In the comments to the Install energy efficient lighting action, a comment from “whale call” points out that there are environmental concerns with using compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs).
It’s a good point - CFLs do indeed include traces of mercury - a toxic metal. It’s an issue that’s been picked up in other enviro-blogs around, but it’s probably pertinent to mention here as well.
I did a bit of digging and found that the amount of mercury in a given bulb is about the equivalent to the amount contained in a watch battery - so it is very small - but it is still important to dispose of CFLs carefully.
Manufacturers have reduced the amount over time - I’m aware of some Philips products having a super-small amount of mercury - “The new Extreme Low Mercury designated products can be recognised by a logo on the packaging and product,” according to this press release. But the mercury remains…
So there is a question over whether the mercury in the bulbs outweighs the energy (and emissions) saving benefits.
The US EPA did a study that found the amount of mercury expelled through coal-fired power plants being higher than the total of a CFL when taking into consideration the amount of energy required for an incandescent bulb - the graph is displayed on Wikipedia and in this article at Treehugger.
Although the EPA study is US-centric, Australia’s electricity production is heavy reliant on coal, so the figures would be similar in Oz.
At the moment there are no recycling or disposal programs for CFLs in Australia (that we’re aware of anyway - has anyone heard/found any different?) - so they will unfortunately mostly end up in landfill. I’m told that landfills have a seal to stop contaminants from leaching into the soil and ultimately the ground water.
Although this situation is far than ideal, on balance, WWF still recommends using CFLs over incandescents. But certainly keep an eye out for recycling and disposal facilities in the future…
thanks for starting this thread grant — it certainly needs discussion -
most manufacturers of these globes use 5 milligrams of mercury in each bulb, and you have started the discussion about mercury — wal mart’s goal of selling 100,000,000 this year puts one tonne of mercury into the environment — and the eco footprint of mercury oxide production and mining is not taken into the supposed savings from cfl’s.
yes, cfl’s use less electricity than incandescents to use, but this is not the same story when it comes to making them — incandescents have a far lower manufacturing footprint, and a zero disposal footprint - when you add the manufacturing and disposal components of cfl’s to the equation, the so called savings are overwhelmed by carbon producing manufacturing methods, as well as the radioactive gas issue, which seems to be no problem for consumers –these globes are not even marked that they contain radioactive material –
and landfill in australia does use ‘liners’ but only when the dump is in close proximity to a waterway or watertable, and many of these liners leak.
the technology is simply not there to handle the waste from these globes safely.
Hi whale call.
I’m interested to know more about your claim that the amount of energy used to produce CFLs outweighs the energy saved over their lifespan. Do you have any further pointers to research or articles to support this? Most analysis I’ve seen of CFLs looks at the life-span of the globe, but doesn’t extend to manufacturing. But even so, my understanding is that the energy saved is greater than the energy consumed, so I’d be interested in knowing more…
Given that the CFLs are 75% more efficient and have a life-span of 8+ times an average incandescent, I’d be surprised to find out that a total life-cycle analysis would come out in favour of incandescent bulbs.
For the record, there are recycling facilities for CFLs available in the US, so in the case of the Wal Mart example one hopes that these recycling facilities should be promoted and utilised to reduce the amount of CFLs going to landfill.
Also - it’s clear that we need recycling facilities in Australia for CFLs if they do become the norm, which it appears they will. Do you (or any other Futuremakers) have any ideas for an action we can post here to help get those facilities in place?
Thanks in advance.
I just found this article from the ABC:
And that was on the basis of a bulb that lasted 4 times - many models last up to twice that.
The ABC article actually raises the mercury problem - certainly something that needs to be addressed. But in terms of energy consumption CFLs are definitely the winner…
Terry, mentions the same issue and posted a response from Brisbane City Council regarding recycling of CFLs.
Its easy to calculate the costs of making a CFL. Weight the glass. You have to have enough energy to heat that much sand up to melting temperature (1500°C) at least 2 times to make a CFL. So if you have the weight, you can figure out how much it will cost. The 1st stage of melting glass is about 3 to 5 kWh per kg of glass with state of the art electric furnaces. The later stages of bending and sealing will take far more energy and my guess on the bending stage of a U tube light could not be lower than about 20 kWh with 100 more likely. The sealing stage should be another 20 kWh. These numbers are assuming that its much more efficient than the same processes used in Neon signs. The high lead content in the glass will reduce the energy by a few percent but that leads to glass that can’t be recycled as normal glass and if the glass doesn’t have a high lead component, then the CFL will produce ozone which will negate any CO2 savings.
There are programs in place now for recycling CFLs and other lighting containing mercury. I work for a company called CMA Corporation (publicly listed in Australia) which recycles waste lighting and has primary lighting recycling facilities in each state as well as the Northern Territory. Crushed waste is shipped from these locations to Melbourne where the materials are separated and recycled. This is the only EPA licenced mercury distillation facility in Australasia.
We have many companies and organisations as customers and we are working with all levels of government, especially local government. More and more local councils are implementing programs to recycle mercury bearing lighting waste.
Our website is: cmaecocycle.net