Cleaning Up a Broken CFL

[The Straight Story]

Cleaning Up a Broken CFL
What to Do if a Compact Fluorescent Light (CFL) Bulb or Fluorescent Tube Light Bulb Breaks in Your Home: Overview

luorescent light bulbs contain a small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing. When a fluorescent bulb breaks in your home, some of this mercury is released as mercury vapor. The broken bulb can continue to release mercury vapor until it is cleaned up and removed from the residence. To minimize exposure to mercury vapor, EPA recommends that residents follow the cleanup and disposal steps described below.

This page presents only the most important steps to reduce exposure to mercury vapor from a broken bulb.

► View the detailed recommendations.

► Download and print a three-page PDF version of this overview and the detailed recommendations (91K, about PDF) | en español (30K, about PDF)

1. Before cleanup
* Have people and pets leave the room.
* Air out the room for 5-10 minutes by opening a window or door to the outdoor environment.
* Shut off the central forced air heating/air-conditioning system, if you have one.
* Collect materials needed to clean up broken bulb.

2. During cleanup
* Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder.
* Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.

3. After cleanup
* Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of properly. Avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors.
* If practical, continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.

http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html

[calimary]

1. Good reminder.

Thanks for posting, TSS!

:patriot:

[arikara]

2. Why are they selling us products

that require a 3 page pdf printout and a hazmat suit to clean up if one should get accidentally broken. Most people aren't even aware of how toxic these things are. I had one catch on fire in my kitchen and had to run it still smoking outside. I had no idea that they were so bad at the time and I'm sure my kitchen not to mention myself got a good dose of toxic fumes. I am very resentful over this, and am worried for the small kids getting exposed all the time too.

[The Straight Story]

3. Cause they can. Folks should focus on smoking, not car pollution, cfl, or this:

You got to have an enemy to blame for all the illness and problems, and it is best to target things and people you don't have any part of or contribute to (like driving, using electricity to charge your iphone, buying throw away products that have to be manufactured over and over again, etc - you know the things that might make folks feel guilty and cause them to have to change person habits they are addicted to):

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/The%20Straight%20Story/39

Air Quality Facts
Posted by The Straight Story in General Discussion
Wed Feb 09th 2011, 05:30 PM


Air Quality Facts

* Twenty cities on this year’s list of 25 cities most -polluted by year-round particle levels had cleaner air than last year’s report found.
* Air pollution hovers at unhealthy levels in almost every major city, threatening people’s ability to breathe and placing lives at risk.
* The most widespread kinds of air pollution are ozone (smog) and particle pollution (soot). Breathing either can harm your body and risk your life.
* When inhaled, ozone irritates the lungs, resulting in something like a bad sunburn.
* The American Lung Association leads the fight for healthy air every day. We fight for tighter clean air standards, reduced power plant emissions and cleaner diesel fuels and vehicles.
* Breathing in particle pollution can increase the risk of early death, heart attacks, strokes and emergency room visits for people with asthma, cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
* One in ten people in the United States lives in an area with unhealthy year-round levels of fine particle pollution.
* Do you live near, or work on or near a busy highway? Pollution from the traffic may put you at greater risk of harm.
* Air pollution remains a real and urgent threat to public health in the US, despite real progress since 1970.
* Even with the growing “green movement,” air pollution in some parts of our country actually got worse since last year’s report.
* The American Lung Association fought to strengthen the Clean Air Act in 1990.
* People who work or exercise outside face increased risk from the effects of air pollution.

...


http://www.stateoftheair.org/2010/facts /

LA


Most Americans Breath Unhealthy Air

The American Lung Association’s 2009 State of the Air report was recently released and sheds light on the quality of air Americans are breathing on a daily basis. The report ranks pollution levels in U.S. cities and counties using levels reported between 2005 and 2007. The air quality measurements are collected regularly in cities and counties across the country and are submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The association based their rankings in the report on ozone pollution levels. However, they also collected data on short and long-term levels of particulate pollution. On a positive note, it was found that Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, Charlotte, Washington, D.C. and Baltimore all improved their quality of air.

However, the submitted levels of pollutants led the American Lung Association to declare that sixty percent of all Americans breath unhealthy air where they currently reside. Air pollution levels are at unhealthy levels at one time or another where 186.1 million people live across the country, mainly in cities. The last report found that 125 million Americans lived in such polluted areas. The drastic increase is most likely due to federal ozone standard changes.

