Monthly Archive for March, 2008

here are messages that i asked Dr. Hui, for you guys’ reference

Message from me in blue
Reply from Dr. Hui in red

  I am searching for materials about the environmental friendliness between CFL and normal light bulb.
And I read one of your passage that talk about the exposure of CFL will actually emit toxic gas (mercury) ,
but I found that the GREEN PEACE is now promoting families in Hong Kong to use CFL to replace normal light bulb, due to the less energy consumption, so I would like to ask which type of light source is most environmental friendly?? and is there any mis-leading for the green peace to promote Hong Kong families to use CFL, but actually it’s having harm to our environment?

There are two types of CFLs. The most common type is electronic CFL (e-CFL). They have two major problems. Firstly, the product lifetime is typically 10,000 hrs (13 months). The fluorescent lamps (FL) have 3mg-5mg of mercury that can vaporise at room temperature. The electronic control housed inside the plastic cover has toxic chemistry such as PBDE. So using them for a few months to 1.1 year will lead to long-term soil and water pollution.

Many governments and “so-called” green organisations have mixed up the concepts of “energy-saving” and “environmental protection”. To be green, two conditions that go hand-in-hand, must be satisfied.

(1) The atomosphere should not be polluted.

(2) Soil and water should not be polluted.

Energy saving is a way to reduce greenhouse gas emission to satisfy (1). But if lots of pollutants (in the case of e-CFLs – non-biodegradable and/orhighly toxic electronic waste) are generated within a short time, then we cannot say that such technology is green.

If we choose to ignore the waste factor (2), then using nuclear power can solve the global warming problem because nulcear power does not generate greenhouse gases. But it generates nuclear waste that is harmful to the earth for thousands of years.

The unfortunate promotion of e-CFLs arises from this misconception.

We agree to replacing the incandescent light bulbs, not with e-CFLs, but with magnetic CFLs (mCFLs). mCFL has the control part made of iron core and copper winding, that can last for >17 years. The metallic parts can be fully recycled. The FL itself can also be recycled.

CNN International has done a program with me and it will be shown globally in Oct.

Thanks for your prompt reply!!
It’s really useful for me to understand more on the myth of environmental friendly e-CFL!
so, may i ask if there is any special requirement in using mCFL? or what we need to do is jst buy a mCFL, then plug it to the socket, thats it?

it’s really good to know that you will have a tv program to be shown soon.
i hope i can get more details about the CNN program if possible! 

There are a few companies who are making m-CFLs. Unfortunately, there are not many because the government has been promoting the wrong technology in the last few years.

Many large lighting companies do not want to talk about m-CFLs because their lifetime is too long for them (the control part can last for 17 years!). They prefer selling e-CFLs because of the huge profits. This is a commercial world and most businessmen and companies could not care less about the environment. They put profits as their first priority and not the environment.