With more than 75% of all American households already using compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) and the government essentially banning biologically inert, safe, incandescent bulbs, are we being kept in the dark about CFLs?
If you’ve gone out to purchase light bulbs recently, you’ve probably noticed that your options are limited. Because of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, we are now facing the end of the light bulb as we know it.
While it is good “to move the United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products…to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government,” it’s the “for other purposes” part of this Act that has me concerned.
Part B of Title III (Energy Savings through Improved Standards for Appliances and Lighting) requires about 25% greater efficiency for light bulbs, which will be phased in from 2012 through 2014. This section of the Act basically bans the continued manufacture of almost all incandescent light bulbs, one of the most trusted inventions of our era. Switching to CFLs is being touted as one of the best ways for the nation to reduce electricity use and lower greenhouse gases.
But will switching to CFLs really reduce energy consumption and lower greenhouse gases, and are CFLs safe? If you’re feeling a bit in the dark over the CFL issue, read on, because CFLs are not the “shining lights” they are made out to be.
Residential lighting represents a small fraction of all of our overall energy consumption, and only has a limited potential for energy savings. Although we should be conserving wherever we can, CFLs are actually adding to the problem. “CFLs take from 6 to 10 times more electrical energy to produce than standard incandescent bulbs,” says Gary Friedman, a freelance investigative reporter and writer, “and that electrical energy is overwhelming supplied to CFL production facilities by coal-powered electrical plants, which add CO2 directly into the atmosphere, increasing global warming conditions— undermining the very argument for the promotion of CFLs in the first place.”
So do CFLs last 10 times longer than standard incandescent bulbs, and are they recyclable? Although CFLs reportedly use 75% less energy than standard light bulbs, they incur energy losses during operation, which you are not told about. According to Friedman, the “statistic” regarding their energy efficiency is based on the circuitry in the bulb, which is supposed to operate at a specific sustained temperature of 105˚ C. Unfortunately, CFLs operate at an average temperature of 130˚ C or higher, meaning that for “every 10 degree increase, the efficiency of the bulb decreases by 50%.” Also, these higher temperatures cause failures in the bulbs’ circuitry, essentially making them non-recyclable. Even worse, because such high heat is produced in the plastic base of the bulbs, they pose a fire risk. There have been numerous reports of CFLs igniting fires throughout the country, including fatalities.
Then there are the health risks. CFLs are toxic technology. They contain mercury and other carcinogenic substances such as phenol, naphthalene and styrene. Mercury is listed as the third most toxic substance to human health on both the EPA’s and CDC’s list of toxic substances. Break one of these bulbs and you need to call in the hazmat team!
The EPA’s website lists several detailed steps for CFL cleanup, including (1) “Before Cleanup” (people and pets must leave the room, which must be aired out for 5-10 minutes while shutting off all heating/air conditioning units); (2) “During Cleanup” (which includes the warning “DO NOT VACUUM,” as vacuuming “could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor”); and (3) “After Cleanup,” which states all bulb debris should be placed in sealed containers outdoors “in a protected area until materials can be disposed of.” The EPA also warns that you should not leave any bulb fragments or cleaning materials indoors, and recommends you “continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.” Maybe using a drop cloth while changing lights might not be a bad idea.
As if the toxins aren’t enough, CFLs also produce electromagnetic radiation, which has been known to cause a variety of health problems ranging from skin rashes to chronic fatigue, headaches, tinnitus, depression, sleep abnormalities, respiratory, gastric, and memory problems, and even Alzheimer’s and all types of cancer. Additionally, CFLs also produce both UVA and UVC radiation, the most dangerous form of UV radiation.
Recent research released by the National Science Foundation warns that CFLs can cause skin damage, increasing the risk for skin cancer. The study, published in the June issue of Photochemistry and Photobiology, concluded that CFL lights can be harmful to healthy skin cells. Scientists discovered that “cracks in the CFL bulbs phosphor coatings yielded significant levels of UVC and UVA in all of the bulbs, regardless of manufacturer or brand, posing a health risk.” “Cracks” are common in CFL bulbs.
Professor Miriam Rafailovich, lead author of the study, says that “it’s best not to use these bulbs at close range, less than a couple of feet, or look directly at them.” She goes on to say, “It’s incredible that this situation has arisen at all. You should not need suntan lotion to protect yourself from indoor lighting.”
CFLs also cause the body to be exposed to high levels of blue wavelength light, which can impair the body’s immune system and disrupt the pineal gland’s ability to function properly. The pineal gland (third eye) is considered to be the connection to the higher vibrations of consciousness. Maybe this is why CFLs are being forced upon us.
In light of all these facts, CFLs are not a bright idea, and the law forcing us to switch to these toxic technologies should be turned off immediately!
Share this post...
