Low Energy Lightbulbs : Mercury

HEADRAT

HEADRAT

HEADRAT

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
21,525
Location
Cambridge, UK
Hi,

Just watched a report on BBC that shows the low energy lightbulbs contain mercury which means that they are considered "hazardous waste" and you can't just throw them in the bin if/when they fail.

Also more interestingly if one breaks you need to be careful :-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7172662.stm

Official advice from the Department of the Environment states that if a low-energy bulb is smashed, the room needs to be vacated for at least 15 minutes.

A vacuum cleaner should not be used to clear up the debris, and care should be taken not to inhale the dust.

Instead, rubber gloves should be used, and the broken bulb put into a sealed plastic bag - which should be taken to the local council for disposal.
Click to expand...

I find it incredible that after years of pushing these "low energy" bulbs to the general public that this advice is only now coming to light! ( pun intended ;) )

HEADRAT
 
Am I missing something here or is the Environment agency worried about it's future due to government cutbacks ?

Surely there are millions of other things to worry about other than 5mg of mercury in a lightbulb. I mean, realistically, how many bulbs does the average household dump in a year. And 5mg of mercury is harly going to kill an entire household (considering most of us have more than that in the fillings in our teeth) - or the old thermometers hanging around.

Why don't they deal with the old car batteries, the oils and the dozens of other poisonous chemicals first. Next they will be telling us not to use rechargebles, or solar panels, oil-filled radiators or newer LED's (each of which has just as dangerous chemicals in)

Or maybe that will make the news next year, when they need to justify their existance. Maybe I need to get rid of that radioactive radium stuff I scapped off that old clock face before someone spots it luminesing.

I work with mercury compounds and vapours every day of the week. And although very toxic, it's not exactly a monster compared to some other stuff we have in our households/lives.
 
Last edited:
watched this morning and laughed my socks off.

Like has already been said I am sure there are bigger things to worry about than a paltry 5mg or thereabouts of mercury!

Was particularly amused by the 'do not inhale the dust' advice'.
 
I thought it was common knowledge they had mercury in. Not sure why it's suddenly come to the forefront again.
 
Aye, it seems odd that suddenly they are being considered so dangerous.
From what I remember reading you actually ingest more mercury than you get in the bulbs if you eat any fish based products on a regular basis, and the only real risk is if you're cleaning up hundreds of broken bulbs a year.

Mercury is dangerous but the amount found in the bulbs is miniscule and you're at much greater risk from other things that contain it.

The only thing they really need to do is to put out some sort of recycling/disposal bins for dead bulbs to assist in the disposal of them (you could do it at tips and the supermarkets).
 
I thought all the fuss was about the fact the packaging doesn't mention mercury rather than the fact that you will instantly die it a bulb breaks.
 
No different to other fluorscent lighting, which almost invariably contain a small amount of mercury, without it they wouldnt work. I think the Environment Agency is just pointing out that they shouldnt be disposed of as normal waste.
 
gurusan said:
How much mercury actually is harmful?
Click to expand...

Not much, but its effect will vary from person to person and from one form to another. Thing is, while the amount of mercury in a tube doesnt change, the amount of mercury vapour at the end of a lamps life should be conisderably reduced since over time the vapour is absorbed into the lamps coating.
The problem is that mercury gets into the ground easily and ends up in water sources if its not disposed of properly.
 
Last edited:
As I said, they must be trying to justify their existance for some reason.

And just to put their mercury thing into perspective, here are some facts found on t'internet about batteries which they would be better off telling people about in my opinion.


Types :
Alkaline : Cassettes players, radios, appliances
Carbon-zinc : Flashlights, toys, etc.
Lithium :Cameras, calculators, watches, computers, etc.
Mercury : Hearing aids, pacemakers, cameras, calculators, watches, etc.
Silver : Hearing aids, watches, cameras, calculators
Zinc : Hearing aids, pagers
Nickel-cadmium : Cameras, rechargeable appliances
Small sealed lead-acid :Camcorders, computers, phones, etc.


Nearly all the battery types above contain hazardous compounds.
An average person owns 2 button cell, 4 Ni-cads, 10 Alkaline and 5 Lead-acid.
An average family buys 32 batteries a year. 10 per person.
An average person throws out 8 batteries per year.
Only 1 in 10 people dispose of batteries properly.
 
Last edited:
They don't seem to smash as much as normal bulbs, thinking about it I don't think I have ever seen a smashed up one.

When I was younger (honestly I was, it wasn't recently) I found some long strip bulbs and I smashed em up on some rocks, muahahah. It was messy and bad forthe environment but watching them expllode was fun. My dad told me off though :(
 
the hazards of batteries has been well known, and publicised for years. Unfortunately the general public ignore the advice and still throw batteries in with general waste.
 
This is more for environment protection than protecting people (hence its form the environment agency).

5mg is small, but since the government is pushing everyone to use these bulbs then the usage will increase. That could lead to thousnads of tons of mercyrz bein dumped in the enviornment each year.
 
By the time the incandescents are phased out altogether (probably 6 years time) - and you average family is disposing of say 2 of these useless compact florescents a year (probably a grand total of 8mg of mercury) - High power LED's will be coming in everywhere and the government wont care about the toxins in the florescents anymore.

Just for the record, I switched entirely to LED bulbs in our house last yeat, and have saved £120 so far on electric (roughly £10 less on lighting a month)- and I used to have the compact (so called energy saving florescents) lightbulbs everywhere. Now that is energy saving.
 
Last edited:
kibblerok said:
Love the advice to seal it in a bag and take it to your local council. Like thats feasable or even remotely likely.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I found that amusing, can you imagine taking it to your local council they'd just laugh at you!

divosuk said:
Now that is energy saving.
Click to expand...

I hope you're still allowed to use the saying "it's like blackpool illuminations in here", a saying I promised myself I'd never use ;)
 
I know, the last time I went to our local refuse site with an old car battery, the guy told me to just chuck it in the compactor after me asking him whether he had a place to dispose of it safely.
 
Has anybody else noticed the deluge of anti energy saving bulb news in the media this week?

First it was energy savers causing epileptic fits, then it was energy savers causing people to have skin irritations and today it is mercury poisoning. This is all within the last week!

Coincidence or campaign by lobbyists with a vested interest in energy consumption? Makes you wonder?

The key point here that the media is missing is that some of these energy savers last 15000 hours of use which is roughly 1.7 years of constantly being switched on. Therefore it would be fair to say that people will not be disposing of as many light bulbs per year to landfill etc.

Although I do agree that a public information campaign is needed to highlight the issues and more importantly the benefits of using CFL bulbs. If we are to encourage people to migrate to CFLs we should at least ensure they have full access to recycling information, facilities and adequate information about the contents of the bulb and how if/when the bulb breaks how to clear-up and dispose of it correctly.
 
Burning coal to generate electricity vents mercury (and a whole load of other nastiness) to the atmosphere. The extra electricity that incandescent lamps use, produces more mercury through this method than is contained in the compact fluorescent lamp.

So the real choice is: more mercury, released uncontrolled into the environment with incandescent vs. less mercury, cleverly contained in small glass jars. Seems like a no brainer to me, especially when considering all the other toxins coal combustion causes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom