Energy saving lightbulbs

I just recently switched over to CFL lights in some of my appliances (mainly, my small desk lamp) And yes, I do prefer CFL lights more because they don't heat up as much as traditional desk lamps run on traditional light bulbs. My old desk lamp, using the old light bulbs, felt like an effective space heater; burning my hand if it got too close.

The fact that CFL lights last longer is just an added bonus.
 
What harm does mercury do for people anyhow? A few people have mentioned it so far, but what hazards does it create?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning

Mercury damages the central nervous system, endocrine system, kidneys, and other organs, and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. Exposure over long periods of time or heavy exposure to mercury vapor can result in brain damage and ultimately death. Mercury and its compounds are particularly toxic to fetuses and infants. Women who have been exposed to mercury in pregnancy have sometimes given birth to children with serious birth defects (see Minamata disease).

Mercury exposure in young children can have severe neurological consequences, preventing nerve sheaths from forming properly. Mercury inhibits the formation of myelin, the building block protein that forms these sheaths.[6]

There is some evidence that mercury poisoning may predispose to Young's syndrome (men with bronchiectasis and low sperm count).[7]

Mercury poisoning in the young has been hypothesized as a cause of autistic behaviors.[8][9] This hypothesis is controversial, as much evidence suggests that about 90% of autism is explained by genetics.[10] The hypothesis has not been confirmed by reliable studies.[11]

Mercury poisoning's effects partially depend on whether it has been caused by exposure to elemental mercury, inorganic mercury compounds (as salts), or organomercury compounds.
 
When it is biodegraded (by microorganisms in the soil), it becomes "bioavailable", or "interactive with bio-chemistry". It mutates DNA. It's affects are inheritable (unlike, say, carcinogens). It is "bioaccumulating" because by bonding with oils (as opposed to water) it is stored in fat and passed from prey to predator. This is why polar bears have ~the same mercury content as any other animal anywhere in the world.

Note that, like DDT, it is rather harmless until it is chomped on by microrganisisms. DDE, the biodegradent, is what almost killed the bald eagle and many other species.
 
HOW MERCURY ENTERS AND
AFFECTS YOUR BODY

Liquid mercury easily changes into a vapor. You are most likely to be exposed by breathing in mercury vapors, which are easily absorbed through your lungs into your body. Liquid mercury is not well absorbed through the skin. However, harmful absorption can occur through broken or damaged skin, or if there is lengthy skin contact.

Most effects of mercury exposure develop slowly over time. Symptoms usually occur only after repeated overexposure. These effects include insomnia, loss of appetite, nausea, weakness, and muscle tremors. Brief exposures to very high levels of mercury vapors can affect the lungs.

Nervous System: Long-term overexposure to mercury vapors can cause a number of symptoms. The first symptoms may be loss of appetite, fatigue, insomnia, and changes in behavior or personality (nervousness, excitability, and shyness). Later, more serious symptoms may include nausea, abdominal cramps, diarrhea, weight loss, weakness, and muscle tremors. Some of these symptoms have been reported after years of exposure to mercury at air levels slightly above the legal limits (see "Legal Exposure Limits"). When overexposure stops, these symptoms will usually go away.

Severe mercury poisoning can permanently damage the nervous system. Such damage may be accompanied by hallucinations, whole-body tremors, a tingling "pins and needles" sensation, pain, tenderness, numbness, and weakness. An interesting note is the past use of mercury in felt production. Felt hat manufacturers suffered from many symptoms of high-level mercury exposure, as witnessed in the Mad Hatter character in Alice in Wonderland, and the popular phrase "mad as a hatter."

Kidney: Long-term overexposure to mercury can injure the kidneys. In most cases, this damage is reversible and kidney function will gradually recover once exposure is stopped. No obvious symptoms are associated with kidney damage, unless the injury is severe. Special urine tests are used to detect this kidney damage (see "Tests for Exposure and Medical Effects"). Generally you will not have kidney damage if you do not have other symptoms of chronic mercury overexposure.

Lungs: Inhalation of very high levels of mercury vapors can affect the lungs, causing coughing, chest tightness and pain, difficulty in breathing, and pulmonary edema (fluid in the lungs). Fever, chills, nausea, and vomiting may also occur. If you develop these symptoms after an exposure to mercury, see your physician immediately.

Eyes, Nose, and Throat: Long-term mercury overexposure can cause increased salivation and inflammation of the mouth and gums. Repeated exposure to mercury vapors may also discolor the lenses of your eyes. This discoloration (usually brown) is a sign of mercury overexposure. It can occur with or without other symptoms of overexposure.