The American Lung Association’s Assistant Vice President Janice Nolen stated: “Six out of 10 Americans right now as we speak live in areas where the air can be dirty enough to send people to the emergency room, dirty enough to shape how kids’ lungs develop and even dirty enough to kill.” The varying effects of breathing polluted air include: coughing, heart attacks, lung function decline, lung cancer and even death.

http://isiria.wordpress.com/2009/05/01/mos... /

[CreekDog]

5. burning coal puts mercury into the environment

yes, into yours as well.

did you know that?

[Cronus Protagonist]

17. I don't burn coal inside my flat.

Why start burning something with mercury in it, and add to the totals of direct mercury exposure for myself and my family IN ADDITION?

[CreekDog]

21. you burn coal when you turn on a light

in the majority of places in the USA.

you burn less of it using a CFL.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SidDithers]

25. Oh, this is another smoking thread...

carry on.

Sid

[The Straight Story]

29. Naw, just one based on principle - apply the same principles across the board, but snark is easier

Take the same logic and values some have and then apply to them to something else.

Sometimes they don't like it when the same things are applied to them.

It's never been about smoking, but some people will say that just because they actually see that what they are wanting to do, when applied to things they themselves do, is kind of stupid.

Like folks who want to ban abortion - core value, your body, your choice.

Take that value, apply it elsewhere, and suddenly liberal people become real conservative.

[Shagbark Hickory]

30. It's only temporary... LED bulbs are ON THE WAY FOLKS!

LED bulbs are the newer technology. Some bulbs are already in stores.
I believe these will not only have a more attractive light but use even less energy and not require a hazmat suit to cleanup after should one of them break.
Best of all, they're probably made in china. A country synonymous with quality products.

[jmowreader]

32. It's going to be pretty damn hard to get an LED bulb to break

But what the hell...CFLs are also made in China.

[Shagbark Hickory]

33. Only that last line was sarchasm. LED's are totally +1

I'm excited for them to roll out. CFL's are ugly light and pita to dispose of.

[arikara]

35. Led's that I've seen

look weird. They give everything an unpleasant sick bluey tinge.

[Shagbark Hickory]

36. Yeah but the newer LEDs are not your grandfather's oldsmobile.

If you catch my drift.

[JBoy]

4. Phew. I thought this was about the Canadian Football League.

It ain't broke. 3 downs rules!

[doc03]

6. Pick the damn thing up and put it in a outdoor trash can

case closed. I worked in a steel mill for almost 40 years a broken CFL bulb isn't going to kill me if that din't.

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. Hide under your desk until the all-clear is sounded.

What BS...............

[Kennah]

8. Everyone does know that all fluorescent bulbs contain mercury?

This includes the fluorescent tubes which have been in just about every office since the early decades of the 20th century.

I recall them falling and breaking, more than once, and no one ever gave a rat's butt.

Something to consider the next time building maintenance is replacing one.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Irrelevant-- what is important is...

that there be a continuing of fear and outrage over the life threatening CFL lamp.

[The Straight Story]

12. meh, at my age everything kills you. I still remember mylar...living causes death

Ban living, and no one dies.

[Posteritatis]

13. Remember, we're only supposed to panic over *new* things. (nt)

[Inchworm]

18. LoL- yup and I can't count the sword fights we had with those things

oop.

:hi:

[NYC_SKP]

9. 4. Promptly go out and replace this CFL with an LED...

I know, I know, they're expensive but even at $20/each they pay for themselves and then some as they use even less energy than a CFL and last 4-5 times longer (or more).

No mercury.

Dig it.



:hi:

[The Straight Story]

10. LED products billed as eco-friendly contain toxic metals, study finds

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x390503

:evilgrin:

[NYC_SKP]

15. Oh noes!

LOL! :P

Not you, just that it didn't take long for someone to find an "Oh Noes, evil LEDs" sort of article... I hadn't seen that one.

Again, not disputing what they say or wanting to cast any negative light on your motives, but these crappy Christmas lights are full of lead, not a big surprise, but I don't see that as an indictment of the LED chip industry.

You're quick!

:pals:

My argument back to the LED naysayers is the same as to the CFL haters: the amounts of Mercury spewed into the atmosphere by coal plants burning all the extra electricity needed to power those perfect old incandescents is greater than the little amounts found in fluorescent lamps and tubes.

