1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Low-energy light bulbs can cause rashes and swelling to sensitive skin, warn experts

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by micropage7, Dec 31, 2011.

  1. Frederik S Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,170 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    361
    First of all the emissions from the power plants are regulated, and in the US they put out under 1% of the total mercury emissions: http://www.mercuryanswers.org/plants.htm

    It depends a bit on coal source and exhaust scrubbing techniques used, but generally coal power is regarded clean in terms of emissions of toxins dangerous to humans.
  2. digibucc

    digibucc

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,914 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,490
    first of all, that data is more than a decade old, we have increased production and done nothing to cut emissions, so the numbers would be MUCH higher now.

    and, the numbers to be more specific are:
    40% of man-made mercury emissions in us, 10% of total north american emissions, and 1% of world emissions. American coal emits 1% of the world's mercury. in 1999, that was 48 tons of mercury. again, that's 40% of our mercury emissions from one source. find a source of mercury higher, i dare you! you can't. it is the single largest producer of man-made mercury!

    were you trying to say that's insignificant? I think you may be reading it wrong.

    edit:
    now that reply was entirely my own, but after replying a quick search for "clean coal" gives some good results. obvious bias is an issue, but if you have a brain in your skull you can tell the difference between lies facts and obfuscation, and simple bias. and since mercury answers is very obviously biased, here is another good one:
    http://quitcoal.org/clean-coal
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2012
  3. magibeg

    magibeg

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,000 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    203
    http://ajrccm.atsjournals.org/content/151/3/669.abstract

    http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15287390590936166

    It's estimated that roughly 56K Americans die each year from air pollution, a large part of which comes from coal power plants. Arsenic is apparently one of the big killers.

    Coal kills. That's all there is to it. Find me a scientific paper on clean coal being clean and we can go from there.
    digibucc says thanks.
  4. OneMoar

    OneMoar

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    3,060 (1.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    687
    Location:
    Rochester area
    and one person dies in a car accident every 10 minutes
    I heat with coal..... do I sound dead ?
    go shutdown all the coal power planets in the usa ... RIGHT NOW and watch what happens .....
  5. magibeg

    magibeg

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,000 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    203
    So basically what you're implying is that i'm a moron because i can qoute numerous scientific studies done on the mortality caused by air pollution?

    Are you implying the studies are bad or that i'm not understanding something?

    Or are you implying that coal causes some form of quick death when burned so the fact you're alive means that it doesn't kill you?


    Let me simplify it for you. Long term exposure to air pollution increases your risk of death, and roughly 56,000 people die from those increased risks each year in the US.
    Chevalr1c and digibucc say thanks.
  6. OneMoar

    OneMoar

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    3,060 (1.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    687
    Location:
    Rochester area
    long term exposure to clue less people lilke you increases my risk of committing murder :banghead:
    quick death ? lolno maby if you live in a chimney
    coal burns very clean and very hot (when burned properly)
    compared to something like wood or oil that burn (cold and dirty)
    so basicly what you are saying is because a meer 56k people POSSIBLY died from some form of air pollution we should outlaw coal .... yea good luck with that let us know when you complete your anti-matter/matter reactor then we can stop possibly killing people with asma .. while you are at it invent a transporter so we can outlaw cars to ......
    and back on topic here
    CF bulbs are nice but LED bulbs are better ....
  7. magibeg

    magibeg

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,000 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    203
    I didn't say any of that. It's almost like you're making shit up as you go along while putting words in my mouth.

    Basically coal compared to any other current power sources, kills vastly more people per watt. No other form of energy comes close to the death rate that coal generates because of its pollution.

    I'm not saying to stop all coal power plants, i'm not saying we should switch over to 'x' power source, i'm simply stating the fact that coal pollutes and kills.

    I will take what you say seriously when you have facts and evidence to back it up. I can provide links for my information. Where are yours?
  8. TheLaughingMan

    TheLaughingMan

    Joined:
    May 7, 2009
    Messages:
    4,998 (2.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,291
    Location:
    Marietta, GA USA
    Well scrubbing doesn't bring emissions down to nil. It just makes it less than a raw burn.

