 |
 |
Dim Bulbs: Those Squiggly “Green” Light Bulbs Could Hurt the Environment, Study Says
Keith Johnson
Wall St Journal
Thursday, Oct 2, 2008
The law of unintended consquences strikes again—this time with light bulbs.
A new study published today in the journal Environmental Science and Technology (sub reqd.) concludes that the shift away from old, incandescent light bulbs to more-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs carries plenty of environmental trade-offs.
The upshot: Making the switch is an environmental win for states and countries that generate most of their power from coal, because the more efficient bulbs mean less electricity generation, and thus fewer emissions of mercury into the atmosphere. But for places that don’t rely on coal power, the shift toward CFLs will probably mean more mercury pollution. That’s because of the mercury content in the fluorescent bulbs themselves.
Plenty of countries, from the U.S. to Australia, are trying to phase out the century-old lightbulb in favor of flourescents that use less power and last a lot longer. The 2007 energy bill in the U.S., for instance, will ban most incandescent bulbs by 2014, prompting big manufacturers like General Electric to switch gears. But not all countries (or states) stand to benefit equally; some will actually take a step backward, environmentally.
(Article continues below)
“Compact fluorescent lighting is an area where we’re really pushing this alternative and all these policies are being enacted, but we’re not looking at the potential unintended consequences of what we’re doing,” said Julie Beth Zimmerman, an assistant professor in Yale University’s Department of Chemical Engineering and a co-author of the paper.
Among the potential losers? California, an early pioneer in banning old-fashioned bulbs. That’s because California gets very little of its electricity from coal. Other regions that can expect to see more pollution, according to the study, are South America, Africa, the Middle East, and Scandinavia.
On the other hand, coal-intensive regions such as China and Central Europe stand to reap huge benefits from making the switch, the study finds.
Now, all policy makers have to do is find a way to convince consumers to shoulder the upfront costs of buying the more expensive bulbs.
Prison
Planet.tv Members Can Watch
Fall Of The Republic
Right Now Online -
Don't Miss Out! Get
Your Subscription Today!
CANCER CONSPIRACY? Are
"they" suppressing the cure? Will YOU
be the next victim? Learn
the Secret Truth! - READ FULL STORY
-
- Social bookmarks
- Email this article
-
- Print this page
21 Responses to “Dim Bulbs: Those Squiggly “Green” Light Bulbs Could Hurt the Environment, Study Says”
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||||||
| By N2H | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
October 2nd, 2008 at 3:49 am
“The law of unintended consquences strikes again”
Bullshit. It’s not incompetence, it’s not an accident, it’s deliberate. Like every other criminal activity these goons get up to. Armed revolution NOW!
October 2nd, 2008 at 5:34 am
These also emanate more intense Electro Magnetic Fields and are inducing headaches.
Migrainers, if your headaches have worsened since using these, there is a connection.l
October 2nd, 2008 at 5:48 am
Once these mercury-laden devices are everywhere, the background level of the neuro-toxin will rise, providing big pharma with an argument against liability for their shelf-life enhancer. This is the same strategy employed with the neuro-toxin flouride; put it in the water supply and we can’t be sued since it’s everywhere. I used to mistake evil for cupidity, but no longer.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:27 am
I heard LCD bulbs are better in that they use even less electricity, and they don’t have mercury in them.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:33 am
Oops maybe it was LED.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:34 am
You’ll take your mercury dosage one way or another!!!!!!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:03 am
glad I never got sucked into buying them !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf6xadMwGz0
October 2nd, 2008 at 7:26 am
They want a fascist planet with the superwealthy ruling it all
Since we’re too independent, America must be led to fall
When our credit’s been exhausted to subdue the Middle East,
They’ll install our debtor nation in the body of The Beast
Traitor…Dare call it treason
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw5dP5gy2Vs
October 2nd, 2008 at 9:47 am
The fluorescent coil last very long in theory, but the electronics doesn’t. I have been using those for sometime now and frankly, they don’t last that long… especially those places where you often turn it on and off (like in kids rooms!). I have some standard filament light bulbs that I never changed.
I have been asking for years about how much energy and chemicals it takes to make those CFL. Do people really think that it takes less energy to make those? They contain a fairly complex electronic circuit and plastics, etc. How much energy it takes to make those? How much chemicals end up in the water while producing the electronic parts and circuit?