"Why use CFLs if they contain mercury?

Small amounts of mercury can be released into the environment when CFLs break, or if they are improperly disposed of at the end of their useful lives. The total amount of mercury that could be released into the environment through breakage and improper disposal, however, is small compared to the amount of mercury that doesn't get released into the environment because Americans are choosing energy-efficient CFLs, reducing demand for electricity. Learn more from the Energy Star program about the benefits of using CFLs.

http://www.epa.gov/mercury/consumerinfo.htm#why

:hi:

[CreekDog]

16. it's clear you don't want to answer my question about Mercury

you've responded to several posts but not mine.

and i think when you accuse those who are supported energy conservation through the use of CFL's, when you call them liars essentially --i think a moral person has an obligation to back such a statement up.

but you didn't, i doubt you're interested.

[The Straight Story]

20. Actually, I am mostly for CFL's, have some myself

Point is - there are some folks who will find anything and everything they can to ban/restrict some things based on similar science. Usually because they do X and you do Y, so banning Y is ok.

Old example - ban smoking in bars (where people do not have to go, but choose to) because second hand smoke is bad for you. Same people ignore pollution (which they cause), car exhaust, other things (like CFL) that some can show (as this article does) can be dangerous, etc.

When you start banning/restricting based on something like...how much something can cost health care wise, when you go about telling people their choices are bad and harm others - well someone can easily turn around and show how those same folks are being hypocritical.

I usually offer the following to folks (no takers yet):

I will go out and chain smoke for 2 hours in my garage. Door closed, windows sealed up.

Then they can go into the same (or similar garage) and sit in it while a car runs for 2 hours.

Which one is more dangerous? Which one do people defend the most?

The same people who yell about second hand smoke will suddenly defend how many toxins they contribute to the air we all breathe (versus in a bar) while telling me I am an addict and biased (truth be told, I hate going to bars and only smoke on my front porch anyway, so I don't really - personally - care about smoking in bars. Of course, I am for the right for women to have abortions, even though I am man - but then I truly believe in your body, your choice - key word here being choice).

[Statistical]

23. The only use less energy because they put out less light.

Some deceptive marketing going on with LED products.

[NYC_SKP]

26. Not true in every case, Statistical.

While I am sure that they "put out much less light" quite often is true, and especially in years past, the technology is rapidly improving.

Deceptive marketing or not, LEDs will dominate the market, wouldn't you agree?

Lighting is a very tricky thing to measure, and I'll be the first to admit that I'm an amateur with respect to the science of measurement.

What I have done is acquire dozens of the latest LED arrays and products, from 5,000 lumen 48-watt Bridgelux arrays to Feit and Phillips and other mfgr's Edison Base replacement bulbs.

And I have to conclude (and others agree) that the quality of light from the LEDs is superior to the equivalent CFL and incandescent and they are apparently brighter.

In the world of lighting, "apparently" brighter is more important than any instrument's reading of "brightness".

I had students conduct a comparison, one $19 6.5W LED lasts 30,000 hours, has equivalent light of a 40 watt incandescent or a 9W CFL.
See results below for cost of lamp(s) and electricity for 30,000 hours of light:

Bulb Type Bulbs needed
(30,000 ÷ bulb life) Total Bulb Cost
(Price x number needed) Electricity Needed, watt-hours
(Watts used x hours of use, or 30,000) kWh
(Wh ÷ 1000) Cost @ 15¢/kWh Total Cost
(Bulbs + Electricity)

Incandescent (30,000 ÷ 1,000) 30 $30.00 38 Watts x 30,000 hrs = 1,140,000 Wh. 1,140 $171 $201.00

CFL (30,000/7,000) 4.28 $29.66 9 W x 30,000 hrs = 270,000 Wh. 270 $40.50 $69.66

LED (30,000/30,000) 1 $20.00 6.5 Watts x 30,000 hrs = 195,000 Wh. 195 $29.25 $49.45



:patriot:

[Statistical]

27. The only objective measure of light is lumens.

I challenge you to find a single "60 watt equivalent" LED which has 800 lumens. Hell I challenge you to find ANY LED light that outputs 800 lumens.

In your analysis above the LED comes out ahead merely because it outputs an less light.

While I do agree EVENTUALLY LED will be the superior product currently I challenge you to find a 6.5watt LED that has same output as a 9 watt CFL or 40 watt inc.