    As far as the life expectancy thing, the same test were done with incandescent bulbs so those are over estimated as well.
  9. OneMoar

    OneMoar

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    3,060 (1.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    687
    Location:
    Rochester area
    undefined reference to ( 'x' power source) at line 7 ignoring
    #define 'x' power source == fission
    error missing class fission aborting with code 3
    }
    }
    show me your links and all show you mine ....
  10. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    13,411 (4.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,233
    it won't take long for this thread to devolve into an anthroprogenic climate change thread. ive had that argument one too many times. you guys have fun...
  11. magibeg

    magibeg

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,000 (0.66/day)
    Thanks Received:
    203
    I'd like to define a few things for you here because you don't seem to follow me.

    When I posted my first comment (with links... you even quoted the links when you replied to me) I was simply pointing out the fact that coal pollution does in fact exist and has a substantial impact on people. I never commented on anything else.

    That was it, my whole post.

    Everything else you inferred from your own mind. You basically make things up that you imagined i'd say then proceeded to launch personal attacks on me for something I never said.

    The point of me saying 'x' power source was because I didn't imply any sort of solution to the power source issue, nor did i want to imply any solution.

    By this point you either have terrible reading comprehension or you are a troll.
  12. Frederik S Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,170 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    361
    I am not talking about coal company green-washing under the marketing term "clean coal". Coal in a controlled burn is a quite efficient fuel, and that the amounts of Hg released into the atmosphere per unit of produced energy is very very small.

    Besides that there is a huge difference in outputting something into the atmosphere compared to a living room. The most likely scenario of a broken bulb is when you are in contact with it, which puts you in the near vicinity of the release.

    And of course the world should quit using coal, it is a no-brainer.
  13. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,599 (13.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,988
    I have more than enough incandescent bulbs to last me until LED's are the norm.
    lemonadesoda says thanks.
  14. unsmart

    unsmart New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    480 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
    I think people are overlooking the most important question. Can a CFL power supply be used to power a tube preamp, after adding a bridge rectifier?
  15. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,089 (2.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    913
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    There are plenty of Low-Energy Light bulbs with double envelopes that block most if not all UV light...

    So this argument is weak imo.

    http://www.gelighting.com/na/business_lighting/faqs/health.htm#3
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamps_and_health#Ultraviolet_radiation_risk
    " The report states that most bare spiral lamps tested gave off more UV than the 60 watt incandescent lamp tested, but that the double-envelope CFLs emitted less UV."

    There is no reason to keep the Incandescent light Bulb around anymore, unless you need the heat I guess... keep some food warm or something...
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2012
    magibeg, Chevalr1c and digibucc say thanks.
  16. BlackOmega

    BlackOmega

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2009
    Messages:
    624 (0.31/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Nah, it's not. I have monitored the electricity output with a kill-a-watt meter. The voltages are pretty stable, I get very little fluctuation.
    I think it's just cheapo bulbs.
  17. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,555 (1.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    908
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    Nonsense, mercury is enclosed in a sealed glass tube. Mercury vapor comes in contact with you only if you break the bulb. You get more mercury and other heavy metals by eating large (carnivore) fish than from (broken) light bulbs.

    Have you had your tuna meal today?
  18. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,446 (6.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,415
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Maybe we just hate being told what we can and cannot do by someone 1000 miles away. USA is supposed to be a country of freedoms, not authoritiarian ideals. The EPA exemplifies what this country is not.

    There are many, many situations where incandescent is preferred to CFL (e.g. outdoors in the cold, locations where both heat and light are required, bulbs in bathrooms and fancy overhead lights, etc.) and they are unlawfully denying that choice.

    What if Congress (or any governing body) came along and decided that only ARM architecture would be allowed because they're theoretically more "efficient?" Say good bye to your choice of AMD and Intel. They'd have to adapt (switch to ARM) or die, just like all those light bulb manufacutrers formerly in the USA failed to do. This is the exact same oppressive decisions that goes against the very fabric of being human (the ability to choose for one self). I don't care what excuses are used to justify it, it is wrong. The market can decide for itself.


    And you know what, incandescent bulbs, just like flourescent, are designed to fail. All it takes to make an incandescent bulb last pretty much forever is a thicker filiment. A prime example is the bulb at Livermore that has been burning for over a century now: http://www.centennialbulb.org/
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2012
    digibucc says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  19. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,555 (1.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    908
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    The problem is that ppl won't use incandescent just where they are still really good and economical. For example for toilette. You usually don't use it for too long but you need the light to start working instantly, not after 30 sec or 1 minute. Same for basement or sensor powered lights. They don't light for long but they need to start emitting light instantly. If ppl would actually use them only for that they'd still be available for sale. But since ppl are known not to obey anything, they just stopped making them by law.

