| Pages:
1
2 |
Xenoid
National Hazard
Posts: 775
Registered: 14-6-2007
Location: Springs Junction, New Zealand
Member Is Offline
Mood: Comfortably Numb
|
|
LED Dangers - Unbelievable Paranoia!
WTF ... Is this for real, have Californian "scientists" got nothing better to
do.
LED Products Billed as Eco-Friendly Contain Toxic Metals, Study Finds
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110210124136.ht...
Those light-emitting diodes marketed as safe, environmentally preferable alternatives to traditional lightbulbs actually contain lead, arsenic and a
dozen other potentially hazardous substances, according to newly published research.
"LEDs are touted as the next generation of lighting. But as we try to find better products that do not deplete energy resources or contribute to
global warming, we have to be vigilant about the toxicity hazards of those marketed as replacements," said Oladele Ogunseitan, chair of UC Irvine's
Department of Population Health & Disease Prevention.
He and fellow scientists at UCI and UC Davis crunched, leached and measured the tiny, multicolored lightbulbs sold in Christmas strands; red, yellow
and green traffic lights; and automobile headlights and brake lights.
Their findings? Low-intensity red lights contained up to eight times the amount of lead allowed under California law, but in general, high-intensity,
brighter bulbs had more contaminants than lower ones. White bulbs contained the least lead, but had high levels of nickel.
"We find the low-intensity red LEDs exhibit significant cancer and noncancer potentials due to the high content of arsenic and lead," the team wrote
in the January 2011 issue of Environmental Science & Technology, referring to the holiday lights. Results from the larger lighting products will
be published later, but according to Ogunseitan, "it's more of the same."
Lead, arsenic and many additional metals discovered in the bulbs or their related parts have been linked in hundreds of studies to different cancers,
neurological damage, kidney disease, hypertension, skin rashes and other illnesses. The copper used in some LEDs also poses an ecological
threat to fish, rivers and lakes.
Ogunseitan said that breaking a single light and breathing fumes would not automatically cause cancer, but could be a tipping point on top of chronic
exposure to another carcinogen. And -- noting that lead tastes sweet -- he warned that small children could be harmed if they mistake
the bright lights for candy.
Risks are present in all parts of the lights and at every stage during production, use and disposal, the study found. Consumers, manufacturers and
first responders to accident scenes ought to be aware of this, Ogunseitan said. When bulbs break at home, residents should sweep them up with
a special broom while wearing gloves and a mask, he advised. Crews dispatched to clean up car crashes or broken traffic fixtures
should don protective gear and handle the material as hazardous waste. Currently, LEDs are not classified as toxic and are disposed
of in regular landfills. Ogunseitan has forwarded the study results to California and federal health regulators.
He cites LEDs as a perfect example of the need to mandate product replacement testing. The diodes are widely hailed as safer than compact fluorescent
bulbs, which contain dangerous mercury. But, he said, they weren't properly tested for potential environmental health impacts before being marketed as
the preferred alternative to inefficient incandescent bulbs, now being phased out under California law. A long-planned state regulation originally set
to take effect Jan. 1 would have required advance testing of such replacement products. But it was opposed by industry groups, a less stringent
version was substituted, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger placed the law on hold days before he left office.
"I'm frustrated, but the work continues," said Ogunseitan, a member of the state Department of Toxic Substances Control's Green Ribbon Science Panel.
He said makers of LEDs and other items could easily reduce chemical concentrations or redesign them with truly safer materials. "Every day we don't
have a law that says you cannot replace an unsafe product with another unsafe product, we're putting people's lives at risk," he said. "And it's a
preventable risk."
(Bold is my addition)
Oladele Ogunseitan sounds like he is a total nutter!
|
|
|
condennnsa
Hazard to Others
Posts: 217
Registered: 20-4-2010
Location: Romania
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
This really cracked me up, xenoid 
" mistake the bright lights for candy " HAHAHA
I guess this guy just tries to get some 'research' money with this stuff... most of of these 'health' concerning articles are about that. And it
works wonders on the general public.
