Perhaps it would be appropriate for Al Gore’s Web site to display a disclaimer warning you about the dangers of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs), but he doesn’t.
According to the Washington Post’s Eco Wise columnist Eviana Hartman, “they contain a small amount of mercury, a potent neurotoxin.”
“If you toss the bulbs in the trash, they're likely to break, potentially exposing workers to mercury or releasing it into groundwater and soil from landfills,” Hartman wrote in the October 7 Washington Post.
There have been instances where these bulbs have broken and posed dangers. A WorldNetDaily story reported a Maine woman’s home was contaminated when one of the bulbs broke and will cost her $2,000 to have it cleaned up. The (Nashville) Tennessean reported of a woman who broke the bulb and without knowing the consequences vacuumed it up and spread the contaminants throughout her home.
“Everybody is throwing all this mercury into the garbage. No one knows this. This should be in bold print on the packaging,” Elizabeth Doermann said to the April 14 Tennessean.
But a government official told the April 2 Waste News, a trade publication that focuses on issues pertaining to waste products and the environment, reported there has been little discussion about the environmental hazards because of the hype surrounding global warming hysteria:
“But warning consumers that they have to dispose of compact fluorescents with care may not be in the best interest of those trying to sell them, she [Ann Moore, recycling coordinator for Burlington County, NJ] said. Along with the additional expense and performance concerns, having to deal with disposing of the bulbs could give consumers another excuse not to buy them, she said.
‘You probably don’t want to do that because you’d hate to wreck the momentum,’ Moore said. ‘And that could kill the movement.’”
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
‘You probably don’t
October 8, 2007 - 16:40 ET by Chris Norman‘You probably don’t want to do that because you’d hate to wreck the momentum,’ Moore said. ‘And that could kill the movement.’”
More evidence that, for it's fanatics, Global Warming trumps everything, including our safety
In short. Lie through
October 8, 2007 - 17:02 ET by danboIn short. Lie through omission.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Lie for the greater lie...
October 8, 2007 - 17:18 ET by Chris NormanLie for the greater lie...
With liberals
October 8, 2007 - 16:49 ET by 10ksnookerLogic is their enemy and the truth is their terror.
In the case of CFLs, they just can't bring themselves to tell the truth. Filling the world with mercury is a good thing, why?
Liberals mean well, and that is all that matters.
Well, Canada will feel this
October 8, 2007 - 16:57 ET by jay_1975Well, Canada will feel this soon as they begin their ban on standard light bulbs. Australia is soon to follow. When the people find out that they will have to pay to have these lights disposed of, they will start to realize how foolish they were to jump at anything the enviro wackos claim to be good for us. What are the saving using cfl's for a year, somewhere around 25-30 dollars? Now how much will it cost to turn in the burnt out cfl's and what will be the total cost, on average, for a broken bulb. Not much in the way of saving. Sort of like Gore's speeches on using solar panels on your home. He says that for a building that uses $20,000 worth of energy in a lifetime can be reduced to only $10,000 with solar. He forgot to mention that the cost of the solar panel for such a building would run around $30,000 for a total cost of $40,000. So, to go "green" you only need to spend twice as much as for coal power. Great plans, all of them.
From the CA Integrated Waste Mgmt Board
October 8, 2007 - 17:00 ET by Mr. KafirAnd the schmuck that is now the Governor of California wants to make standard incandescent bulbs prohibited because they are inefficient. So not we get efficiency with the threat of mercury poisoning. The jihadis must be lovin' that.
replacing incandescent lights
October 9, 2007 - 15:36 ET by merlin61Has anyone priced these mercury bulbs? How are
people in the poor neighborhoods going to pay
for these new bulbs? Is Hillary going to give them
away free in her campaign to give everything away
free? Are we going to have lightbulb police?
Illinois is thinking of banning incandescenet lights
also. Gov.Blago who can't even get a budget
passed wants go ban regular lighting.
Anything politically correct, and stupid is the
"in" thing nowadays.
Does this make you feel safe????
October 8, 2007 - 17:07 ET by Mr. KafirImagine 300 million broken CFLs. Mercury poisoning country-wide. Remember Lake Erie in the early 1970s???? The mercury poisoning the fish??? Apparently, that's a distant memory for most people. I, for one, will stock up on incandescent bulbs, and by them over the internet when needed.
hey listen
October 8, 2007 - 18:58 ET by PKhey listen morons.
disposing of flourescent light bulbs has been an industrial process for nearly 60 years.
its not that big a deal.
if it actually was, mercury would have been replaced in industry forty years ago. just like asbeostos was.
first there is not that much mercury in a large tube (8' long.) its about a tenth of a drop. the reason is that its expensive. the little curlicue bulbs are about a hundredth of that.
the big thing about mercury is that some people (a very small number) are extremely sensitive to it. the vast majority of the population is not.
