cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Infinity
Pro
Posts: 5,601
Thanks: 148
Fixes: 2
Registered: 19-06-2011

Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

The medical experts who refuse to use low-energy lightbulbs in their homes:
Professors have stocked up on old-style bulbs to protect against skin cancer and blindness
Fortunately, there is a way around the ban....
The EU directive banning Incandescent bulbs refers only to those meant for “household lamps”, meaning shops can continue to supply bulbs intended for “industrial use”, or rough service use..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2626564/The-medical-experts-refuse-use-low-energy-lightbul...

Some older articles on this...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/9498092/Retailers-avoid-ban-on-traditional-light-bulbs.html
http://www.lighting.co.uk/news/latest-news/manufacturers-and-retailers-use-loophole-to-flaunt-incand...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193792/Old-fashioned-lightbulbs-banned-EU-directive-sold-tr...

When the CFL's were first introduced, our local Electricity supplier, and Supermarkets were either giving them away, or as low as 10p per bulb.
I have a large box full of them !!
But as above, non are used in close proximity, ie less than one metre away, mostly room and area lighting.
Any closer are behind me, so hopefully safe from any eye problems.
For close work, personally I prefer the 12v halogen bulbs, such as near to my computers.

I haven't got into the newer low energy domestic light bulbs yet, such as LEDs, they all seem to be quite low illumination.

Anyone any experience of these ?
PS: I do think the papers should use UK Bayonet mount light bulb file photo's....
20 REPLIES
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

I've swapped out all the cfl's I could for led's , and I changed out the halogen desk lamps for led strips (there brighter and yet use less power) if I get my way i'll be changing the giant strip light in the kitchen for a set of led strips as well but that's an argument I need to have with the landlord .....
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
itsme
Grafter
Posts: 5,924
Thanks: 1
Registered: 07-04-2007

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

You need to check whether your LED's light source is any better than CFL as one method is to use phosphor coated ultra-violet LED's have a peak wavelength at 450nm
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

fortunately I went for warm white led's so there not in the problem category Smiley
its the white and blue lights that are the problem, if you get a cheap led based light it will often have a blue hue to it which is from the UV and staring directly into the light will cause a problem similar to arc eye for a few minutes, warm whites don't do that, not that I would need ot worry about it if they did, mine are all away facing so there's no direct light (its all rebounding off the walls and so on) which makes it look far more natural anyway Smiley
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
alanf
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 1,931
Thanks: 77
Fixes: 1
Registered: 17-10-2007

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

It was stated on a recent radio show that the "heavy duty" incandescent bulbs now being sold give less light per Watt than the bulbs intended for household use that are banned.
A question was also raised, but not satisfactorily answered, as to whether one might have problems with any insurance claim if one used the bulbs which by law have to be labelled words to the effect that they are not "not for domestic use". There was however no reason for these bulbs to be less safe than traditional incandescent bulbs.
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,307
Thanks: 86
Fixes: 3
Registered: 08-01-2008

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

If they give less light per Watt then they're less efficient, in that case they'll give out more heat per Watt ('wasted energy') so, if used in a fitting marked 'maximum 'x' Watts' they could possibly exceed the expected heat output for the fitting so slightly increasing the risk of overheating the fitting.
I don't like lighting my house with hot wires in glass enclosures, I'm certainly not a fan of CFLs with (often) slow light-up, strange colour rendering, high UV output, dimming of output over time... , I do like LED lights (some are better than others though)
Call me 'w23'
At any given moment in the universe many things happen. Coincidence is a matter of how close these events are in space, time and relationship.
Opinions expressed in forum posts are those of the poster, others may have different views.
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,342
Thanks: 609
Registered: 23-09-2010

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Too many "mays" in the article to be taken seriously.
There's also been many warnings about the heavy metal intake via showers.
But I'm sure lots of people still shower more than five times a week.
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,674
Thanks: 109
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

I was under the impression that only applied to people who live near metal factories or processing centres where there was heavy metal contamination of water courses (like those problems that occurred in areas such as Dagenham where the average IQ levels dropped off sharply in the younger generations) but in order to get such an effect from a normal  domestic unit you would need it to be a damaged unit made about a hundred years ago that was leaching into the water......
there are definitive problems caused by things like mercury oxide (brain disorders and/or death depending on levels of exposure), vision problems caused by over exposure to harmful rays so the CFL argument is actually a valid one, and lets not forget that the phosphorous coating if it gets onto your skin will burn quite harshly (or worse if you breath in the dust)
LED's OTOH are generally safer and consumer units are supposed to all comply with health regulations (no UV or IR produced)

personally I prefer led's as there cheaper to run and last a lot longer than CFL's, don't have the long warm up time and on top of all that they don't get hot Smiley
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
alanf
Aspiring Pro
Posts: 1,931
Thanks: 77
Fixes: 1
Registered: 17-10-2007

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Quote from: nanotm
lets not forget that the phosphorous coating if it gets onto your skin will burn quite harshly (or worse if you breath in the dust)

The glass is coated with phosphors not phosphorus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphor
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,342
Thanks: 609
Registered: 23-09-2010

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Quote from: nanotm
I was under the impression that only applied to people who live near metal factories or processing centres where there was heavy metal contamination

It applies to everyone simply because when taking a shower you breath in the contaminants, and not just heavy metals, straight into yours lungs and so directly into your bloodstream.
Community Veteran
Posts: 16,848
Thanks: 1,133
Fixes: 13
Registered: 06-11-2007

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

ah well.... been around for 3 score years and 10, had many many showers in that time.( all over the world ) .. so think it must be a myth....  having a bath is not so much fun !.. Cheesy
Community Veteran
Posts: 3,380
Thanks: 2
Registered: 18-01-2013

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

The biggest issue with many of these energy savings bulbs are the electronics inside them that are designed to scrape  by the safety and EMI testing by the skin of their teeth. Then the approved design gets sent "abroad" where they are built using even cheaper and often substandard components.
The chances of one either melting or catching fire (without external influence)  are way in excess of an equivalent incandescent bulb.
Community Veteran
Posts: 7,923
Thanks: 600
Fixes: 8
Registered: 02-08-2007

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Quote from: shutter
...  having a bath is not so much fun !.. Cheesy

Well it can be if it's with someone else !
Smiley Smiley Smiley
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,342
Thanks: 609
Registered: 23-09-2010

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

Either way tomorrow it will have moved on to something else that's out to kill us.
myredhotcar
Grafter
Posts: 457
Registered: 06-11-2013

Re: Low Energy Lightbulbs, but High Risk ?

According to the DM everything gives you cancer. Here is an alphabetical list.