Across the EU it's lights out for the good old incandescent bulb
since september first even 40 and 25 watt bulbs are off the market
The EU has pushed through energy efficient lights
mainly the compact fluorescent models known as the CFLs
but they leave much to be desired
I think that these energy-efficient bulbs make poor light
it's not bright, it's diffuse. That means the color rendering is awful
And CFLs contain a highly hazardous metal: mercury
This bulb poses a grave danger if it breaks
the mercury vaporizes and gets into the lungs within seconds
Critics warn they even admit toxic substances in normal use
If a simple instrument like this can register poisons and contaminants emitted from these bulbs
that means there's a serious problem
it indicates the presence of hazardous toxins
It's universally agreed that the new bulbs use less electricity and last longer
but critics say consumers and the environment will pay a high price for these benefits
At the Foxdorf kindergarten in Hamburg instructors are using a playful method
to teach four to six year olds about both kinds of lights
the old incandescent bulbs and the new energy-efficient models
and this is the new model - of course it looks different than the bulb you've drawn
there is the spiral version and the tubular shapes
You probably see them in light fixtures at home, don't you?
My mom doesn't buy them because when you turn them on it always takes a while
and by the time it's lit up you're already washed and dried your hands
then you're out of the bathroom.
The teacher wants to teach the children what to do in case one of the new bulbs shatters
so if this energy-efficient bulb drops you have to leave the room immediately
so let's run a drill
remember there's poison inside
we're only practicing now but if it drops and breaks you have to run for the door, okay?
So I'll pretend to drop it - it breaks and now you have to hurry outside.
The official recommendation from the federal environment agency is to evacuate for 15 minutes
leave the windows open, turn off the heat
To find out if those precautions are justified
we turn to an independent laboratory that analyzes environmentally hazardous materials - including mercury
and the researchers take all precautions for our test
here's a protective mask
just pull it over your head
Laboratory head Gary Zorner says there's only one sensible reaction when a CFL bulb shatters
You should get away as quickly as possible
it could enter your blood stream through the lungs and from there into the brain
or through the olfactory nerves directly into the nervous system That's why we take these safety precautions
the measures include a fume hood, breathing masks and gloves.
As soon as the glass breaks an invisible cloud of mercury is released from the bulb.
We can see the electronic components
Zorner is highly critical of the use of mercury in this kind of product
Every encounter with mercury makes you a bit more stupid and lowers your IQ
It is a highly dangerous nerve poison and can also affect many other organs and the immune system
There should be a zero tolerance policy for mercury
We must do all we can to institute all worldwide ban
against mining, production and distribution
Environmental medical specialist Joachim Mutter has worked for years with patients suffering from mercury poisoning
He is regularly asked to testify in civil court cases
Recently he encountered a youngster who suffered severe injury after low-energy bulb shattered.
The boy was already ill at the time
and the parents had no idea just how dangerous the mercury cloud was.
They didn't air out the room and the shards were thrown in the garbage
The child then slept in his bedroom
Within the first week he developed a skin rash
By week two he began losing hair
he developed severe diarrhea and a visible case of the shakes
He showed what I'd describe as autistic ticks
He was withdrawn, lost interest and was constantly tired.
He slept all the time and was lethargic
nothing like the boy he was before
After extensive therapy he slowly regained his health and vitality
That's precisely the kind of accident the instructors at the Foxdorf kindergarten are trying to prevent.
Silke Stoltenberg uses a demonstration bulb to show the children how to safely dispose of them
in accordance with the government's environmental guidelines
I use cardboard to gather all the pieces and put them in here
your mom and dad can do that too
I collect the big pieces in the cardboard
and use tape to gather the rest
Then I press down on it to get every little piece
We are not allowed to use a vacuum
and a broom isn't adviced because it would only spread the mercury all-around
Then I take off the gloves and dispose of them too.
There might be hazardous material clinging to them
So now I shut the lid tight and we'll recycle it.
Light bulbs filled with toxic metal not what most people would call progress
We visit a lighting designer in Hamburg
Katja Winkelmann is an engineer and knows a thing or two about the business
The problem with this form of technology is that it simply doesn't work without mercury
That's true of all bulbs of this sort
and that includes these tubular models the fluorescent lights.
It's the same for the compact CFL bulbs, the energy-efficient bulbs.
