Is anyone else here stockpiling CRT televisions ?

[Gameguy]

I was under the impression that the government would never allow a product with 4 lbs. of lead (average TV) as well as mercury be produced.

I don't see why not, there's lead and mercury in compact fluorescent lightbulbs and they're being pushed to replace traditional lightbulbs which don't contain any lead or mercury. Sure it looks good to save on electricity usage, but most people will just chuck them into the trash and landfills will still be polluted.

What should be pushed if anything are LED lightbulbs as they are lead and mercury free, use less electricity than CFLs, and last much longer. The main reason they're not so widely produced is that they're bad for business. They cost more to produce and last much longer than CFLs so companies won't make as much money if they make LEDs instead.

This isn't really related to TVs, but it still bugs me.

[Soviet Conscript]

I don't see why not, there's lead and mercury in compact fluorescent lightbulbs and they're being pushed to replace traditional lightbulbs which don't contain any lead or mercury. Sure it looks good to save on electricity usage, but most people will just chuck them into the trash and landfills will still be polluted.

What should be pushed if anything are LED lightbulbs as they are lead and mercury free, use less electricity than CFLs, and last much longer. The main reason they're not so widely produced is that they're bad for business. They cost more to produce and last much longer than CFLs so companies won't make as much money if they make LEDs instead.

This isn't really related to TVs, but it still bugs me.

they arn't very bright and the light they emmit is very displeaseing. though i have to admit my experence with them is limited.

my Samsung CRT HDTV gives me the best picture i've ever sceen even with old games. it has the same ghosting and motion problems you get with older games run on a hdtv but in some way i like the sharp vibrant picture more then even on my sony RGB PVM.

[Compute]

What should be pushed if anything are LED lightbulbs as they are lead and mercury free, ...

You may want some kind of assurance from the mfr before assuming that the bulbs were assembled using lead-free solder. The few vendors I have asked have been unable to tell me if the bulbs they sold were in fact lead free. Those bulbs were not touted as being lead-free, however.

[AB Positive]

(With apologies to Yahtzee...)

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooo.

[Orion Pimpdaddy]

I don't see why not, there's lead and mercury in compact fluorescent lightbulbs and they're being pushed to replace traditional lightbulbs which don't contain any lead or mercury. Sure it looks good to save on electricity usage, but most people will just chuck them into the trash and landfills will still be polluted.

What should be pushed if anything are LED lightbulbs as they are lead and mercury free, use less electricity than CFLs, and last much longer. The main reason they're not so widely produced is that they're bad for business. They cost more to produce and last much longer than CFLs so companies won't make as much money if they make LEDs instead.

This isn't really related to TVs, but it still bugs me.

I'm not sure if the amounts of contaminents are high enough to pose a threat with the CFL bulbs. The non-compact fluorescent bulbs are much bigger and have been around for decades and are still used for most commercial lighting. Nobody rasied a stink about those. It seems like they would have more toxins in them than a CFL. I know a lot of people who purposely shatter them while throwing them in dumpsters.

CFL's can actually lower the amount of mercury being released into the environmnet because it takes less coal at the plant to light them. Burning coal releases mercury.

Your right about LEDs though.

[Gameguy]

they arn't very bright and the light they emmit is very displeaseing. though i have to admit my experence with them is limited.

I'm also annoyed with CFLs because someone I know is visually impaired and the light from CFLs give her headaches for some reason, and since traditional lightbulbs are going to be eliminated within a few years this could pose a big problem for her.

CFLs also emit UV light which can damage art work among other things. There's also potential health problems that can be caused by long term exposure to the UV light, especially if you remain close to the bulbs while they're operating(like in a lamp that's right beside you). That's something else to think about.

You may want some kind of assurance from the mfr before assuming that the bulbs were assembled using lead-free solder. The few vendors I have asked have been unable to tell me if the bulbs they sold were in fact lead free. Those bulbs were not touted as being lead-free, however.

I'll have to check some packaging again, there were a couple of LED bulbs in Wal-mart and I know the packaging said they were mercury free but I'm not sure about lead. I thought they were but I'll have to check again.

I'm not sure if the amounts of contaminents are high enough to pose a threat with the CFL bulbs. The non-compact fluorescent bulbs are much bigger and have been around for decades and are still used for most commercial lighting. Nobody rasied a stink about those. It seems like they would have more toxins in them than a CFL. I know a lot of people who purposely shatter them while throwing them in dumpsters.

CFL's can actually lower the amount of mercury being released into the environmnet because it takes less coal at the plant to light them. Burning coal releases mercury.

Your right about LEDs though.

The thing is not all power generating stations are coal powered, plenty are nuclear or Hydro-electric. If you get power from a plant that's nuclear or Hydro-electric you won't be saving any mercury emissions. But CFLs get worn out and replaced far more frequently than monitors so they'll create a ton more waste. And though most bulbs just get thrown out in the regular trash(as you've mentioned), they aren't supposed to be disposed that way. I'm currently saving up a big box of old CFLs because they're actually supposed to be brought to the local hazardous waste depot to be properly disposed of, just like old paint or old electronics. It's a pain to have to save all that up, but it's not worth a trip to just drop off a single bulb whenever they wear out. Most people just don't care so they throw them out in the regular trash anyway.

