming it by about 40% or more will give you about 20 times the life span.
* Dimming an incandescent saves energy too. Dimming by about 15% will save about 13% power.
* You will not even notice if a light is dimmed by about 15% (something called square-law dimming. Your iris will respond to the ambient lighting and compensate). Even if you dim down to 10% lighting, you 'see' about 30%. You're saving energy and conserving the life of the bulb.
* The 'free' self-ballasted fluorescents 'given' out by power companies are subsidized by the bills you already pay. They are not free. You have already paid for them.
* Most of them are made in China. Do you think the Chinese are being very careful about emissions, safety etc.? Are you thinking globally in your quest to be 'green'?
* The latest fad in commercial lighting is induction. A Tesla invention from over 100 years ago. Lots of mercury. Because there are no induction lighting manufacturers in the US, they are exempt from the 'Buy American' act. That means your local street lighting etc. could be made in China and not American made. Are you happy your local government is using Chinese made products and using your taxes to pay for it? Yes, they are exempt due to a competitive clause.
* Self ballasted LED and fluorescent bulbs should not be used in recessed downlights. The heat from the bulb rises. Right through the ballast or driver. It cooks the components, and that extended life expectancy shown on the box will be dramatically reduced. DRAMATICALLY.
* Has the local energy company that is 'giving' away the 'free' fluorescents put together a recycling program for these bulbs? Probably not. Costs are around $1.50 per lamp to properly recycle. Consequently, they are going into the landfill because nobody is recycling them.
* Ask your local landfill if they have been monitoring mercury levels over the last five to ten years. Have they seen an increase?
* Do you really, honestly buy 'mercury is naturally occurring and doesn't present any health threats'?
* Your local power company is not in the business of being benevolent. They SELL power. You using a little less isn't profitable. They want you to use a little less so they have more to sell, at extremely high prices, to their commercial users.
* Your lighting, on the heaviest use cycle, can make up about 6%-8% of your power bill. In an office building, for example, the lighting accounts for about 38%. When was the last time you saw a completely dark office building on the weekend, or in the night-time when nobody was there? Never. That's all the energy you are 'saving' by using the CFL/LED being sold at 18 cents or more a kW.
* LED is making huge strides in the lumens per watt ratio. However, not all LEDs are created equal. Good LEDs are very expensive and in high demand. Poor LEDs are very inexpensive and don't perform the way the bulb manufacturers say they do. Many bulb manufacturers are using the poor performing LEDs. Especially the 'offshore' brands. They just want to sell product. They don't care if your cheap LED fails. They'll sell you a new one. Buyer beware. You get what you pay for.

Incandescent lighting is not the bad guy here.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by IamCorrect
The information presented in the article is gross misinformation

I don't think so



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


i use them, but i buy them by the hundred lot online and make lighting solutions with them. they do exactly what i want them to do. you just have to know the materials and the secrets. i can run my entire house lighting on 40 watts. beat that



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
You ask what kind of Government would do it?

The same kind of crappy Government which just banned smoking in Bars here in Spain. About 80% of the population smokes and they want to stop `em doing it in Bars? Nearly all the STAFF in Spanish Bars smoke. Nothing irritates a Spaniard more than being pushed about by rules n regs. There will be blood on the streets before long.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Q: How many ATs members does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Two. One to screw in the bulb, and the other to watch out for the police.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join