a larger hazard is the white powder inside of the bulb getting in a scratch. or open wound. you really don't want to breath it either but thats just general safety. garden variety snotcatchers (low level face masks) will handle it just fine.
yes there is a classic goatf&*k about it (mercury) as a preservative in medicine but it appears as though, based on latest reasearch, that thats only an income guarantee for lawyers.
if you're worried about mercury in the damn bulbs, DON'T BREAK THE STUPID THINGS, dispose of them at your local computer/electronics recycling place.
if you go to the safety/hazmat/disposal companies, where you will be referred to by the fire departments, police departments, city idiots .... you will see just why industry has been screaming for decades about this stuff. if you get into their clutches, $2000 for getting rid of a light bulb is just starters in their league as they are EXPENSIVE!!!!
oh and you will have to keep a copy of the paperwork for seven years.
C
No,, mercury isn't that bad
October 8, 2007 - 18:44 ET by bigpapaAll you need to do is a little research..
I did because someone tried to poison me with it once upon a time. In it's liquid state it pretty much just passes through if you will..
In alcohol or inhaled is very deadly...
More on mercury in fish at consumerfreedom.com
many years ago there was a
October 8, 2007 - 19:06 ET by PKmany years ago there was a big mercury stink in the northeast about elevated levels of mercury in fish and other critters in the rivers. as i remember general electric and westinghouse were the victims of the day and they were well and truly fricaseed on the alter of public opinion for their massively calculated discharges.
after a couple of weeks the thing died a death of about a half hours duration when someone got some fish from a fishing club in up state new york that had been caught in a pristine stream about 200 years before and the levels of mercury were about the same as in the water/fish samples used for that particular "viewing with alarm" session.
C
And that could kill the movement....
October 8, 2007 - 19:23 ET by geminicontenderKill the movement damn it! I just converted a 30 unit apartment complex with CFL's to save energy. First, they didn't save energy. Secondly, and very important is that each bulb costs around $5.98. Rip off! !!!!! I am going back to candescents. To hell with Gore and his ilk.
The ones I have seen do have
October 8, 2007 - 20:14 ET by alamojbThe ones I have seen do have warnings that they contain mercury, or "Hg". But it is in small print. most people do not read labels. Do you realize that up until about 3 years ago, pressure treated wood had arsenic in it. It was called "CCA." Now the wood industry has mostly gone to "ACQ", which is a copper treatment. The thing is most houses around where I live it is code to use treated lumber for the baseplate, which is the 2x4 that is touching the concrete. So most house older than three years have arsenic in them. Same thing for a treated fence older than three years. Is it really a problem? Probably not, after all it is sealed up in the wall or out in the yard. Older decks probably have this is well. Some people worry about kids crawling around on wood decks. There I guess it could be a problem, especially if they stick their hands in their mouth- maybe. Someday a lawyer will probably make a big deal about it, though. Guess what, the newer treatment, ACQ, is highly corrosive to unprotected steel. It eats it up. You have to use fastners, nails, screws, etc that are rated for ACQ lumber. Any old nail will not do. Electrolytic reaction, I guess. I knew a guy who was a manger for a building company down in Houston that had to go back and replace a lot of stuff because the base plate corroded the metal that was attatching it to the concrete (Or maybe the nails connecting the plate to the studs- or both- I do not remember which for sure, now) Guess what will happen down in New Orleans? My guess is, since the transition to ACQ occured just before Katrina, there are some buildings down there that look fine on the outside, but the structural integrity could be in bad shape. Alamojb-Independent Contractor.
"Mad as a
October 8, 2007 - 20:13 ET by botg"Mad as a Hatter"
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
botg, most people will have
October 8, 2007 - 20:20 ET by alamojbbotg, most people will have no idea about the mercury poising in the old industry. lol
Trash Talk
October 8, 2007 - 20:38 ET by saw the light“Everybody is throwing all this mercury into the garbage."
But I thought that these CFC bulbs were supposed to last so much longer than incandescents. If that is true, why are all these people throwing them away?
"There is a tendency for the world to say to America, 'the big problems of the world are yours, you go and sort them out,' and then to worry when America wants to sort them out." - Tony Blair
MEK-Methyl Ethyl Ketone
October 8, 2007 - 20:39 ET by alamojbMEK is a solvent that was banned in the Army several years ago because they decided it was too hazardous. I used to get that stuff all over my pants when using a gasket sealer that was about 90% MEK by weight when wet. The fumes though is what is most dangerous , as I recall from the MSDS sheet. We wore gloves to protect our hands, but my legs may fall off one day-lol.
A few weeks back I was in the paint department of one of the major big box home improvement stores and saw that they were selling MEK by the quart to civilians.
To dangerous for the army, but.....LOL.
alamojb,
October 8, 2007 - 20:53 ET by Dave RLOL-MEK still isn't as bad as TED (tetra-ethyl-death).
