New Swiss study: CFL’s irradiate much more than previously assumed

Original article in German:

www.bernerzeitung.ch/bern/Kaum-eingefuehrt-und-schon-umstritten/story/29795888

www.bernerzeitung.ch/wissen/technik/Verdacht-Sparlampen-strahlen-staerker-als-angenommen/story/14561897

Letter to the editor:

www.bernerzeitung.ch/bzforum/leserbriefe/Die-grosse-Luege-bei-den-Sparlampen/story/29291609

Google translation of the first article:

Hardly introduced and already controversial

New studies show that the energy saving light bulbs emit a lot stronger than hitherto assumed. The federal government has also done a study about this now. She is still under wraps.

The Federal Office of Energy (BFE) has re-examined together with the Federal Office of Public Health (BAG) in a study of the electrical radiation emitted from energy saving light bulbs. The results for the two offices are already on the table, but will only be informed in a few weeks. Reason: The study of the electric fields probably come to a conclusion different from a study in 2004. Even then, the SFOE let jointly investigate with the BAG, is whether the electromagnetic fields of energy saving lamps for human health hazardous.

Controversial Study

In this first study, the authors have come to the conclusion that energy-saving lamps “on electromagnetic radiation hardly perform worse than incandescent lamps.” Energy-saving bulbs could safely be recommended as a means of reducing energy consumption.

This study was controversial from the beginning. Experts from home and abroad, loudly criticized, not that the correct method was applied, making the measurements far below the actual exposure to electromagnetic pollution from energy saving light bulbs.

“It will not be the suspicion that the first study to conceal the actual emissions of energy-saving light bulbs in favor of the single-track thinkers and saving lamp producers wanted,” says Peter Schlegel, radiation expert and longtime fighter against all forms of radiation. To counter these and other criticisms, let BFE and BAG are posting a second study. “The methodological approach is different and more complex than in the 2004-spec ‘study, says BFE spokeswoman Marianne ignition. Currently, the BAG and BFE brooded about how the results communicated to the public in March.

Switzerland’s leading role

Should the study prove fact that a saving lamp shining in his head close to much stronger than for example a computer screen at shorter distances and use of energy saving light bulbs health risks are coming into Erklärungsnot BFE. Because Switzerland has taken place in Europe and was the first country with efficiency requirements for household lamps. This gives the BFE’s approach is accelerating, which then last year decided to “ban incandescent.”

Furthermore, the much praised energy-saving lamps meet the requirements in many respects, not (yet). According to a test of the German consumer magazine “Öko-cut test” the energy saving lamps in the case of directional light, like a dining table, desk or reading lamp with lampshade relatively poorly. In addition, the brightness of a lamp power increases during the period from clear.

Saving lamp manufacturers advertise the extremely long lifetime. This ensures cost-saving bulb would come when the old bulb. According reach Ökotest of 16 tested models, but only 7 of the rated lamp life. Another problem: Many energy-saving lamps contain mercury – toxic heavy metal and this makes them a hazardous waste.

Low savings potential

In Switzerland, for lighting, according to BFE about 15 percent of the total power required. But even if all bulbs were replaced with energy saving light bulbs, reducing the power consumption in Switzerland, only one percent to a maximum of two. The EU is a savings potential of four percent.

In New Zealand, the new government has in the past year, the ban on light bulbs discarded. There is also in Switzerland, such efforts? “No, there is not,” says ignition of BFE. Since Switzerland import virtually all lighting sources, such a move would make no sense.

 

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Electromagnetic Radiation, Energy saving?. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s