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 am
Additionally, on the down side of these bulbs, should be noted that they RADIATE a very harming field of electrons in a smal radius close to the bulb depending and proportional to its force.
This RADIATION field is similar to the radiation produced by the cathode tubes of old TV sets: a RAY of electrones is projected outwards so that it bombards a glass screen covered with dust called “luminophor”, dust that produces glow when bombarded by electrons.
The problem is that the electrone ray contunues its way beyond the glass and thus stands as a sustained field of RADIATION that human cells don’t particularly like…
I guess the solution is some strong sort of LED…
October 2nd, 2008 at 10:45 am
Why no body is talking the UV emitted by these bulbs?
I know some sensitive people who can not tolerate these bulbs.
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Rosin – sorry to burst your bubble here but we are surrounded by a sea of electrons. We don’t live in vacuum. Every atom of matter has electrons around its nucleus. Any electron that would escape the vaccum would get lost in the surrounding sea of electrons. Electrons are not very energetic particles. You would need a very high density at short range to do anything to your atoms/molecules.
October 2nd, 2008 at 2:59 pm
um i dont know where you all got yours from but i got a set of G.E. CFLs and i got them when they first came out in packs, there all 4 years old and still work fine, i took them out of my old place and put them into my apartment. Yes i have noticed that they dont really save all that much money a 4 pack of incondecent bulbs is what? 1.99 or so and a 4 pack is 12.99. but the electric bill didnt really change. another point i would like to point out is, on the package and the bulb itself says that they need to be recycled. I approve of them mainly of the hastle of replacing them in inconvient light fixtures in hallways or livingrooms ya know..
HO HO HO i am government man from government land, sent by the government.. thoughs arent lightbulbs, there secret government….. weather balloons.
October 3rd, 2008 at 5:52 am
“They want a fascist planet with the superwealthy ruling it all
Since we’re too independent, America must be led to fall
When our credit’s been exhausted to subdue the Middle East,
They’ll install our debtor nation in the body of The Beast
Traitor…Dare call it treason”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw5dP5gy2Vs
–The Cornbread Mafia
October 4th, 2008 at 12:38 am
Have you ever heard of the saying “build a better mousetrap”…, well I say WE are the mice,
Those old bulbs are no good.., here buy these.
That cell phone is one month old…, here buy this better one
That old TV works fine, but its not HDTV…, here buy widescreen plasma
That car you drive has almost 100.000 miles on it…, better buy a new one
Oh Yeah now the Whole planet will have to buy electric cars.., thats one Big Mousetrap!!!
October 4th, 2008 at 8:19 am
The technical pros and cons are not the point. The point is that the U. S. government has no constitutional authority to regulate matters such as this, which, under the 10th Amendment, are reserved for the several states. But special interests are always in favor of powerful government, because government is the ideal tool for making superior competition illegal, as well as for forcing people to spend money unnecessarily — you might want to think about HDTV, as an example, or mandatory carbon monoxide detectors etc. etc. ad nauseam.
October 4th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
http://digg.com/environment/En.....estigation
A well researched article on the subject.
October 4th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
“they last longer”?, from experience I just don’t believe that.Did you know there’s a light bulb in a firehouse in Livermore California that has been burning continuously for over a century? Guess what?It’s not fluoresent it’s incandescent! The ‘they last longer’ is bulls@#t!
PS..I don’t really believe that bulb in Livermore has burned continuously for over 100 years.Livermore is reasonably close to San Francisco & I find it highly unlikely the power stayed on there during & after the great earthquake in 1906! Maybe they’re just not counting that.
October 5th, 2008 at 11:33 am
that bulb has a thicker filament than what is used today, which is why modern bulbs burn out and it doesn’t. however, the thicker filament puts off much less light.
October 5th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
IT’S ALL ABOUT PROFITS FOR THOSE THAT STAND TO GAIN!! WHY WOULD YOU EVEN THINK ABOUT IT?
October 6th, 2008 at 5:55 am
It’s the age old trikc of being very selective in the things you compare tww items with.
Same goes for cars, yeah a hybrid will use a little less fuel, but don’t you think the chemical waste of producing and throwing away the batteries will in the end be worse?