Questions Arising On Mercury In Compact Fluorescents

Patchw0rk F0g sends in an article from MSNBC on how some environmentalists are having second thoughts on compact fluorescent bulbs. Their relative energy efficiency is unquestioned. The problem is the mercury — enough in one bulb to contaminate 1,000 gallons of water, even in newer low-mercury bulbs. The EPA has an 11-step cleanup process to follow when you break a CFL in your home. The specialized recycling facilities that are needed are thin on the ground — about one per county in California, one of seven states where it is illegal to dispose of CFLs in the general waste stream.

Comments

Re:But Global Warming

[speaktruth]

Because what your doctor won't tell you is that exposure from a broken bulb (or some would argue that which is radiated throught the air by an unbroken bulb) is still less than the amount of mercury and other heavy metals being injected into that same baby through vaccination. And, of course the reason your doctor won't tell you this is actually the same reason we use these bulbs to combat climate change: follow the money........

HAHA

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you read about the lady in liberal Massachusetts who broke one in her bedroom? The liberal government turned her house into a superfund site.

A little mercury is no big deal. Its only because our regulations have become so hysterical that you can use a headline like "contaminates 1000 gallons of water". Really? What is it, a milligram of mercury?

Hyper-sensitive fools running the government doing more harm than good. Hardcore liberal government types attacking liberal minded housewives.

And slashdot under full control of the enviro-hysteria agenda. Its getting downright crazy out there. This site is for feebs.

Re:HAHA

[Goliath]

Liberal.

Re:Three questions.

[Bryansix]

This is not offtopic. Whomever modded it as such should have their mouth filled with dental amalgam fillings.

Good grief is right; why were you modded up?

[WindBourne]

First, I see more gripping out of neo-cons like yourself than I do out of environmentalists. They view EVERYTHING as being wrong, unless it obeys their vision of the world 100%. There is no intelligent solutions from them. They push for tax cuts and spending increases.

Second, did you even RTFA? It said that environmentalists are pushing CFLs, and waste industry officials and some environmental scientists, are now thinking that we should not be pushing these. In particular, the waste industry ppl (note: these ppl are not known for their environmental concern, except where to bury a body) are concerned because we have no recycle stream in place. They do not want to be held responsible for bulbs being broken and the mercury released into ground water. So, is that so bad? I think not. The US requires companies that sell Ni-Cads to take them back and recycle them. The same should be required by Walmart.

BTW, we do have diesels here. Ppl do not buy them because they want faster power gas engines rather than smoky stinky diesels. Of course, ppl miss the fact that they are smoky and stinky BECAUSE we have limited emissions regulations esp. compared to EU. EU's fuel is VERY clean compared to our diesel. Of course, that is a big part of the reason why they pay so much for it. So why do we not require it? Because it would cost as much as EU's .

Yes, everything has trade-offs. Sadly, far too many ppl make choices without knowing the facts, such as yourself.

Thanks again Enviro-dorks

[DarkOx]

Seriously this campain against the incandescent bulb is stupid. Ok so an incandecent lamp is about 10% efficent, fine. Guess what though that is a LIE. The way I use them (at night in my home) about 9 months of the year I want the heat (northeast Ohio). So actually I am getting very effiecent use of the electrical power it takes run that bulb.

So in exchange for some energy savings in the summer months with the CFL we get to dispose of the plastic bases which are most likey not biodegradeable and or pay to recycle them. We also get to put all sorts of toxic chemistry like phosphorse and mercury into the ground or USE more energy to run some sort of facility to properly process and dispose of these things. Gee you know what that old incandescent bulb is starting to look pretty friendly to the environment by comparision.

I am not saying CFLs are bad, they just should not be used everywhere as "the green" solution there are situations where they are appropriate and ones where they are not. They work great on the garage door opener for instance. I don't want to heat the garage ever(well very rarely) and they are less vibration sensitive then incandecents. So there is a real energy saving their probably.

All this legislation to end the incandecent bulp is really short sited. Technology should be used where it fits. Judgements should be made on a situation basis. Take CAFE standards, lay all the BS about whats a truck whats a car aside, you still have the dumb standards in the first place. I can't run my engine as hot and lean as the metal would allow, because if I do the NOx emmission will be through the roof. The thing is by running it cooler its less efficent more gas is burned resulting in more other kinds of emmissions. There is also major negative impact from harvesting and refineing oil in the first place that is being ignored. If we could five mpg more out of current technology ICEs just by relaxing the NOx emmisions rules it might well be a win, especially with the availibility issues with oil we are starting to see.

Our entire eco-policy is total BS that might as well have been written by poo-slinging monkeys. There are some obvious common sense rules about disposal of dangerous materials beyond that its fair to say we should legislate that blaten waste of energy not be allowed. Perhaps you should not be allowed to air condition your home to a temp of less then 74 without a medical waivor and or heat it beyond 69. Maybe it should be illegal to drive a vehicle that is larger then X sq feet without multiple occupants or cargo. Want to own that SUV? then you need a small car when its just you driving to work etc etc. This all needs careful though and it needs to be done on a local level.

  I know that makes it hard for big manufacturers to deal with but whats sensible in Northern Ohio might not make sense for Southern Texas. Its time we swallow the hard pill and realize that we need to try and use our brains to solve our energey and pollution problems and that means all our brains yours, mine, and bill over in San Franciso. We can't expect some fuck'wit in Washington DC to fix everything.

Re:I only liked CFLs because they lasted longer.

[lpq]

So you still live at home and don't pay for electricity but your mom makes you buy your own bulbs? Geez...And I thought my mom was harsh...