# Broken Industrial Fluorescent Tube Cleanup/Safety -- Need Answer Fast
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [January 7, 2013, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380 "2013-01-07T19:09:02Z")
**Posts on this page:** 13
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/1 "2013-01-07T19:09:02Z")
Contractors installing lights i the office in which my wife works broke two large industrial fluorescent tubes today.
And left.
There doesn’t seem to have been much cleanup.
I know the things contain some amount of mercury. Many sites comfortingly tell me compact fluorescent bulbs such as we use in houses contain little mercury (\<4mg), but these tubes are (were) several feet long and probably contain more.
Checking several sites around the 'Net, the two ironclad rules of cleanup seem to be **Open windows for ventilation for several hours** and **Do not vacuum!**
Well, the building she works in does not appear to have windows which can be opened, and in this cold, her boss likely won’t go for it if it’s even possible (too much money/interference with office workers). The cleaning staff will certainly vacuum.
So both cleanup rules are being or will shortly be broken.
Any advice on what she should do, or ask her boss to do, if anything?
---
### Author:  [@MikeS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeS)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/2 "2013-01-07T19:24:42Z")
Personally, I’d get the boss to call the contractors and raise hell until they come back and clean it up properly. But that’s just me.
---
### Author:  [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/3 "2013-01-07T19:44:39Z")
1. Were the lamps old or new? Had they recently been turned on?
2. Where were the bulbs broken in relation to her workspace, the kitchen, air handling equipment, etc.? What kind of material did the glass shards / phosphor powder, etc. land on - desks, furniture, carpet, tile floor?
3. When you say not much cleanup - is there still phosphor powder from the bulbs and shards of glass on the floor or elsewhere?
If it were me, I would write a short memo to my boss saying that I did not believe proper cleanup procedures were being followed, send a copy to him, and keep a copy. CC _his_ boss and anyone else you feel like. You can reference EPA cleanup guidelines, available on their website, as well as documentation on the health effects of mercury and other resources if you wish. I’d also probably tell them I’m leaving the office for the day.
A week or so later, after working normal days in the office, I’d see my doctor and pay $40 for a blood mercury level test. If it comes back abnormal in any way, I would demand that the company pay for any treatment needed, as well a thorough cleaning of the office by a professional cleanup company, and follow-up blood tests. This should all be covered by their workman’s compensation insurance.
In all likelihood, she will probably be fine. But if they spilled a great deal of mercury and failed to clean it up (i.e. it gets trapped in the carpet, or some little beads roll under a file cabinet), it can continue to release vapor for a long time, and this potential for chronic exposure is the real concern. This vapor can also re-condense in the HVAC system and spread throughout the office.
Many people will undoubtedly post in this thread that it is not worth worrying about, “I’ve broken tons of bulbs and I’m still fine”, “scientists and doctors make too big a deal about mercury, why, in my day…”, etc. This is all bullshit. There is no safe level of mercury exposure, and the fact that someone does not notice any major neurological problems does not mean that damage has not been done. Most studies on mercury and other heavy metal exposure focus on major medical consequences that are easy to identify and correlate statistically, and this is what EPA and OSHA base their exposure limits on. Minor problems resulting from small exposures are difficult to study and definitively establish a causal link. But there is increasing evidence that even small exposures to mercury/lead/etc. levels previously regarded as “safe” can have detectable neurological effects, especially in children. Many people would dismiss these effects are minor, but if it were me, the fact that my brain damage is only minor would not be all that reassuring.
---
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/4 "2013-01-07T20:02:06Z")
Thanks, I sent her the questions, we’ll see.
One of the safety engineers here (a gov’t agency at which I work, not my wife’s firm where the spill occurred) suggested dryly that “after a few days, most of the what mercury there is will have volatilized and been carried out of the building in the lungs of office workers, so the carpet shouldn’t be too hazardous after that.”
---
### Author:  [@Yeticus\_Rex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yeticus_Rex)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/5 "2013-01-07T20:14:39Z")
Here are the appropriate [Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)](https://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=msds+fluorescent+light+bulbs&oq=MSDS+flourscent&gs_l=hp.1.1.0i13l3j0i13i30.0.0.1.8814.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.IdOaAk7CWls&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE&fp=89c8db76974e7f67&bpcl=40096503&biw=1680&bih=883) for fluorescent bulbs.
---
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/6 "2013-01-07T20:18:41Z")
Questions from above:
> [@](#):
>
> 1. Were the lamps old or new? Had they recently been turned on?
>
> 2. Where were the bulbs broken in relation to her workspace, the kitchen, air handling equipment, etc.? What kind of material did the glass shards / phosphor powder, etc. land on - desks, furniture, carpet, tile floor?