[Edited on 11-2-2011 by condennnsa]
|
|
|
Xenoid
National Hazard
Posts: 775
Registered: 14-6-2007
Location: Springs Junction, New Zealand
Member Is Offline
Mood: Comfortably Numb
|
|
Here he is;
"I'm frustrated, but the bullshit continues," said Ogunseitan, a member of the state Department of Toxic Substances
Control's Green Ribbon Science Panel.
|
|
|
hissingnoise
International Hazard
Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Pulverulescent!
|
|
With LEDs on the cusp of becoming ubiquitous do you think that the hazardous substances they contain should be of no concern whatever?
|
|
|
garage chemist
chemical wizard
Posts: 1803
Registered: 16-8-2004
Location: Germany
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
At least they don't poison the air you breathe if you break a LED lamp, if you even manage to do that. You'd have to crush the LED up into a fine
powder and eat it to have any chance of being poisoned.
It would be a shame if LED development and application would suffer because of these eco-lunatics.
Speaking of the elements contained in LEDs, someone once told me that he had once acquired a large chunk (several 100g) of gallium arsenide on ebay
and asked me how to separate it into the elements, or at least pure compounds of the elements.
I was not able to come up with a good, simple solution. Any ideas?
|
|
|
madscientist
National Hazard
Posts: 962
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: American Midwest
Member Is Offline
Mood: pyrophoric
|
|
Children mistaking light bulbs for candy is a stretch. Also seems silly to don a moonsuit before sweeping up broken LEDs. But leaching of metals into
groundwater is a very real concern. Do you want lead and arsenic in your food and water?
I weep at the sight of flaming acetic anhydride.
|
|
|
Xenoid
National Hazard
Posts: 775
Registered: 14-6-2007
Location: Springs Junction, New Zealand
Member Is Offline
Mood: Comfortably Numb
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by hissingnoise  |
With LEDs on the cusp of becoming ubiquitous do you think that the hazardous substances they contain should be of no concern whatever?
|
It is difficult to envisage LEDs ever becoming an environmental problem. My main concern is with the pseudo-science this man is promulgating, it is
very entrenched in the environmental/toxic hazard "industry".
... noting that lead tastes sweet ... and this is from a so-called scientist. Lead doesn't taste sweet, it tastes
metallic, like, ... well lead. Lead acetate (so called Sugar of Lead) tastes sweet, apparently.
Hang on! There is no lead in LEDs other than in the solder of associated wiring, and this is common to any electrical/electronic device. This is now
being replaced with tin/antimony - oh! no! tin and antimony are also toxic!
People using a "special" broom to sweep up a broken LED, come on, REALLY! Have you ever broken a LED, they are almost indestructible.
I could go on, but this sort of "research" is just so silly. Looking for a problem where none exists, at the expense of the Californian taxpayer!
[Edited on 11-2-2011 by Xenoid]
|
|
|
metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 758
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
What a banana jounalism !
Of course, the used elements are an environmental hazard but, as said earlier, LEDs do not spread these tocic materials when broken. It is all
encapsulated in plastic, unlike CFLs. And the 'special broom' story or 'the sweet taste of lead' is absolutely nonsense.
But more everyday products are a hazard in our throwaway society, like smartphones which have an economical lifetime of at most 2 years, the huuuuge
pile of batteries to power all gadgets, the huuuuuuge pile of used CRTs contain very large amounts of Pb, and at least to mention all plastic
packaging. Just buy an SD card and sometimes you get a 10x20cm sealed blister packaging around it which requires sturdy cutting tools to open.
And the air we breathe in the cities clogged up with jammed so-called 'green' automobiles .... Electric cars powered by the same batteries containing
toxic elements and mostly being recharged by ... yes CO2 belching coal and oil power plants.
Then the hazard of the LEDs is very minimal comared to this.
|
|
|
metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 758
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
Unless:
http://www.youtube.com/RODALCO2007#p/search/8/nxWQQJHmFP0
[Edited on 2011-2-11 by metalresearcher]
|
|
|
psychokinetic
National Hazard
Posts: 558
Registered: 30-8-2009
Location: Nouveau Sheepelande.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Constantly missing equilibrium
|
|
I was going to make the "People shouldn't be eating them" quip, but then I see that PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY EATING THEM.
I want to go to a smarter planet, please.
“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found
the object of his search.
I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
-Tesla
|
|
|
DougTheMapper
Hazard to Others
Posts: 145
Registered: 20-7-2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Energetic
|
|
What a bunch of goons.
Ever used lead fishing sinkers? Copper plumbing in your house? Copper-jacketed lead bullets? Arsenic-based pressure-treated wood? And they make such a
fuss over tiny little lights... I about laughed out loud in class at that one. Furthermore, any fluorescent lamp contains thousands of times more
mercury than any LED would... and they're infinitely easier to accidentally smash. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever even broken an LED
before.
