Page 70 - Spring2013

posed environmental and economic savings. if we don’t want it to burn out as rapidly as the fifty-cent bulbs it replaces,
Second, do they last eight to fifteen times that takes a number of minutes or more to achieve optimal brightness and
longer than incandescent bulbs? Definitely not. efficiency, that works efficiently for less than half of its rated lifespan
Here as well, the bulbs’ real life performance (which is a fraction of what many manufacturers claim), and that requires
falls far short of manufacturer and government extreme care to dispose of at the end of its life or after accidental break-
claims. Our family’s personal experience sup- age, and most often just ends up in a landfill, serving as yet another toxic
ports this―we had to change two just last week, source of pollution.
and neither was more than two years old―as do Oh, and you also need two of them to get the same light output as a
numerous studies. Part of the problem—and the single incandescent, but each now costs about four times more than one
irony here is as thick as the butter on my morning of those. This is progress and will save the earth? Really, this stuff is too
bread—is that the very act of turning a CFL on ironic to make up.
and off can greatly reduce its lifespan.
A major study regarding the lifespan and WHEN DARKNESS IS BETTER THAN LIGHT
light output of CFLs concluded, “Applications Yet, we have reason for even greater concern. Many people report
in which lighting is used only briefly (such as that they dislike or react negatively to the quality and type of light CFLs
closets, bathrooms, motion detectors and so produce. Headaches, eye strain, and a host of other issues have been as-
forth) will cause CFL bulbs to burn out as quickly sociated with CFLs.
as regular incandescent bulbs . . . When initially Even more alarming, a recent study showed that the protective CFL
switched on, CFLs may provide as little as 50 coating was prone to wear and cracking. When this coating was compro-
2
percent to 80 percent of their rated light output mised, the bulbs emitted a very harmful form of light, damaging to both
and can take up to three minutes to reach full eyes and skin. Even worse, every bulb tested in the study showed cracks
brightness.” in the coating. “Cells exposed to CFLs exhibited a decrease in the pro-
5
Also notice that the above study and others liferation rate, a significant increase in the production of reactive oxygen
point to the fact that CFLs take many minutes species, and a decrease in their ability to contract collagen.” Ironically,
3
to reach full light potential, a significant prob- the now banned incandescent bulbs had no such issues.
lem for many home lighting applications, where Thus, CFLs are not just a bad choice for indoor lighting or for en-
people are briefly in a bathroom, closet, or some vironmental stewardship but should be avoided and replaced as soon as
other space and need light for far less than ten possible because of danger to health. So much for all the promised savings
minutes. Before a CFL has reached optimal for people and planet. If only we could get our money back. Don’t turn out
brightness or efficiency, it will already have been the lights just yet
turned off. Fortunately, we can still find the old style incandescent, and many
Thus, we have been forced to adopt a light people have been stocking up on them while they have opportunity.
bulb that must remain either on or off at all times Amazon sells a case of twenty four 100-watt bulbs for around fifteen
Continued on page 80

MERCURY MYTHS AND MISSTATEMENTS

CFL supporters argue that incandescent lights create more mercury pollution than CFLs; their tortured logic claims that
since mercury is released into the atmosphere from the use of coal in power plants and the incandescent lights use more
electricity, then the incandescents create more mercury pollution than CFLs. But the CFLs are not much more efficient
than incandescents and, more importantly, use of coal is on the decline as a power source, especially in the U.S. The
claim that incandescents create more mercury pollution is largely based on emissions data from older coal power plants.
Many coal plants are being converted to natural gas and new natural gas plants are coming on line to replace retiring coal
8
plants. Such myopic thinking plagues many “environmental” regulations, which have no predictive power for changes
in culture and technology, changes that will have far greater impacts on the environment than intrusive, industry-driven
mandates. And, of course, when a bulb breaks in your house, you have mercury pollution at close range, not diffused into
the atmosphere, which poses real health dangers.
Probably the happiest people about the incandescent ban and CFL boon are those in the Chinese mercury and manu-
facturing industries along with their U.S. lobbyists. China is the world leader in mercury production and the only place
in the world CFLs are manufactured. Since the use of mercury in amalgam fillings is declining, the new CFLs provide a
6,7
new market for the toxic metal.
70 Wise Traditions SPRING 2013 SPRING 2013 Wise Traditions