Skin: Prolonged skin contact with liquid mercury can irritate the skin and cause a rash that allows increased absorption through the skin.

Cancer: There is little reason to think that mercury could cause cancer, although that possibility has not been studied.

Reproductive System: The effects of metallic mercury on pregnancy and reproduction have not been studied thoroughly. When metallic mercury vapor is absorbed into your body, some of it is changed into another form, inorganic mercury. In limited studies, exposure of pregnant animals to moderate levels of either metallic or inorganic mercury caused growth retardation, birth defects, and death of the fetus or of the offspring shortly after birth. In another study, exposure of male animals to inorganic mercury reduced their fertility.

It is not known whether mercury causes similar effects in humans, but, based on the animal studies, you should handle it as a potential human reproductive toxin and minimize your exposure (see "Reducing Your Exposure"). Nursing women should also avoid exposure to mercury, since inhaled mercury can enter a woman's breast milk.




Notice terms like "long term" and "prolonged".


My girl does NEON for a living. She has been exposed to mercury in levels 1000000x that in a CFL on a daily basis for almost 10 years. She exhibits none of the symptoms yet.
 
When it is biodegraded (by microorganisms in the soil), it becomes "bioavailable", or "interactive with bio-chemistry". It mutates DNA. It's affects are inheritable (unlike, say, carcinogens). It is "bioaccumulating" because by bonding with oils (as opposed to water) it is stored in fat and passed from prey to predator. This is why polar bears have ~the same mercury content as any other animal anywhere in the world. Top predators concentrate it. Fear tuna and shark.

Note that, like DDT, it is rather harmless until it is chomped on by microrganisms. Ok, it is devestating on contact. Still, DDE, the biodegradent of DDT, is what almost killed the bald eagle and many other species (fear carbon rings with stuff like chlorine attached). Likewise, bioavailable mercury is the real wildfire not canned tuna addict deaths/retardations.

OT kinda: Speaking of ocean consumption, I don't blame jews for avoiding "shellfish" or "filter feeders". Eating things that filter ocean water (or bottom-feeding fish) is probably more harm than good (given that nutritional requirements are provided through other sources). That goes for most rivers and lakes too.
 
Ok, sounds like scary stuff.

But getting back on track, CFLs don't offer any sort of solution towards curbing global warming.

I might also add that any sort of home/work energy saving device can be substituted in for CFLs. They are all in the same boat.
 
People banter on about how much more energy efficient CFL light bulbs are compared to incandescent bulbs (traditional bulbs).

I did my own comparison based on Irish prices for light bulbs and electricity consumption. My analysis showed that CFL light bulbs are at least 2.5 times more economical than standard light bulbs. Therefore, one might assume that they are 2.5 times more energy efficient.(..)
Can you show your comparison, please ?
 
In my experience thus far, CFL's last about as long as a standard lightbulb, if not less than a standard light bulb. I've been dissapointed.
 
CFLs also contain mercury.

BUUUT...

300px-Mercury_emissions_by_light_source_%28en%29.svg.png




And that's a nice typo I made... :) Thanks Ansar!
 
Don't tell that to the French guy :)

You must think we're a bunch of barbarians, still burning coal...

:lol:

On topic, I don't like fluorescent lights; they're a lot tougher on the eyes than incandescent or sunlight. I like to save electricity in other ways...
 
No, but the picture on an LCD monitor isn't quite the same as having the light in front of me...
 
1. Cut back world GDP (this isn't very possible)

2. Improve energy production so that it emits less global-warming inducing stuff (only way forward)
3. Better efficiency on everything. A more service & less goods based economy. A switch from consumer culture to a more sustainable model.

By the way LED's pwn florescents, too bad they're still so expensive to buy. The technology needs government subsidies.
 
Can you show your comparison, please ?

Hi Rik

Here are my figures attached. Now they are based on Irish prices for light bubls and kilo watt hours.

But we can probably assume that prices are pretty much relative across the world.

As for the life span, I took this information from the Irish electricity supply board website, so I presume the figures are average.
 

Attachments

  • ILB v CFL.JPG
    ILB v CFL.JPG
    39.5 KB · Views: 35
3. Better efficiency on everything.

Better efficiency. Can you give a clearer example please?

A more service & less goods based economy.

The world economy consumes X amount of goods. We can assume that this is a fixed number, because if we consumed less goods, there would be a decrease in world GDP. Hence this is the same as my first point of solution. I think, however, that this is highly unlikely. To limit consumption when most of the world economy are barely surviving is impractical.
 
Back
Top Bottom