"I'm frustrated, but the bullshit continues," said Ogunseitan.
Pretty much sums up my opinion too.
Victor Grignard is a methylated spirit.
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
A lot of paranoid wackjob environmentalists have been trying to destroy California for a long time. The wackjobs want to do this to the entire
country. http://peakoil.com/forums/ is dominated by wackjobs. If you like internet bullying, you might enjoy this forum. Some of them flip out so badly
its incredible. And I thought Taliban Online was bad.
[Edited on 12-2-2011 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Regolith
Hazard to Self
Posts: 73
Registered: 4-2-2011
Location: Mining the moon.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Glacial
|
|
When California falls into the sea the entire north american continent will collectively utter "thank god". Most (lets be honest here, all) of these
lights are made in China. We should all be glad there not created with freaking uranium. I mean intentionally, there ALL contaminated with uranium...
if your lucky.
|
|
|
metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 758
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
When North America (and possible W-Europe) falls into the ocean the rest of the world says 'thank God' for a steep decrease of CO2 and other noxious
gas exhaust .....
|
|
|
quicksilver
International Hazard
Posts: 1820
Registered: 7-9-2005
Location: Inches from the keyboard....
Member Is Offline
Mood: ~-=SWINGS=-~
|
|
I have lived in rural environments most of my life and I have learned - LEARNED to despise this wack-job, shit-for-brains idiots who KNOW fucking
nothing but what they heard someone (whom they happen to believe has the "answer") blather on about. Or should I have said "herd"?
RoHS compliance? What the fuck is that? Laws enacted for the benefit of the environment regarding heavy metals and the electronics industry...(?
what...?) Canada, the US, the UK are all bending over literally so that China and India can dump mega tons of shit and filth into the world's oceans
and air and what's the response? WE are suppose to play with a fucking LED or watch our "carbon"???? GOD IN HEAVEN....... GIVE ME the STRENGTH to deal
with the futility of this bullshit!
In 2002 the National Academy of Sciences debated the source for the greatest source of "carbon emissions" & found vulcanism to be the largest
single source. CFL contain Hg and we are being forced to buy up CFLs from China instead of incandescent bulbs. We are making a major polluter the
wealthiest country on earth. Plants need what to grow????? Oxygen? NO.......CO2 and UV. We have bought into some of the most stupid, short-sighted,
mindless crap generated from where??? - fucking Hollywood actors spouting pseudo-science and half truths. NOW we should dump all the RoHS compliance
and do what's in the best interest of the major polluters in the world.
Why? Because some fuck fresh from a drug rehab has pleaded with daytime TV watching jerks that the impact of their living room has a greater impact
than a floating island of garbage produced by another pro-generator of entertainment ("Bollywood") enlightenment.
Someone once said that the lack of individual competence in arithmetic and conceptual mathematics will have a serious effect on cause and effect
thinking as it steers the mind away from logical thinking.
I think we are now seeing the truth in those predictions. Fucking morons will be the people in charge when we all grow older and older. And these same
fucking morons will be the decision making genre' when we need vital change the most.
[Edited on 12-2-2011 by quicksilver]
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5128
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
"RoHS compliance? What the fuck is that?"
Thank you for demonstrating the care with which you have researched this matter.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2006/1463/contents/made
"Canada, the US, the UK are all bending over literally "
I'd literally like to see evidence of that being literally true.
|
|
|
quicksilver
International Hazard
Posts: 1820
Registered: 7-9-2005
Location: Inches from the keyboard....
Member Is Offline
Mood: ~-=SWINGS=-~
|
|
That is called sarcasm.
_______
QUOTE:
"Canada, the US, the UK are all bending over literally "
I'd literally like to see evidence of that being literally true.
_______
Actually I apologize as I realize that wasn't clear.
The compliance (RoHS) is in place for nations as per the above; but not the polluters.
[Edited on 12-2-2011 by quicksilver]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by metalresearcher |
When North America (and possible W-Europe) falls into the ocean the rest of the world says 'thank God' for a steep decrease of CO2 and other noxious
gas exhaust ..... |
What you believe is the direct opposite of what is true, a result of propaganda and brainwashing, obviously. See the link and attached file. This
apparently is suppressed by the gangsters trying to force cap and trade on us.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/24/2063601/Climate/Scien...
Attachment: SciMag-442.pdf (349kB)
This file has been downloaded 894 times
[Edited on 13-2-2011 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
More files.