>
> 3. When you say not much cleanup - is there still phosphor powder from the bulbs and shards of glass on the floor or elsewhere?
Answers:
> [@](#):
>
> They were old. I was told they were the ones removed because they were burned out.
>
> They were broken in the hallway a the opposite end from me, but the air circulation continued to run. It landed on the carpet and they used a shop vac to vacuum it up, but I don’t know how thorough their job was because I cannot detect debris except for a few bits of cardboard they left behind.
---
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/7 "2013-01-07T20:20:36Z")
> [@Yeticus\_Rex](#):
>
> Here are the appropriate [Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)](https://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=msds+fluorescent+light+bulbs&oq=MSDS+flourscent&gs_l=hp.1.1.0i13l3j0i13i30.0.0.1.8814.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.IdOaAk7CWls&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE&fp=89c8db76974e7f67&bpcl=40096503&biw=1680&bih=883) for fluorescent bulbs.
Note that these were NOT Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs (CFLs), but the long tubes used in offices and industrial sites. Someone asked me if they were T-8s or T-12s, which I do not know.
---
### Author:  [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/8 "2013-01-07T21:00:25Z")
> [@](#):
>
> They were old. I was told they were the ones removed because they were burned out.
>
> They were broken in the hallway a the opposite end from me, but the air circulation continued to run. It landed on the carpet and they used a shop vac to vacuum it up, but I don’t know how thorough their job was because I cannot detect debris except for a few bits of cardboard they left behind.
An old bulb that has not been operating poses the smallest risk, because much of the elemental mercury has likely been converted to other forms that do not evaporate, and whatever remained was likely not in vapor form. Using a shop vac is pretty stupid and it certainly would increase the airborne vapor concentration and contaminate the vacuum, but if it was the contractors’ vacuum and your wife was not adjacent to them while they were doing it that’s mostly their problem.
As you note, though, those large commercial-grade tubes can contain a lot more mercury than small CFLs intended for residential use. You will find a lot of websites talking about how most modern CFLs contain very little mercury and cleanup is not a big deal, but a single CFL is not at all the same as two large tubes. It is _possible_ that quite a bit was spilled.
If this all happened on the other side of the office from your wife she’s still probably fine. If it had been a very large number of bulbs, or new bulbs, etc. broken directly over her workspace, chair, etc. I would be more concerned. Definitely tell her not to walk on that carpet for a few days.
If it were my office I would make the contractors pay to replace the section of carpet where this happened. Since I suspect it will be difficult to sell that approach to her boss, I’d say the best thing to do is just have her blood level tested in a week or so. As I said, she is most likely fine but there are certainly less probable combinations of circumstances in which further measures might be required. Safest approach, if she can’t bully her boss into doing the cleanup according to recommended procedures in the first place, is to have a blood test.
---
### Author:  [@Michael63129](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Michael63129)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/9 "2013-01-07T21:05:16Z")
> [@Absolute](#):
>
> Many people will undoubtedly post in this thread that it is not worth worrying about, “I’ve broken tons of bulbs and I’m still fine”, “scientists and doctors make too big a deal about mercury, why, in my day…”, etc. This is all bullshit. There is no safe level of mercury exposure, and the fact that someone does not notice any major neurological problems does not mean that damage has not been done. Most studies on mercury and other heavy metal exposure focus on major medical consequences that are easy to identify and correlate statistically, and this is what EPA and OSHA base their exposure limits on. Minor problems resulting from small exposures are difficult to study and definitively establish a causal link. But there is increasing evidence that even small exposures to mercury/lead/etc. levels previously regarded as “safe” can have detectable neurological effects, especially in children. Many people would dismiss these effects are minor, but if it were me, the fact that my brain damage is only minor would not be all that reassuring.
This may all be true, but the amount of mercury you will expose yourself to from a broken fluorescent isn’t anything to be worried about - at least, if you also aren’t worried about [eating fish](http://1000bulbs.com/pages/mercury.html):
> [@](#):
>
> Figure 2 (left) shows the key comparisons between mercury exposures from breaking a CFL, and the methylmercury exposures from eating Albacore tuna. The top bar, showing the tiny mercury dose (0.068 micrograms) calculated from the median of the 45 breakage scenarios, is compared to the dose absorbed by breathing air contaminated at the state air quality standard for one hour (0.153 micrograms) and eight hours (1.22 micrograms). (Eight hours is an approximate upper limit on the time it takes to digest and absorb the mercury from a meal.) Most important in this comparison is the bar showing the dose from eating a single (6-ounce) meal of Albacore tuna (48 micrograms of mercury), which is roughly equal to the very worst CFL breakage case measured by the MDEP. The last, and by far the largest, of the bars is the steady state body burden that would result if the recommended amount of fish is regularly consumed on a weekly basis [570 micrograms, worst-case is 55 micrograms].