None of these can function without mercury
That's simply based on the technology in use
EU guidelines allow up to 5 milligrams of mercury per bulb
That's about the size of the head of a pin
In addition the base is filled with complex electronics
with up to thirty individual parts made of silicon, phosphorus or aluminum
These bulbs are built with this electronic ballast
We've taken this one apart to show you
The mercury is still inside because we haven't broken this casing
but we can clearly see the intricate electronics involved
and of course this has to be disposed of in an eco-friendly manner
Every time we recycle we throw away these electronic components too
and that's crazy because first the mercury has to be dealt with and then a whole lot of electronic waste
Most energy-efficient CFLs are produced in Asia particularly China
There are reports that employees at some Chinese plants
have suffered from mercury poisoning
We contacted investigative labour activists there
We know that Chinese workers got poisoned by mercury while producing ...
Is there a way to find out what happened to the workers?
At great personal risk a member is going to go under cover with a hidden camera
in an attempt to document working conditions at the plant.
We're willing to take the risk.
If we can prove the rumors are true perhaps we can force a change in labour conditions in those facilities
Garry Zorrner has begun a new test with 6 CFL models produced by 5 different manufacturers
He's studying whether intact energy-efficient bulbs may also pose health risks.
Once the lamps are on, the surrounding air is collected, chemically bonded and analyzed.
This is an extract from the air sample that we've sucked into the tube.
Now we'll use gas chromatography, mass spectrometry to find out what substances it contains.
This method reveals that there are various substances.
There are volatile organic compounds
We've even fount measurable traces of the toxin phenol.
What's the problem with phenol?
Phenol is carcinogenic and is considered a health hazard.
we also found tetrahydrofuran which may also cause cancer
There are others as well.
Alkylbenzines which can damage the nervous system and are toxic to the liver and so on.
The worst thing is that you have an entire cocktail of substances linked with various health risks.
That is a particular concern.
But Germany's environment agency says the concentration of emmissions is not high enough to be a significant health risk.
We consult Wolfgang Maes a recognized authority in building biology and environmental analytics.
We want to find out exactly how the toxins are emitted.
Do they escape from the base or from the glass housing?
We can give this simple instrument a try.
It's a sampling probe, fairly insensitive and not very accurate.
We can see where the emissions are coming from the scratches that lead to the ballast as I suspect
once the bulb has reached a certain temperature.
Listen to that!
It is the same at the other switch.
Look at how that follows the glass housing.
So if toxins such as phenol are escaping from this bulb why aren't they better sealed?
It must be possible from a manufacturing standpoint.
You must ask the producers.
It's a necessity no matter how high the cost.
We're talking about poisons that should not be allowed to escape.
If such a simple instrument can detect poisons and contaminants emitted by CFLs
then we truly have a problem.
I'm talking about biologically hazardous emissions.
We asked manufacturers to comment.
One of them responds:
In addition we conduct internal and external inspections on a regular basis.
As a manufacturer of high quality brands, Osram complies with all manufacturing standards and guidelines.
In addition we conduct internal and external inspections on a regular basis.
Maes also measured the amount of electron smog produced by the CFLs.
So I turned off the energy-efficient bulb and replaced it with a filament bulb.
Look at the field intensity on the display.
You can see for yourself that the traditional light bulb gets better results.
It's a much healthier choice than the energy-efficient models.
In particular this bulb produces a field whose strength is 42 volts per metre
The limit for a computer work place is just 1 volt per metre.
That means that this bulb is 42 times more intense than a personal computer is allowed to be
We found CFLs that produce over 70 volts per metre - 70 times higher than a pc
What kind of health problems could arise if I sit too close to an energy-efficient land, for instance at a desk?
From a biological standpoint there's dangerous electromagnetic exposure to your head, your body, your entire work environment.
It can lead to neurological and hormonal problems and to cell damage.
These are all things that can be triggered by high electromagnetic field intensity.
Here in a typical German residential area, we want to find out how consumers are accepting energy-efficient bulbs.
The first family has only a few CFLs used where they won't be noticed.
We use normal bulbs here in the living room - the CFLs are so ugly, they'd destroy the look of our chandelier.
Family number two has designer lighting with the appropriate bulbs.
Halogen bulbs? - We use mostly floodlights ... the one exception is the fluorescent tube in the kitchen.
I installed it over the sink.
The family has decided to install energy-saving bulbs only in certain areas.
We replaced the bulbs on this ceiling lamp.
The CFLs makes sense because this lamp is on for lengthy periods.
Family number three has just moved into a new house and has bought new furnishings.
most of the lamps have CFLs.