Attachment: 386.html (46kB)
This file has been downloaded 629 times
Attachment: 504a.html (47kB)
This file has been downloaded 609 times 
[Edited on 13-2-2011 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
vulture
Forum Gatekeeper
Posts: 3330
Registered: 25-5-2002
Location: France
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Vogelzang, your behavior is starting to look like If_6_was_9's from some time ago, that is posting blanket statements, tying (often tenuous) links to
that and hijacking the thread in the process.
You may or may not be right, that is not the issue here, but please don't become a propaganda loudspeaker.
One shouldn't accept or resort to the mutilation of science to appease the mentally impaired.
|
|
|
Regolith
Hazard to Self
Posts: 73
Registered: 4-2-2011
Location: Mining the moon.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Glacial
|
|
| Quote: |
When North America (and possible W-Europe) falls into the ocean the rest of the world says 'thank God' for a steep decrease of CO2 and other noxious
gas exhaust .....
|
Uhh let me see, china has already become the top #1 producer of your hated and feared CO2 the world over. The US is de-industrializing while china has
a new coal plant online every other week. They built a hydroelectric damn that retains so much water and is so LARGE it's slightly changed the axial
spin of the EARTH.
Look into how many species of animals were just screwed and had to die for said damn. Americans (of which I'm not, for clarity sake) are trying there
Damnedest!! to save endangered species.
China has bears in cages in markets and harvests the secretions of there glands through tubes in there flesh...
Data from the UN's own studies, which BTW thanks UN for that great job in egypt. We should have some giant body of people that unites the nations of
the world and prevents atrocities from happening. Israel has had a dozen mandates against it in the same timeframe Egypt has had NONE.
China's CO2 output tracked last in 2007 was 6,538,367,000 metric tons
United States output last tracked in 2007 was 5,838,381,000 metric tons
Here's a better stat, lets track growth of CO2 emissions to find out who the real bad guys are here (this is assuming that CO2 is a bad gas and will
kill us all which my own research, not beliefs, Research! shows is incorrect, the pesky forests all the greenies loved years ago that are now
regrowing in north america NEED that CO2)
All DATA IN THOUSAND OF METRIC TONS
United states year after year growth
1999 5,556,587.0
2000 5,742,526.0
2001 5,630,110.0 << Down from previous
2002 5,695,562.0
2002 5,689,629.0 << Down again
2004 5,799,254.0
2005 5,842,558.0
2006 5,759,214.0 <<<<< LOOOK IT EVEN WENT DOWN AGAIN!!
2006 5,838,381.0
Looks pretty stable actually... If the UN's own data would continue you would find there a couple more years when they made LESS, but that data
conflicts with the biased world view of this man made climate change nonsense. It's my belief this data is being scrubbed. Someone please find the
current data to 2010 reguarding Both countries.
China's year after year growth
1999 3,318,045.0
2000 3,405,096.0
2001 3,487,365.0
2002 3,694,040.0
2003 4,346,796.0
2004 5,094,739.0
2005 5,614,071.0
2006 6,113,278.0
2007 6,538,367.0 <<<< This is exponential growth from less than 10 years
Yeah the Chinese took the trophy years ago. You get away from my table and come back when you tell the Chinese to slow down until then you can goto
heck. There is a REASON California is asking for a bailout for the whole state. Everyone there, all of them, are idiots (apologies if your the rare
exception) and had/have no concept of the real world. If they did all that green power etc they talk about would have lifted them OFF the grid instead
they buy Enormous quantities of energy from other countries to get around there own self destructive imposed laws.
China isn't going to stop. So, what? we all crawl back into caves and live our 30 year lifespans while there chinese do whatever they want ?
Further
| Quote: |
steep decrease of CO2 and other noxious gas exhaust .....
|
50% At BEST is all your going to see if every Man Woman and Child DIED right now in the entire united states... More likely the chinese are now so far
ahead its more like 25%.
This is what I love about you treehuggers your world view is not only myopic but you simply disbelieve any data not within that view.
|
|
|
metalresearcher
National Hazard
Posts: 758
Registered: 7-9-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: Reactive
|
|
But why is China increasing its CO output so fast ?
Right because of that 70% of Chinese products are for the US and W-Europe. These are indeed de-industralizing and promoring 'we are cleaner' but the
large increase of pollution from CN is mainly because of our gadgets, car parts,
| Quote: | | China isn't going to stop. So, what? we all crawl back into caves and live our 30 year lifespans while there chinese do whatever they want ?
|
As long as we buy all these crap like every 1-2 years a new iPhone (or to stay within the topic: every year new Xmas lights strands) the Chinese make
them. Only a small eprcentage of the CN industry serves the domestic and non US / EU market.
www.lowtechmagazine.com
[Edited on 2011-2-13 by metalresearcher]
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5128
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by quicksilver | That is called sarcasm.
