Toxic “Cure”
I've mentioned the mercury present in compact fluorescent light bulbs before, but Britain has just issued an astonishing alert about the problem. They say that a room must be evacuated for at least 15 minutes if one of the bulbs breaks. There are a long list of other safety measures as well.
Energy-saving light bulbs are so dangerous that everyone must leave the room for at least 15 minutes if one falls to the floor and breaks, a Government department warned yesterday.
The startling alert came as health experts also warned that toxic mercury inside the bulbs can aggravate a range of problems including migraines and dizziness.
And a leading dermatologist said tens of thousands of people with skin complaints will find it hard to tolerate being near the bulbs as they cause conditions such as eczema to flare up.
The Department for Environment warned shards of glass from broken bulbs should not be vacuumed up but instead swept away by someone wearing rubber gloves to protect them from the bulb's mercury content.
In addition, it said care should be taken not to inhale any dust and the broken pieces should be put in a sealed plastic bag for disposal at a council dump – not a normal household bin.
None of this advice, however, is printed on the packaging the new-style bulbs are sold in. There are also worries over how the bulbs will be disposed of.
The Daily Mail made up a handy warning sheet, but screwed it up by using radiation trefoils as the warning symbols. They should have used the toxic symbol - the traditional skull and crossbones. There are additional health warnings out now that the light from the bulbs actually causes serious flareups of certain common forms of eczema.
Lovely. The "cure" is literally worse than the disease. Lighting represents a fraction - a very small fraction - of the average home's energy use. Now the governments are demanding you install toxic waste in your home.
Energy, Environment | Gaius Sunday, 6 January , 2008
By syn, Sunday, 6 January , 2008 @ 12:28 pm
Wait a minute, hold on here!
Long before the government demand was set in motion….
people like Independent-Moderate blog-king Instapundit Glenn Reynolds was waging a campaign that America needs a billion of these new-age bulbs so that we can rid ourselves of our addiction to oil.
These days it’s hard to tell which side of the road the ‘independent’ middle-of-the-roader will be on.
This time I’m not blaming the government on the light-bulb ban.
By Uncle Pinky, Sunday, 6 January , 2008 @ 1:41 pm
This time I’m not blaming the government on the light-bulb ban.
Well, I’ll do it for you. Prof. Reynolds can do many things. He could threaten to drink more puppy smoothies if you do not install CFCs but he certainly can not fine you, arrest you or give you a record for using incandescent bulbs.
These days it’s hard to tell which side of the road the ‘independent’ middle-of-the-roader will be on.
Who cares? What business is it of the government? Trust me, Britain is the thin edge of the wedge as we’ve seen here with smoking bans and trans-fat bans. Nanny-statism is, perhaps, more rampant there now, but it’s one of those problems that never goes away.
“Constant Vigilance” as Mad Eye Moody would say. (Maybe I don’t have to apologize for reading the Harry Potter books, they’re a kind of allegorical Swiss Army knife.)
By NortonPete, Sunday, 6 January , 2008 @ 2:32 pm
Uncle Pinky,
On target. In the US.
This passed in the “Clean Energy Act of 2007″ with this provision:
-Light bulbs. The sale of most incandescent light bulbs will be banned by 2014. Exempt from this ban are various specialty bulbs, including appliance bulbs, colored lights, and 3-way bulbs.
This will cost us all big time. GE and Philips will shift production and normal lightbulbs will cost more as 2014 approaches.
By Evil Hr Lady, Sunday, 6 January , 2008 @ 3:44 pm
I wish gov’ts would let the free markets decide what kind of bulbs to use.
By feeblemind, Sunday, 6 January , 2008 @ 10:48 pm
Of course it would be better if the customer was allowed to choose the type of light bulbs they want. As for the risk from CFLs. The number of people killed by CFLs every year is zero. The number of people electrocuted in their homes per year is about 450. So for those of you worried about miniscule risk, Should you remove your CFL bulbs which have never killed anyone, or should you simply disconnect your electricity which is known to kill hundreds of Americans every year?
By syn, Monday, 7 January , 2008 @ 8:31 am
< ?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> < !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
I must disagree, the American people drove the government into banning the light bulbs. Why would you believe that Americans issuing a campaign of 1 billion new-age bulbs in America is of little consequence? This is the very same way Americans drove smoking bans and now the up-incoming trans fat ban; spastic, hypochondric freaks who believe the government is capable of preventing all death and disease if they could just get everyone to eat, drink, ****, smell, exercise, screw in the correct bulb, exactly the same. I live in NYC the capitial of government bans, very few voted Bloomberg's government-banning administration out of office!. You say the government does the banning, why then are Americans consistantly voting into power politicans who enact these bans. I still question the moderate, independent voter because they haven't shown themselves to be very stable about whether they want govenrment intrusion or not. If NYC is any indication, apparently the only place moderate, independents want the government to stay out of is the bedroom, everywhere else in the house is okay for the government intrusion. Americans are screwing themselves into nanny-statism, the government is simply responding to their demands.
(Edit, language)
By syn, Monday, 7 January , 2008 @ 8:43 am
Further, when the ‘1 billion new-age bulb’ campaign began, I seem to recall that those advocating everyone in America go out and buy the new-aged bulb deny time and again that the bulbs were not harmful and rejecting them was backward idiocy.
Now you’re going to convince me that these fine Americans had nothing to do with encouraging the government ban?
Memories can be short but come on man,it was just a couple of months ago that Pajama Media along with Instapundit and various other great intellects waged this ‘1 billion new-aged bulb’ campaign…you remember all that don’t you?
By Uncle Pinky, Monday, 7 January , 2008 @ 12:07 pm
syn,
The thing is when the goobs who want to ban things march on up to the government, the government should say “No, that it not what we are supposed to be doing.” I’ve got no problem with the ‘1 billion new-age bulb’ campaign but they should not be able to force their pestilent bulbs on anyone who doesn’t want them.
What’s the new slogan going to be? “Keep your hands of my ovaries but stick your nose in my light-sockets and deep-fryers?” PJ Media and Instapundit were not calling for federal or state regulation, they were using a market campaign to popularize CFC’s, increase demand in the hopes that the product would get better. Kos tried the same thing. “Market”: it’s a good word that ought to have “Free” permanently linked to it.
When you give up any personal liberties to governmental forces they will use it as a precedent to take as much as they can. Then, when they take something that you like, you are well and truly boned unless you have the money and the pull to get it into the higher courts.