LED that don't "cheat" on light output are rather expensive and draw similar power compared to CFL.

Example:
http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-LED/h_d1/N-5yc1vZ1xh3Zbm79/R-202530170/h_d2/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053

12.5 watt LED, 25K hours, 800 lumens. $40ea

http://www.homedepot.com/Electrical-Light-Bulbs-Compact-Tube-Fluorescents/Philips/h_d1/N-5yc1vZbmaeZ15b/R-100671139/h_d2/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053

13watt CFL, 12K hours, 900 lumens. $2ea

The CFL is still ahead in lumens but lets pretend they are equivalent.

25K hours total cost (material + energy).
LED: (1 * $40) + (25,000 * 12.5 / 1000 * $0.10) = $71.25
CFL: (2 * $2) + (25,000 * 13 / 1000 * $0.10) = $36.50

Even if CFL lasted only half of their projected lifespan the total cost $40.50 is significantly less than the price of LED. Also with a $40 bulb one is taking a much larger capital risk. If the bulb lasts only say 15K hours (either due to accident or defect) then the cost rises significantly.

I wish LED were a superior product but so far they simply aren't. Eventually they may and things like the Phillips bulb I linked too (first 800 lumens LED I have seen) are a good sign.

[NYC_SKP]

28. I've got two of those $40 Phillips bulbs and two $19 Feit bulbs....

...purchased at Home Depot and Lowe's, respectively, (H.D. also sells an 8W 450 lumen bulb for under $20).

I've set up comparison racks with three lampholders (as pictured in other reply) to compare with my own bare eyes the quality and brightness of all three types and I think the LEDs are brighter better lights than CFLs or incandescents.

I also have dozens and dozens of loose LED arrays, including the 5,000 lumen 48W array mentioned earlier and shown below:



Well you don't dare look right at that 5,000 lumen Bridgelux array without welding goggles, and it's not really fair to compare it outside of an application in an actual luminaire (fixture), but what fluorescent can come close to that output for 48 watts?

I know we don't disagree on the big picture, just the details, and in any case it's an exciting time in the lighting world!

There's a huge lighting conference in Santa Clara this month, Feb 22-24th, that I'm attending for one day, and I'm looking forward to seeing what's new!

:hi:

http://www.strategiesinlight.com/index.html

:patriot:

[Statistical]

31. How do you like the Phillips 12W 800 lumen bulb?

It is the first one that seems to be willing to be honest without output. 800 lumens is 60 watt equivelent. I have seen LED lights marketed as 60 watt equivelent that are 650, 550, 420, 300, and 280 lumens.

I was thinking of grabbing one of the new Phillips to check it out. $40 is a little steep. Still being semiconductor I expect that $40 will be more like $10 in 2-3 years. Indeed it is an exiting time and long term (10-20 years) LED will likely displace CFL and other bulbs.

I am not anti-LED I just don't like it when companies are fast and loose with the numbers because they can't compete on facts alone. If it were up to me if light doesn't output 800 lumens then you can't legal use the phrase "60 watt equivalent" same would apply to other standardized wattages (25, 40, 60, 100, etc).

[NYC_SKP]

34. I like it a lot, it may even be too orange, but so far I like them.

And no doubt about it, there have been many claims that just didn't stand up to the tests and the industry is now paying the price.

I first saw these Philips lamps at a sustainability conference in SF called West Coast Green and tried to talk the guy out of a sample.

He couldn't do it but did promise to let me know the moment they shipped to stores, which he did.

I've got a collection of crappy LED Edison Base lamps that were really expensive and some really sucked, but this one, the 12W EnduraLED A19 lamp and it's little 8W, 450 lumen brother (at ~$20.00) are pretty pleasing lights.

:P

About the prices, I'm sure they'll go down, the Feit 6.5W (40W equivalent) dropped in price since first introduced.

But I think the price point is set by the calculation in savings, not the manufacturing costs.

Even at $39.95 (ouch) these save money in lamp replacement cost and tons more in the cost of electrons.

Cheers!

:hi:

[ReggieVeggie]

14. here's an idea...be extra careful with CFL bulbs

I've only had one burn out in 10 years (something like 15-20 bulbs) and that bulb I took to the cfl recycling center

[HEyHEY]

19. ROUGHRIDERS! Oh wait.,.....er

[Motown_Johnny]

24. the Canadian Football League isn't in that bad.....oh... nm, n/t