_______
QUOTE:
"Canada, the US, the UK are all bending over literally "
I'd literally like to see evidence of that being literally true.
_______
Actually I apologize as I realize that wasn't clear.
The compliance (RoHS) is in place for nations as per the above; but not the polluters.
[Edited on 12-2-2011 by quicksilver] |
Since RoHS stops me buying electronic gear full of lead, I don't see how it can encourage (for example) the Chinese to use lots of lead.
I realise that their systems suck badly in terms of environmental impact and I agree that we shouldn't be exporting our "dirty work" to them just
because they are not in a position to decline it.
|
|
|
Regolith
Hazard to Self
Posts: 73
Registered: 4-2-2011
Location: Mining the moon.
Member Is Offline
Mood: Glacial
|
|
You didn't respond to the point you simply changed it (like every treehugger I know when faced with facts).
China has 1.331 Billion people 20% of the worlds population... and rising.
You don't think that they will just start to use those lights themselves when were all gone? Of course they will. Plus you seem to make the point that
if we didn't ask them to make more they wouldn't... again this is without basis. Their population is expanding the american population is shrinking.
China is going to be the new center of the world.
| Quote: |
Right because of that 70% of Chinese products are for the US and W-Europe. These are indeed de-industralizing and promoring 'we are cleaner' but the
large increase of pollution from CN is mainly because of our gadgets, car parts,
|
Where do you get that number from it's bang on 70% (nice round big sounding number) huh ? Here's some real numbers
From http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-02/11/content_746712...
| Quote: |
The total included US$27.93 billion in trade between China and the European Union, down 18.7 percent; 22.25 billion dollars in trade between China and
the United States, down 15.2 percent; and US$14.5 in trade between China and Japan, down 28 percent.
|
Again its not the americans at the front of the line. Yet the americans get all the lashings.. makes sense.
(again I'm not american but the constant ripping on them gets old FAST)
Stop lumping the US and The EU together, neither country thinks of themselves as part of the other and noone No One thinks of themselves as french..
Sorry, you don't get it both ways. Much like global warming crap if it's warmer it's global warming if it's COLDER
it's global warming. NO it's one way you double talking fool. It's not our fault BOTH if were making the stuff
ourselves OR if china is making it. If america wasn't here at all it would be the russians. The simple truth is they have made an economy SELLING
goods.
China is where they are because their gov mandates cheap products to MAKE THEM MORE MONEY. Thats why things here went out of buisness
THEY made them cheaper and put people out of buisness here.
You use a hippie magazine as your proof ? Surely it's unbiased and has both sides of the story shown... You live in Cali don't you ? How's my power
keeping your lights on ? Every payday I thank you for making it just a little bigger with your policies.
At first I though to just tell you off and to get out but then I looked at the URL and realized YOU are the madness in sciencemadness. Your exactly
where you should be, but there are men of science here and raw data doesn't back you up.
|
|
|
unionised
International Hazard
Posts: 5128
Registered: 1-11-2003
Location: UK
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
"You didn't respond to the point you simply changed it "
" Much like global warming crap if it's warmer it's global warming if it's COLDER it's global warming. NO it's one way you double talking fool."
Just for a start, LEDs are not responsible for global warming.
Whether or not the Chinese population is growing and// or industrialising, the US and EU (independently, but nevertheless both of them) are
continuing to produce a lot of CO2
If some of that is indirect production (i.e. we get the Chinese to do it then ship the stuff to us) isn't really the point.
It's the Western world's consumer demands that use a lot of the Earth's resources.
Pointing out that, at the moment, trade is down is just a reminder of the recession. Not really news.
And, while we are about it, actually it can happen both ways. A rise in global temperatures will reduce the size of the Arctic ice sheet. That will
reduce the energy delivered to drive the gulf stream and that will make some places (notably Western Europe) cooler.
So hotter can mean cooler, provided that you look at the details.
"China is where they are because their gov mandates cheap products to MAKE THEM MORE MONEY. Thats why things here went out of buisness THEY made them
cheaper and put people out of buisness here."
Perhaps the US govt should mandate the same thing.
"You live in Cali don't you ? "
Not unless the UK has recently been annexed.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