Note that this does NOT mean that tuna has as much mercury as a fluorescent (compact or otherwise; note that the limits on mercury also apply to regular fluorescents, [which do have more mercury than CFLs](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescent_lamp_recycling#Mercury_in_lamps), but not staggeringly higher); only a small amount of e released mercury will be absorbed by your body, as compared to all of the (much more dangerous) organic mercury in fish.
Also, what was the worst-case scenario shown above?
> [@](#):
>
> Note that the worst case scenario was truly designed as the worst of worst cases. It yielded 800 times the median dose, and five times the dose of the second worst case (data not shown in Figure 2). There were two main factors that contributed to this case. First, every effort was made to force the mercury into the air. Although the bulk debris was picked up, it was disposed of in a trash can, in the room. A vacuum cleaner, with a beater attachment, was then used on the carpet where the lamp had been broken and then left in the room. Second, entrances to the room were shut, and heating vents and windows sealed, leaving little chance for the mercury to disperse. The important point here: all of these factors are easily avoidable.
In other words, they did everything wrong, yet still had less than 10% of a typical week’s mercury exposure from fish, probably the only way to get more is to lick the phosphor off the glass (which absorbs a lot of the mercury, especially in old tubes; that said, the phosphor itself isn’t harmful, at least in modern fluorescents, although may cause inflammation if it gets in a cut). Note that an industrial tube has around 2-3 times more mercury, which still comes out to less than the exposure from fish - even for this very extreme worst case (800 times the average exposure, or around 300x for a 4-foot bulb).
---
### Author:  [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/10 "2013-01-07T21:18:37Z")
She’s (almost) dead Jim.
Now give me back that tri-corder and pass me another mint julipe.
---
### Author:  [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2013, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/11 "2013-01-07T21:37:54Z")
Several points:
1. People do worry about mercury in fish. In fact, the FDA explicitly recommends against eating more than one meal of albacore tuna per week because of the risk of mercury exposure. The article you linked is being quite disingenuous by portraying eating approximately 12 meals of albacore per week as the FDA recommendation. The FDA recommends you eat fish that are low in mercury and limit consumption of albacore to 1 meal per week for the very reason that the mercury level is hazardous. This alone is enough to make me distrust the article, since they are obviously willing to omit and/or distort key facts in order to make their point.
[http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-specificinformation/seafood/foodbornepathogenscontaminants/methylmercury/ucm115662.htm](http://www.fda.gov/food/foodsafety/product-specificinformation/seafood/foodbornepathogenscontaminants/methylmercury/ucm115662.htm)
1. The article is written by members of the “Illuminating Engineering Society”. I view it with as much skepticism as I would an article about the safety of fracking written by members of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
2. The “typical” small exposure levels mentioned in the article are as small as they are precisely because common safety precautions are typically taken. The OP has described numerous ways in which these safety precautions were not followed in this case. Some but not all of the conditions in their “worst-case exposure” scenario exist and it is impossible to definitively state which of those conditions were critical and which were not.
3. The mercury content of an industrial tube can be significantly larger than 2-3 times that of a CFL. Many new CFLs contain less than 1 mg of mercury, whereas approximately 10% of all large fluorescent bulbs sold in 2004 contained in excess of 100 mg. Certainly, you can assume that the CFLs involved in their study contained more, and the bulb broken in this case contained less, but assuming that everything is fine is a poor way to ensure safety.
Your article shows that careless and improper disposal of a single CFL can in a single day lead to a mercury exposure that matches or exceeds that resulting from the FDA’s recommended weekly maximum consumption of fish. I think it only reinforces the point that the breakage of two large fluorescent tubes in an indoor workplace environment that you spend all day, every day at is a problem worth worrying about, even if the contractor’s in the OP’s case were not quite as careless as the worst-case scenario in the article.
---
### Author:  [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)
#### Post date: [January 8, 2013, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/12 "2013-01-08T17:11:54Z")
Thanks. I think the info so far will ease her mind a bit; I will lobby for the blood test.
---
### Author:  [@Absolute](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Absolute)
#### Post date: [January 8, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/broken-industrial-fluorescent-tube-cleanup-safety-need-answer-fast/646380/13 "2013-01-08T17:43:11Z")
Well, I wouldn’t lobby for it. From a practical perspective it is overkill, but if she is still worried about it it should put her at ease.