Energy saving light bulbs 'contain cancer causing chemicals'

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 3:06 PM GMT
    The unintended consequences of enviro fascists and banning of incandescent bulbs - we have no other real alternatives except maybe LEDs which are quite expensive. This doesn't even discuss the mercury in these things.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8462626/Energy-saving-light-bulbs-contain-cancer-causing-chemicals.html

    Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on.

    Peter Braun, who carried out the tests at the Berlin's Alab Laboratory, said: “For such carcinogenic substances it is important they are kept as far away as possible from the human environment.”

    The bulbs are already widely used in the UK following EU direction to phase out traditional incandescent lighting by the end of this year.

    But the German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.
    Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 3:33 PM GMT
    Yes Riddler !!! and Thermometers contain Mercury, so I suggest you don't break one in your hands and then lick off that chemical. Enviro Fascists of old pushed this way of knowing what the temperature is on us, and nearly every household in the US bought one, we were sold a bill of goods that wasn't as innocent as it seemed. We so need to be saved from these Enviro Fascists don't we !!!
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Apr 21, 2011 4:01 PM GMT
    This seems kind of stupid.... Other than size and shape, how are CFLs any different from the long, tubular bulbs we've been using for decades?

    How does glass emit: phenol, naphthalene and styrene?

    The article does mention mercury. It says the Hg cannot escape from an intact bulb. Today's CFLs contain less Hg (as a percentage of material used vs. volume of the bulb) then their predecessors.

    More to the point, I did a brief search to find the actual study, abstract, something, and wasn't able to find anything (the article certainly doesn't make any citations), so I find the article a bit suspect.

    I will say I think the term "environmentally-friendly bulb" is a bit of a misnomer given the toxic nature of the substances used to create them. The manufacturing process, as well as the disposal process should be taken into consideration when labeling something as "environmentally friendly", not just its energy consumption.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 7:28 PM GMT
    There are two things that struck me as odd, too:

    Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on.

    If "poisonous materials" are released "when switched on", why shouldn't they be "left on"?

    carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.

    Granted that one doesn't want to go swimming in these substances, but they're not exactly considered carcinogens or toxins, certainly not in trace amounts.
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Apr 21, 2011 7:57 PM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidThere are two things that struck me as odd, too:

    carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.

    Granted that one doesn't want to go swimming in these substances, but they're not exactly considered carcinogens or toxins, certainly not in trace amounts.


    I gave that a pass because the chemicals certainly are not good for you but you're right, phenol and naphthalene are not carcinogens and while styrene is suspected of being a carcinogen, there still isn't enough evidence/research to support that assertion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 9:02 PM GMT
    These bulbs are not because of envirofascists, lol!

    For example:

    http://www.bchydro.com/powersmart/technology_tips/buying_guides/lighting/compact_fluorescent_lamps.html


    and here: "Mr.P.K.Ranganathan is a Director, of SECO Controls P. Ltd. He leads the Energy Services Division, and is a Certified Energy Auditor with more than 12 years of experience in Energy Efficiency studies. He graduated in Electrical Engineering, from IIT Madras and has a Post Graduate Diploma in Management. He has designed and executed large captive Power plants, providing standby Power, to many leading Industrial Organizations. He has introduced many new products in the Utility Sector, for protection and control of HV & EHV – Electrical Power Switchgear. He is a life member of the Institution of Engineers and the Institution of Plant Engineers."

    for this link

    http://www.pennenergy.com/index/energy-issues-and-solutions/hsse/display/4232135956/articles/pennenergy/ugc/hss
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 9:08 PM GMT
    ...and then there's them thar enviro fascists at GE.

    http://www.gelighting.com/na/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 9:10 PM GMT
    The idea that these bulbs have been pushed by "enviro fascists" is total BS.
    riddler is just posting his usual right-wing talking points BS.

    The bulbs have been pushed because they save energy and therefore save consumers money.
    Given the price of oil and the greater and greater demand for it and the need to conserve energy as much as possible - these bulbs are of benefit for ECONOMIC reasons.
    They save money and they stretch our energy supply further.
    Any environmental benefit is purely incidental.

    But, of course, riddler doesn't give a shit about facts or presenting a fair and balanced thread.
    He's only interested in pushing right-wing BS.
    As per usual.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 10:21 PM GMT
    I like LED lights better anyway icon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2011 10:32 PM GMT
    meninlove said ...and then there's them thar enviro fascists at GE.

    http://www.gelighting.com/na/


    Yes, it's nice to be in favor of regulators. It's also remarkable how little you know of GE and how they've tied many of their businesses to government largesse and funding for development of environmental technologies. On the other hand, they also depend on government regulators to get an advantage on competing technologies.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html

    I can accept that some people feel it is less expensive. But that they would render illegal a product in favor of one with questionable trade offs that is even more expensive is offensive on its face.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14310

    Apr 21, 2011 11:36 PM GMT
    Everything causes cancer according to some of these whacky researchers. Anything to get publicity. Energy saving light bulbs cause cancer, what baseless nonsense.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 22, 2011 2:10 AM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidEverything causes cancer according to some of these whacky researchers. Anything to get publicity. Energy saving light bulbs cause cancer, what baseless nonsense.


    Personally (and this will really frost riddler's superior-ass smugness that he knows us oh-so-well) we hate the damn things.

    If one breaks, the industry recommends leaving the room for 15 minutes, then vacuuming all surfaces because of the mercury vapor. The UVs they emit can cause all kinds of problems for people, especially when it turned out standards weren't being followed at the factory level.

    They don't work with dimmers, so to change out the dimmers creates more junk into the landfill.

    An LED light here equivalent to a 50 watt flood light is...... 28.00!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 22, 2011 2:11 AM GMT
    I've come to the conclusion that the only thing that does not cause cancer, is death.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3274

    Apr 22, 2011 2:21 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    roadbikeRob saidEverything causes cancer according to some of these whacky researchers. Anything to get publicity. Energy saving light bulbs cause cancer, what baseless nonsense.


    Personally (and this will really frost riddler's superior-ass smugness that he knows us oh-so-well) we hate the damn things.

    If one breaks, the industry recommends leaving the room for 15 minutes, then vacuuming all surfaces because of the mercury vapor. The UVs they emit can cause all kinds of problems for people, especially when it turned out standards weren't being followed at the factory level.

    They don't work with dimmers, so to change out the dimmers creates more junk into the landfill.

    An LED light here equivalent to a 50 watt flood light is...... 28.00!



    I just bout a dozen floodlights that were LED for about 5 bucks a flood light. They are coming from chinaicon_cry.gif

    If your interested ill Pm you the ebay Link.

    I think the CFL concerns are unfounded. You get more of those chemicals in glue and other plastics than the total weight of the bulbs ( if you assumed whole bulb was a bad chemical)

    Plus they are necessary , especially in the desert. Incandescent just get too hot and waste energy.

    They do last about 4 years. But LED's will replace them in the next decade.