Are you worried about sleeping next to a bulb that contains mercury? Have you even thought about that?
To tell you the truth it hadn't crossed my mind but as long as the mercury is contained in the class housing it won't leak out.
The anecdotal evidence from three homes only 37 percent energy-efficient bulbs
the rest is a mix of incandescent, halogen and fluorescent.
Then number four who was initially excited about the prospect of saving energy and costs
The enthusiasm didn't last long.
This is my collection of energy-efficient bulbs
I tried them all and we didn't like them.
They all ended up in the basement.
This is our supply of incandescent bulbs for use around the house.
They just don't produce the kind of light we want.
We can't use dimmers and we've been reading about the dangers as well.
They're supposed to be environmentally friendly and yet they contain mercury.
Sorry we just can't grasp that concept.
The European Union enacted legislation on energy-efficient bulbs back in 2009.
Early on european parliament member Holger Krahmer voiced skepticism and pointed out the possible adverse effects for consumers.
It's clear that health concerns were simply not a factor in implementing the ban on incandescent bulbs
and the pressure to market energy-efficient bulbs.
The EU commission admitted as much.
At the time there had been no comprehensive studies - it wasn't just about mercury.
There are also concerns about the psychological effects of the light among other things.
But didn't the EU commission carry out extensive testing?
We asked commissioner for energy Gunter Oetinger to comment
He refused sending a spokesperson instead.
Were studies done on possible adverse effects of CFLs prior to the incandescent bulb ban?
Before we began taking light bulbs off the market we investigated the problem of mercury in the energy-efficient bulbs.
We asked some of the independent scientists on our advisory council
and the indicated there was no risk from the amount of mercury contained in the new energy-saving lights.
One day later she sent a correction.
In an email she wrote that extensive test results were only submitted in 2010 long after the phase out went into effect.
In a 2009 study researchers looked at just 5 different CFLs
that was the minimum requirement.
So why the urgent decision to ban filament bulbs and replace them with CFLs?
It was at the height of the climate debate. It started in Australia and spread around the globe.
Everyone was unscrewing light bulbs and no one wanted to be left behind including chancellor Merkel
There was no stopping it.
Incandescent bulbs had to be banned to save the world.
The EU commission appointed a committee to set guidelines for the energy-efficient bulbs.
It included industry experts along with representatives of consumer groups.
Why were producers such as Phillips and Osram at the table?
It's all about who knows whom. The buddy system.
The bureaucrats in the EU commission have circles of friends. They network.
And when it comes to a decision on some issue
they invite those who might be affected by it to meet.
And it has to be clear that environmental concerns aren't necessarily the highest priority.
Rather these decisions are heavily influenced by the respective business interests.
There's no profit in the incandescent bulb perhaps just a few cents.
The profit margin is much higher for CFLs.
That's why business interests trumped environmental concerns in coming to this decision.
Proponents point out that the energy-efficient lamps truly do save electricity
and have a much longer life span.
But is that really the case?
In Frankfurt we visit the offices of popular german consumer magazine Eko-test.
It's done extensive research into CFLs.
Editor in chief Gurgen Stepflug and his team studied 16 different models to find out whether they live up to manufacturers claims.
Here they claim that this 11 watt CFL can replace a 60 watt filament bulb.
That's simply not enough.
Our findings indicate you'd need at least 14 watts.
But the CFLs also lose brightness quickly.
so actually you need a 21 watt energy-efficient lamp to replace an old 60 watt bulb.
And the lifespan?
According to this, one low-energy bulb lasts longer than 8 traditional bulbs.
The manufacturer is required to print this information on the packaging
It just doesn't add up.
Yes, they're required to but no officials check to see if it's true.
But this laboratory in Vilhemshofen does.
Electrical engineer Wolfgang Hoerter and the staff at the Pruf Centrum Technik have been testing bulbs for years
commissioned by consumer protection groups.
That includes tests on the true life span of energy saving lights.
This room contains more than 100 lamps from 36 manufacturers.
On average they should burn between 8 and 10 thousand hours.
We're performing a longevity test here.
More than 7.000 hours and 30% of them have burned out.
That's a lot.
In addition we have a row with lights that are regularly turned off and on.
Metred so they are on for 1 minute and then off for 5.
And the test runs around the clock.
The first bulbs expire at the 3.000 hour mark.
And you can tell by these dark spots that a lamp is about to burn out.
