Are energy saving lightbulbs dangerous?

Question

I heard the new energy saving lightbulbs contain a small amount of mercury. If broken what is the risk to your house? I also heard (unable to verify) that a homeowner dropped a quantity of them on the floor and had to pay $2,000-$3,000
for decontamination. I'd like to use them but I'm a little wary

Answer 1

they contain enough mercury that they should not be tossed out with the trash but either recycled or disposed of in the same location you would take paint, household chemicals, etc. the primary concern is groundwater contamination.

as far as the scenario you describe, it would not the the smartest move to lick the floor where you dropped the bulb. the glass also presents a hazard!

should you break a bulb, sweep up the fragments, wrap them in cardboard or - if you must - a small heavy guage plastic bag and take it to a facility like the one described above.

Answer 2

There's not much mercury in a lightbulb, but its not safe to breathe. Eventually the small amount will dissipate but as the Clinton Administration's expert scientists said...There's no safe level of mercury exposure. Its a risk, but a small one. The only issue is if you have dozens of CFL bulbs and have a habit of breaking them a lot in your house.
LED's will replace CFL's and incandescents once the prices become reasonable and manufacturers make them in bulk.

One option to look at: Skylights, and even adding a window or two.

Answer 3

Just don't use these bulbs in a situation where you can dim the lights, they can't handle it and burn out really fast. If you really want to save some energy and have a light that lasts seemingly forever, invest in LED bulbs. They are a little more up front, but emit less heat, use less electricity, last longer, and can handle any lighting situation (dim, flash, full on, long use). LED have no mercury and are completely safe.

Answer 4

You shouldnt worry excessively about the mercury content in CFL bulbs, its highly likely you have more mercury in your mouth, in fillings.

Whilst the amount of mercury used in production a CFL bulb is at most 6mg, the average mercury content is 4mg. The total emissions of mercury created by a CFL bulb from electricity consumption over its lifetime is about 2.4mg of mercury. In comparison the emissions from an incandescent light bulb through electricity consumption is about 10mg. Therefore overall CFLs result in a slightly less amount of mercury emitted over the lifetime of a CFL bulb.

When mercury is released into the environment from incorrect disposal or burning of fossil fuels, and falls back to earth and interacts with bacteria this creates a far more dangerous mercury compound known as methylmercury. This is the substance which is currently a danger in fish and our water supply.

Recycled CFL bulbs are crushed in a machine that uses negative pressure ventilation and a mercury absorbing filter allowing the mercury to be reclaimed for reuse.

If all of the USA used CFLs this would reduce the annual mercury emissions by 7 tonnes per year. For CFLs to be environmentally ineffective in reducing mercury over the expected 5 year life of a CFL, the USA would have to incorrectly dispose of 8 750 000 000 CFLs to landfill, this is impossible to achieve even with extreme neglect.

There is also a reduction of 38kg of Co2 per CFL per year and an overall saving of 14% on your electricity bill.

Mercury is also present in every day objects in greater amounts than a CFL, like your cell phone and highly likely the monitor you are looking at now. Thermometers, Barometers and Thermostats. To name just a few.

For a detailed look at mercury in CFLs and how to clean up a broken CFL;

http://howtosaveenergy.blogspot.com/2007/05/cfl-mercury-myths.html

Energy Saver
http://howtosaveenergy.blogspot.com

Answer 5

I have never seen any significant mercury content in them, and a regular light bulb is just as dangerous, if not more, in different ways. (High heat index, major risk of fire if covered, not well ventilated, etc.)

Go with the energy saving option. Less dangerous even if what you heard is accurate, they're actually less likely to break than the normal ones, and it's better on the environment.

Answer 6

People have been using the regular long tube or circular fluorescent tubes for decades and they had far, far more mercury in them and were are much easier to break. The energy -savings benefits as well as other environmental benefits (ie-they last many times longer than the incandescent bulbs they replace--less waste ,less trucking ,etc) Far outweigh the very minimal risks posed by the mercury in the compact fluorescent. So yes , I use and will continue to use compact .fluorescent bulbs

Answer 7

Considering the types of foods we put into our mouths on a regular basis (fast-food, chemicals to keep products "fresh", chemicals to produce our food, dyes and colors to make our foods pretty, etc...), I doubt that the new style bulb is any more dangerous.

Still, I wouldn't suggest eating them, the glass may pose a hazard to your health.

I have already started replacing my old bulbs to conserve energy and money! It hasn't been six months and I can already tell the difference in my electric bills!

If you start salivating like a rabied dog and can't pee, then I would start worrying, since those are the symptoms of mercury poisoning.

Answer 8

They are not dangerous. While CFLs have trace levels of mercury in them, they actually reduce global mercury emissions levels by reducing the amount of coal combusted in coal fired power plants. Coal combustion is the number one cause of mercury emissions, and the energy saved by using a CFL (up to 75%) reduces total coal combustion.

That said, do not throw used CFLs in the trash. Most of them last over 8,000 hours, so you will not go through them quickly!

Answer 9

You heard that? Where did you hear that? If you stop and think about it for a minute, you would realize how unlikely what you're saying is. I sincerely doubt that a product would be put on the market that has so many potentially horrible negatives.

Answer 10

I have been using CFL'S since they first became available. It takes quite a bit of horsing around to break one(intentionally aiming something their direction). The wattage is lower too.