I should point out that most of the vaporized mercury becomes fused with the glass by the time the bulb wears out, but if you accidentally drop a bulb that's new, then you'd have a bigger problem of contamination in your home. It may not be all that much, but it's more than with traditional lightbulbs.

I'm convinced that the main reason why CFLs are being pushed is because municipalities can't keep up with increased demand for electricity, and rather than find a way to produce more, they find ways for people to use less. It's not really because of environmental reasons.

There's articles on Wikipedia that go into further detail with the pros and cons of CFLs and LEDs, I don't want to read through them again but most of the info is there with references.

[Ed Oscuro]

CFLs are hopefully just an intermediate step towards better devices. Lead joints in LEDs are an issue I didn't know of.

Of course, both of these are still better solutions than lightbulbs, from a pure pollution standpoint - IF you dispose of them properly. CFLs have a much longer lifespan than lightbulbs and so you won't be tossing nearly as many units. LEDs have a longer lifespan still. You just have to be able to recycle them. With any luck, you'll be able to take them back the day you go get some more to help replenish your stocks.

The light can indeed be bad. I have seen some CFL lights with terrible light wavelength output, very blue. CFL light that's more blue than an incadescent is fine; nowadays when I walk into a room with incadescent it feels rather too orange and dim. As has been said before - the shorter wavelength of the blue light makes it easier to see things. In the summer it's also nicer because they aren't creating the sheer amount of heat of incadescents (too bad we don't have any bulbs appropriate for a chandelier).

What designers really need to do is create bulbs with varying wavelengths, and some with light closer to the sun than we've seen before. In a ground-floor room in my house, there are small incadescents in a chandelier and a LCD monitor with its color temperature set low (more orange, more "warm" like the sun). This is a decent color setup for that place because the artificial light doesn't contrast with natural light. However, the CFLs don't currently replicate it (and one strange-sounding, but perhaps understandable, objection to CFLs is that the bulbs aren't found in as pleasing shapes as you can find incadescents - CFLs in a chandelier look strange).

Back to CRTs for a moment:

Sony Trinitron tubes were made with a resolution at least as high as 1920x1440 (yes, you read that right - that's the resolution of the P992, a Dell-branded Sony Trinitron from early this decade).

Trinitrons that have a color tint may just need to be adjusted. Now, the Sony / Dell P992 is a computer monitor, so it may be different than a TV, but its settings can be adjusted via WinDAS (Digital Alignment Software) software by plugging an ECS cable into your computer's RS-232 port and then into the (usually hidden and covered) data port of the monitor. The P992 has this; I found mine (although still waiting on the cable sold from this place; they also have instructions on doing this).

Basically, instead of complaining that your television has a terrible picture, hunt down the service manual and see how you can adjust the output to be more correct.

[robotriot]

I've got a 32" Panasonic 16:9 which I bought new about 4 years ago. It's a pretty good TV, it's just that it weighs so much (and takes up a lot of space) I have no idea if I'll be able to take it with me once I move. I also prefer LCDs in terms of power usage. If only they'd scale better :/

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Most CFLs you buy in the store anymore aren't blue in the slightest. In fact our house is entirely CFL (or just flourescent) and none of the lights have a blue tint to them. With the exception of the "warming up" some of the bulbs require to get at full brightness, everything looks just as it did back in the incandescent days.

In fact here's an article from NPR while detailing the dangers of CFL mercury, shows that the energy savings over a standard bulb contribute to overall less mercury in the environment.

Here's the link.

Here's the quote

She says that even though fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, using them contributes less mercury to the environment than using regular incandescent bulbs. That's because they use less electricity — and coal-fired power plants are the biggest source of mercury emissions in the air.

"The compact fluorescent light bulb is a product people can use to positively influence the environment to… prevent mercury emissions as well as greenhouse gas emissions. And it's something that we can do now — and it's extremely important that we do do it," Reed says. "And the positive message is, if you recycle them, if you dispose of them properly, then they're doing a world of good."

And if you're concerned about the color temperature here's a quote from the same article that shows how to avoid the bluer bulbs.

MYTH: CFLs have a harsh, cold light quality.

Increasingly, this is less of an issue. Over the past few years, manufacturers have worked to provide a warmer color. Some people say they still notice a difference, but the gap is narrowing. For a warmer, white light, look for a color temperature of 2,700–3,000K on the package.

According to this website here are average color temperatures of an.

100-watt incandescent 2870
40-watt incandescent 2500


And as far as LED technology goes, it's way more expensive right now than standard CFLs or incandescent. And most of the home use ones produce the same bluish tint that people still accuse CFL's of producing. If you get a chance go to wal-mart and compare the lumen output of their LED bulbs compared to a CFL. They're nowhere close considering the price.

Anyway what was this thread about again?

[Ed Oscuro]

Great digest of the facts TDI!

Most CFLs you buy in the store anymore aren't blue in the slightest.

I can corroborate that they've been improving greatly over the last year. My CFL horror story was from a random pack found at Goodwill (that somebody had opened and then promptly donated, no doubt because of the horrid color temperature) from Feit Electric that had very inappropriate color. Ironically the package touts the bulbs as "simulating natural light" inside a little orange sun graphic. Either a bad model or a bad sample. I have no idea how old those are, either, which may contribute to it.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

Beware: Any bulb simulating natural light will be blue(ish). Sunlight is blue, although a lot bulbs that simulate natural light are not really near the 5000k range of real sunlight.