In a bathroom families turn the light on and off at least 10 times a day.
So a CFL probably wouldn't last a year.
We asked Germany's largest bulb producer to explain the apparent discrepancy.
Osram answered my email:
We are Germany's only manufacturer to guarantee our energy-efficient bulbs.
This guaranty also applies particularly to the life span.
In the meantime we've reestablished contact with the Chinese labor activists.
They've been able to place one of their members inside an assembly plant at the Fusan electrical and lighting company.
This facility produces fluorescent lights which operate on the same principle as CFLs.
The key component is mercury.
Heinrich Calmer is a lighting designer previously employed by a major manufacturer. He speaks with authority about the images from the Chinese plant
The employees aren't wearing protective gear.
and it should be disposed of once they leave the production line.
If one of these tubes breaks highly toxic mercury will escape.
Chinese regulations stipulate protective clothing but it appears few employees are aware of the health hazards.
Over the past few years there have been numerous documented cases of toxic accidents including at this plant.
Under these conditions can recall these lamps environmentally friendly?
Certainly not when you look at it from this standpoint.
They do consume less electricity
but noone sees the environmental damage caused by mercury.
So special EU exemptions were put into effect to make CFLs available to consumers.
The guidelines are far stricter for all other instruments.
Mercury thermometers are banned.
But there are special guidelines for fluorescent tubes and CFLs
so that these energy-efficient bulbs will continue to pollute the environment.
In 2004 Osram bought a stake in the Fusan electrical and lighting company.
In a statement Osram declares:
With the goal of improving occupational safety and health Osram successfully implemented these and other measures in 2010:
- Use of modern dosing technologies - weekly mercury monitoring - construction of new ventilation and exhaust mechanisms
And then there's the problem of disposing of the burned out bulbs.
Germany forbids throwing them away with the rest of the household trash.
We go to a building supply center to see whether it has a recycling program in place.
It doesn't appear to be the case.
Excuse me, I'd like to recycle this bulb.
Sorry I can't help you, I don't think we accept them.
There was nothing in the light department
We don't accept them.
But I bought it here. That doesn't matter.
The only alternative is a trip to the recycling center.
On the way my car burned nearly a litre of gas and emitted over 2.000 grams of Co2
all to dispose of one eco-friendly light bulb.
Waste separation actually works quite efficiently in environmentally conscious Germany
but the CFLs pose a gigantic recycling problem.
Recycling centers are required to accept them
but experts estimate that only about 10% of CFLs from german households are properly disposed of.
That means that 90% are thrown out with the trash
ending up in landfills and posing an environmental hazard.
But surely the EU commission has imposed recycling guidelines
Eurocrats in Brussels have regulated almost every aspect of our lives
but the spokesperson for the EU energy commissioner couldn't find the laws applying to recycling up CFLs.
As far as recycling is concerned stores that sell the bulbs must also take the used ones back.
But they dont't.
They have to.
The stores have to take them back.
Take CFLs back for recycling?
The stores refuse and say they're not required to.
You can't dispose of the burned out bulbs at the place you bought them.
The law stipulates that the stores must accept them.
The law also says that member nations must inform its citizens where and how to dispose of these bulbs.
Of course that includes Germany and German citizens.
The spokesperson for the EU energy commissioner is wrong.
Mrs Holsner corrects her statement the day following our interview
Stores may recycle the bulbs on a voluntary basis.
Light designers are developing bulbs that work without mercury.
At the Unilever house in Hamburg LEDs and natural lighting are part of the progressive energy-efficient concept
It's an expensive solution.
At a cost of 30 to 40 euros per bulb
LEDs are beyond the price range of many families
but they do last up to 5 times longer than CFLs.
These LEDs are a very effective and energy efficient way of generating light.
The major advantage is that LEDs emit maximum light at the flip of the switch.
That's my major complaint with CFLs
You can fall down the stairs because there's no light.
LEDs solve that problem.
They're a good alternative.
But if LEDs are too expensive and CFLs too dangerous there's little choice left.
This lighting shop in Hamburg recognized a business opportunity
ordering and hoarding thousands of traditional bulbs.
Stefan Shroder expects to be doing a booming business.
Look at this bulb, it's beautiful - I have about a thousand in this style
And how many bulbs in all?
One of two million at least.
On September first farewell to the incandescent bulb.
Consumers have stocked up and demand for CFLs is moderate at best
a potentially toxic product that simply doesn't live up to the hype.