Director, Safetyissues.com

Perhaps a light has been turned on in Congress by U.S. Representative Joe Barton R-TX who states, “People don’t want Congress dictating what light fixtures they can use. Traditional incandescent bulbs are cheap and reliable. Alternatives, including the most common replacement Compact Fluorescent Lights or CFLs, are more expensive and have serious health hazards — so why force them on the American people?”
Barton has co-authored new legislation, the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act, or H.R. 91, which would repeal this subsection and restore Americans’ freedom of choice to buy the light bulb. This new Bill seeks to overturn the present ban on incandescent light bulbs due to become effective in 2012. Should consumers bear the economic and health costs of this legislation, all in the name of conserving energy?
Let’s explore this ban how it got started and why Congress HAS to vote to overturn it.
In 2007 all the world was a rage with how to safe the environment. The propaganda that there would be significant energy savings by enforcing a ban on incandescent bulbs would or could save 20% on carbon emissions into the environment was started by a report circulated from the United Nations. This was not just a U.S. Senate, and former President Bush gaff at controlling our freedom of choice. I could not confirm at the time of writing this blog which agency or country provided this report. However, suffice it to say this same year at an EU conference hosted by Germany’s Chancellor, Angela Merkel, the European Union’s leaders announced their intention to ban incandescent light bulbs, for the 490 million people living within the EU’s 27 countries, by 2010,” according to the banthebulb. This new legislation being pondered by the EU calls upon members states, “along with EU encouragement [to] immediately launch public information campaigns on the economic and environmental advantages of efficient lighting systems and maximize existing legislation to facilitate the phasing-out of the incandescent bulb.” There was a growing worldwide move to ban incandescent bulbs in such diverse places as Cuba (May ’06), Venezuela (Nov ’06), Australia (Feb ’07) and Ontario, Canada (Feb ’07). Five U.S. states, including California, also considered legislation to ban incandescent bulbs.

Significant to note, I think, is that 100% of all fluorescent light bulbs are made in China!
CFLs are made in factories where Chinese worker are exposed to near lethal amounts of mercury vapor, which is a component of CFLs. These factories are largely powered by coal. Since China lacks the environmental protection laws that we have in Europe and US it is more cost effective to make them there.
Once here, these bulbs cost hundreds of times more to purchase. Sometimes, local utilities have subsidize the cost of purchasing these bulbs bringing the price down to a reasonable level. The bulbs are very toxic, as they contain deadly mercury vapor. Mercury is one of the most toxic elements on Earth. All CFL bulbs contain a minimum of four to five milligrams of mercury. That is enough mercury in one CFL bulb to contaminate 6,000 gallons of clean water. If broken, the lethally toxic mercury puts the health of your entire family at stake. The proper cleanup of a broken CFL would require professional haz/mat services. That can be very very expensive.

Also most important to be aware of is the effect of CFLs lighting on psychological effect they can have on the users. An overlooked hazard of CFLs is there operating frequency. They operate at a frequency that can make people ill by emitting radio frequency radiation that contributes to cause migraines, dizziness, nausea, confusion, fatigue, skin irritations, and eyestrain.
Despite the patriotic brand names of most compact fluorescent light bulbs, none of them are made in America. While most incandescent light bulbs are made in the USA, therefore Instituting the ban would shut down most, if not all plants in the US. This means once again losing an industry thousands more jobs to outsourcing manufacturing. A recent Washington Post story reported that GE is shutting a plant in Winchester, Va., killing 200 jobs in the process.

Dangers of CFL:

Congress claimed to have acted to ban incandescent bulbs because it would be better for the environment and use less energy to use the compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL). However, they have to change this ban because enough scientific evidence has emerged to debunk that old theory. It is now common knowledge that CFLs contain mercury and have to be disposed of carefully. The amount of mercury in one bulb is enough to contaminate up to 6,000 gallons of water beyond safe drinking levels. The EPA recommends an elaborate cleanup ritual, including throwing away any clothes or bedding that has come in direct contact with the mercury from the bulb.

In addition lifespan of a CFL may be reduced by up to 85 percent if you switch it off and on frequently. The high amounts of toxic mercury in these CFLs are about 4mg – 6mg per fluorescent light bulb. Promoting the use of compact fluorescent lights is a serious threat to the health of our environment. Most consumers do not even think about how to properly recycle fluorescent lamps. While the widespread consumption of fluorescent lights may save our nation from wasting electricity on incandescent lights, it may also lead to a mercury contamination catastrophe. Never before in the history of our world has so much mercury been so widely distributed across the environment. The long-term effects of this contamination are currently unknown, but they can only be negative. The real unknown is the degree of harm that will occur if the mercury proliferation is left unchecked.

About 30,000 pounds of mercury are dumped into the environment each year due to the disposal of compact fluorescent light bulbs. That’s an enormous amount of mercury, and almost half of the total amount of mercury emitted into the atmosphere by coal-fired power plants.

Many state governing agencies have even adopted their own regulations regarding fluorescent lights. In California, Minnesota, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin, it is unlawful for anyone to dispose of fluorescent bulbs as universal waste, according to LightBulbRecycling.com.

Safer Alternatives to the incandescent light bulb:

Unfortunately, eighty percent of home lighting today uses highly inefficient incandescent bulbs that convert only five percent of the energy they consume into light. As consumers and nations move away from highly inefficient incandescent lights, most are considering using compact fluorescent light bulbs.
Fluorescent lights are filled with a gas containing low-pressure mercury vapor and argon. The inner surface of the bulb is coated with a fluorescent coating made of varying blends of metallic and rare earth phosphor salts. When a high-voltage current is passed through this vapor, the electricity causes the gasses to “fluoresce” or emit light.

Advantages of LED lighting:

Our government should do more to make LED lighting available and affordable.
LED lights are completely free of mercury, and they generate clean white light using 1/10th the electricity of incandescent light bulbs. They’re more expensive up front (due to the use of high quality components), but they last 50,000 hours and pay for themselves within 1 – 2 years of use due to electricity savings.
In a free society, people should have the choice of what type of lighting they should use. The incandescent ban, though well meaning, is an affront on our freedom of choice. It is an un-American act that puts jobs, health and lives at risk. The Congress, in it’s attempt to repeal the incandescent light bulb ban, would be wise to realize this.
Learn More – Safe Alternative lighting technologies

~ Michelle Markey
Director, Safetyissues.com

Share this article