If you aren't, you should be. This topic came up a few weeks ago in a Facebook conversation about the government regulations requiring light bulbs to be more energy efficient. The argument was that the government should not take away our right to use inefficient bulbs if we so choose. The "market" should control usage. Maybe we just like incandescent bulbs better, or maybe we are worried about the fact that the new compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs contain mercury. It seems wrong that our government should force us to use products that create toxic waste. Should we be concerned about mercury? After digging deeper this is my answer:
- Yes, we should be concerned about mercury, and
- The mercury case against CFL bulbs is entirely bogus.
Mercury is a naturally occurring but rare element in the Earth's crust. The element and most of its compounds are extremely toxic causing harm to the brain (especially developing brain), heart, kidneys, and immune system at all ages. Fortunately the toxic effects are not caused by low levels of mercury, but unfortunately mercury is difficult to eliminate, so it tends to accumulate in the body over long periods. A highly toxic form, methylmercury, builds up in fish, shellfish and animals eat fish. About half of the mercury in the atmosphere comes from volcanos and other natural sources, but mercury is an often overlooked and serious component of man-made air pollution. The five biggest sources may surprise you.
- Coal-fueled power plants (40-65%)
- Gold mining (11%)
- Coal-fueled cement kilns (6%)
- Chlor-alkaline plants (3%)
- Trash incinerators (3%)
What about CFL bulbs? Even if disposed of improperly, fluorescent bulbs of all kinds would never represent more than a fraction of a percent of the total mercury pollution. If recycled properly, on the other hand, they are perfectly safe and cause no pollution whatsoever. Here are a few links about recycling bulbs.
- Lamp Recycle
- where to recycle fluoresenct tubes
- where to recycle CFL bulbs
- Eco Home on CFL bulb disposal
If we are concerned about mercury pollution, which we should be, and if our concern is genuine rather than an excuse for complaining about energy regulations, we should look on CFL bulbs as one means of lowering mercury emissions by lowering consumption of electricity produced by coal. Those who use mercury content as a reason to repeal the energy regulations say almost nothing about long fluorescent bulbs found in their workplaces, businesses, and shops (even in their own homes). Most ingenuous, they are silent about coal-fired power plants. They claim to be worried about mercury, but obviously they are not.
The problem with digging deeper is knowing where to stop. Each of the above sources of mercury pollution deserves a discussion of its own.
- Proposed Turk Power Plant in Southwest Arkansas
("clean coal" controversy) - Toxic jewelry and the new gold rush
- The Ash Grove Cement kiln in Forement, AR
(pros and cons of tire-derived fuel) - Ashton Chemical Chlor-alkaline plants in Ohio and El Dorado, AR
- ENSCO (El Dorado, AR) and Reynolds Metal (Arkadelphia)
toxic waste disposal
No comments:
Post a Comment