A woman in a clothing shop in the German city of Hanover arranges lights. The European Union ban on some bulbs is a conservation effort aimed at slowing global warming. (Jochen Luebke / European Pressphoto Agency / August 27, 2009, LATimes.com)

I recently read an article in the LA Times about a German man and his wife who frantically bought enough light bulbs to last them a lifetime. This seems to be a growing trend as of late. A worldwide effort has been in put in place to phase-out incandescent bulbs by the year 2012 and ever since this legislation has been implemented, panic buying and bulk purchasing has been evident.

At 50 years old, Mr. Ziegler created a floor plan of his apartment in Frankfurt, Germany and calculated that he would live 30 more years in order to finally figure that he needed 3,000 bulbs to last the rest of his lifetime. To think – he was willing to guesstimate how many years he had left to live – a rather bizarre and depressing thought process – just so he wouldn’t have to live without his treasured incandescent bulbs.

Now, I don’t blame him completely; there is plenty of backlash across the globe about this somewhat new legislation because governments are forcing consumers to purchase CFL bulbs and taking away their alternatives. Who wants a CFL bulb with their flickering, lag-time, mercury content, headaches and so on!?

The heart of the problem is that there are other options that governments are not seriously considering (like solar power or LED lights). Where did this legislation come from? Who is encouraging every major government around the world to participate in this plan? Why Compact Fluorescents?

In December of 2006, Philips, one of the largest light bulb makers announced a campaign to encourage all governments around the world to phase out low-cost incandescent bulbs by 2015 under the facade of CFL energy savings. So, I guess Philips forgot to mention that along with forcing consumers to purchase a more expensive bulb that doesn’t last all that long, the bulbs contain mercury, have high recycling costs, and irreparable environmental dangers.

Can you save energy with CFL bulbs – yes – but at what cost? The problems outweigh the benefits – AND we are being forced, by law to use them. Not to mention, many people do not know how to properly dispose of CFL bulbs, which is a requirement due to their mercury content.

The push toward CFLs in order to fight global warming could actually release more mercury into their air and hurt the environment more. We all know that many people have the desire to recycle, but we also know that people don’t recycle unless it is convenient.

“The problem with the bulbs is that they’ll break before they get to the landfill. They’ll break in containers, or they’ll break in a dumpster or they’ll break in the trucks. Workers may be exposed to very high levels of mercury when that happens,” says John Skinner, executive director of the Solid Waste Association of North America, the trade group for the people who handle trash and recycling. (NPR)”

Is this a problem for you? How do you feel that the government is forcing us to use CFL bulbs? We’d love to hear from you.

12 Responses to “Light Bulb Ban Not So Eco-Friendly or Green”