It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MegaCurious
If you really wanted to save energy, you'd be using OLED light bulbs anyways, not those things.
ANd these are supposed to be a "green" product?
That's outrageous and appalling. Now I wonder what other "green" products are also incredibly bad for our environment?
That's outrageous and appalling. Now I wonder what other "green" products are also incredibly bad for our environment?
Like all fluorescent lamps, CFLs contain mercury, which complicates their disposal.
CFLs, like all fluorescent lamps, contain small amounts of mercury[41][42] as vapor inside the glass tubing. Most CFLs contain 3 – 5 mg per bulb, with some brands containing as little as 1 mg.[43][44] Even these small amounts are a concern for landfills and waste incinerators where the mercury from lamps may be released and contribute to air and water pollution. In the U.S., lighting manufacturer members of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) have voluntarily capped the amount of mercury used in CFLs.[45] In the EU the same cap is required by the RoHS law.
In areas with coal-fired power stations, the use of CFLs saves on mercury emissions when compared to the use of incandescent bulbs. This is due to the reduced electrical power demand, reducing in turn the amount of mercury released by coal as it is burned.[46][47].
In the United States, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimated that if all 270 million compact fluorescent lamps sold in 2007 were sent to landfill sites, that this would represent around 0.13 tons, or 0.1% of all U.S. emissions of mercury (around 104 tons) that year.[48]