I remember that one from my 40hr OSHA class way back in '89.
That, along with 100% white cotton, non-sparking underwear.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
I went thru a couple of
October 8, 2007 - 21:30 ET by alamojbI went thru a couple of those enviromental compliance classes. At that military facility we had both an environmental Committee and a Saftey commitee. For some reason, the Environmental guys had to keep the MSDS books up, not the safety guys. The Safety guys focused more on the "bumps and bruises and getting crushed by 70 ton tanks" kind of things. We focused more on the chemical hazards- and their disposal. And oil spills- lots of oil spills. Actually leaks, we were dealing with some of the original Bradley fighting vehicles. Serial number BlahBlah00005 and such. This was about a decade ago. They were worn out by then and we were trying to get them back up to fighting standard. Army hand-me-downs to the National Gaurd. A lot of them had to be towed in to the bay. By the time they left us, they were in much better shape than when they came in. I worked there full time for about three years. At one point I had close to 140 mechanics, welders, painters, etc that I was responsible for making sure they did what they were supposed to do with their messes. Although the painters and Welders mostly took care of themselves. And that was an 'additional" duty for me. I was also a mechanic.
alamojb,
October 8, 2007 - 22:14 ET by Dave RI used to have a Calcomp pen plotter in my office back in the day, and I had to keep the MSDS sheet posted on the wall.
Something in the ink, I recall.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
i worked in a navy yard for
October 8, 2007 - 23:27 ET by PKi worked in a navy yard for many years. we had a couple of battleships come in (real battleships not patrol boats painted gray that the social types call battleships). they had been built with equipment (pumps, turbines and stuff) designed in the thirties.
back then oil dribbling in the bilges just kept the rats down.
then we had to get the stuff up to 80's standards which was just after the great epa standards came into place and no one knew just what was allowable.
we wound up replacing a lot of small steam turbines with small electric motors.
C
I bet that was a mess! I
October 8, 2007 - 23:54 ET by alamojbI bet that was a mess! I know those old Bradleys would have fuel and oil leaks sometimes that were bad enough. Some of them had old fuel in their fuel tanks that had been sitting there for who knows how long that we had to remove. We had this trailer with a fuel filtering system on it that would suck the fuel out and filter it. Then we could re-use the fuel. It was a commercial filtering system that had a fuel water separater and then used Big Rolls of Bounty paper towels as the filters inside of long metal cylinders. I do not remember how many there were in there, something like 32 whole rolls! Worked great. I think some company in Alabama made it. In the civilian world, I guess Big Trucking operations could use it. It was better than having to dispose of old, water contaminated fuel as waste.
the ships were supposed to
October 9, 2007 - 04:12 ET by PKthe ships were supposed to come into the yard with less than 5% of their normal fuel load. our tank cleaners would suck that out and until some fool got into it we would burn that in our tugboats, trucks, stationary boilers etc. then a doogooder got into the act and we wound up paying a disposal company ~50c per gallon to dispose of it and he would sell the cleaned stuff back to us for 60c per gallon. and our fools thought that we were getting a good deal.
million gallon batches.
yeah i know,
yeah i know,
yeah i know.
C
yes you can get all of the
October 8, 2007 - 22:04 ET by PKyes you can get all of the stuff that has been banned by DOD for industrial use in small quantities on the open market.
you have to remember that the solvent crisis came along shortly after the lawyers extracted all of the money that they could from the asbestoes companies (which was a well and truly horrrible industrial desease). then they needed a new source of income and proceeded to beat up on the chemical companies. DOD (which had gotten tagged pretty badly over asbestoes) went knee jerk over the solvents and pretty much summarily banned them even though the substitutes in some cases were actually worse.
C
then i want my
October 8, 2007 - 22:07 ET by botgTSP
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
Don't look now, but here comes another MTBE fiasco.
October 8, 2007 - 20:55 ET by Dave RYa just gotta luv guvmint.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
You can't make this stuff up.
October 8, 2007 - 22:00 ET by pbthinkerSo, Liberals would rather pollute the landfills and the ground water supplies, than to "wreck the momentum"? I always knew they had convoluted reasoning, this is just more proof.
I still see the light bulb of the future being the LED, in one form or another. They aren't quite there yet, but they show great promise and don't have as many down sides as the CFL's.
Just another example of a high tech lynching, by Liberals, this time for the incandescent light bulb.
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
My heating Bill just went
October 8, 2007 - 22:14 ET by Lancasters Saved UsMy heating Bill just went up. I run the furnace from November to early May, and those curly cues aren't heating the space with clean Nuke power like the halogen ones. If there is any justice think how saggy and Blah the Hollywood elite, Pelosi, etc, are going to look in the bathroom mirror under that very ugly lighting. On second thought, they are more likely to use one square of TP than give up their vanity lights.