    Honestly, CFL is just a bridge between incandescent and LED. We are already using CFL in all rooms for years and last few years we replaced many bulbs with LED. Especially where lights are ON for long periods. Only incandescents are used for the sensor light at the main door and the sensor light in the garage where they both work for very short periods of time.
  20. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,446 (6.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,415
    Location:
    IA, USA
    That's exactly what I do. CFLs replaced all the bulbs here that have a nasty habit of blowing weekly. All the ones that last for months if not years on incandescent have remained incandescent.


    The EPA would have denied access (technically already did) to those outdoor incandescecnt lamps had Congress not intervened.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  21. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,555 (1.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    908
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    If you mean the street lighting, we aren't using them for ages, well at least here in Slovenia. All the public lighting is using either CFL or metal-halide class bulbs. When it gets dark, you see them go on slowly. Especially when it's cold and you see them start as a very weak light and then turn slowly into extremely powerful light. Not sure how it is with this stuff in USA.
  22. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,446 (6.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,415
    Location:
    IA, USA
    I was not talking about street lighting. You were talking about sensor lights as was I. The EPA put minimum power requirements on all bulbs allowed to be sold in the USA and virtually all incandescent bulbs were below that requirement. In other words, if you lived in the USA and the EPA regs stayed in place, you would either have to stock up on incandescent (and hope you never run out), buy CFL, or buy LED.

    That's my whole point: they didn't care if the incandescent bulb usage was sensible, almost ALL were banned.


    As far as city/intersection streetlamps go, I'm pretty sure they're mostly metal-halide. The newer ones are probably something else but that's what the older ones were.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  23. digibucc

    digibucc

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,914 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,490
    that's the point imo. it's not like they arbitrarily said no more incandescent bulbs. So what about maximum emissions from a vehicle? a power plant? are those ok to regulate, just not light bulbs?
    i recognize what you are saying, and i get the issue. but quite honestly, if you've got a problem being told what to do you are on the wrong planet, let alone in the wrong country.

    did you read about the NDAA being signed New Year's? This is not a free country, there are bad things happening, and when you complain about light bulbs you just seem silly.

    EDIT: for those that haven't heard, NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act). Long story short, it will allow US citizens suspected of "terrorism" (wonderfully vague word, ain't it?) to be held without trial, by the military inside of the united states. that's a radical departure from the founding of this country, and in my mind can not turn out good.
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2012
  24. CJCerny

    CJCerny

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    855 (0.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    248
    Location:
    Akron, OH
    I think it's important to remember that flourescent lights have been used for decades now in office building and stores and just about any large building where it was not economically feasbile to use incandescent lights. If there were any real health dangers involved in using them, we would likely already have known about it years ago. CFL "bulbs" use exactly the same technology, just on a smaller scale. It's just standard human fear of change and nothing more.
    robn says thanks.
  25. Raw

    Raw

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    Messages:
    454 (0.36/day)
    Thanks Received:
    97
    I stocked up on incandescent bulbs early last year.
    I bought enough 75 and 100 watters to last till I croak and my great, great grandkids will be enjoying them and passing them on to their kids.
    I spent over $500.00 at my local Lowes store and bought them out.
    I got every last bulb on their shelves and out of their back room stock.
    WHY?
    Because I could.
    Because I don't like big brother forcing me to do it his way.
    Because I happen to LIKE incandescent lighting.
    Because I believe in freedom of choice.
    Because this is a good example of the extremist environment movement influencing government to force citizens to follow their agenda. I can't believe our elected officials are so willing to go to extremes that they would force citizens to buy something that a minority decides is good for everyone. The newer bulbs are costing much more, not lasting as long as promised, and more dangerous. Most folks are trying to do right by the environment but thats not good enough for the fear mongers. Listen people, you better wake up and let your voice be heard because a big part of our government thinks that they need to tell us what to do because they are smarter than us and know what is best for us. That's why our country is broke, we're paying higher prices for gasoline, and our jobs are going out of the country. Tell me again how smart they are.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page