On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:10:47 -0500, BQ340
wrote:

On 12/31/2009 3:56 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:35:49 -0800, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

On 12/31/2009 3:07 AM spake thus:

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 03:18:55 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

4) Does it take into account the addition of mercury to
environments where most of the energy developed is from hydro or
nuclear power?

No. CFL bulbs are poised to bring significant mercury pollution
issues to areas where there isn't any mercury pollution from nearby
coal plants because there AREN'T any nearby coal plants.

Do you have ANY idea how long florescent's have been in wide use?
Where do you see them? How about ALL large buildings being almost
completely lit with full sized florescent's which contain FAR more
mercury than CFL's? When you flip the typical light switch in a home,
maybe 1-4 lights are powered up. When you flip a switch in a
supermarket, there may be hundreds of lights lit up. All Florescent.

Any idea why they use florescent's ?

Of course he knows this; that's implicit in his arguments. He's not stupid.

What he's saying, which I agree with, is that the use of CFLs, primarily
for *residential* lighting (not commercial, which as you point out has
already been using fluorescents for many decades) will result in a
massive upsurge in the amount of mercury in transit out there, some of
which will escape into the environment. This is the 900-pound gorilla of
CFL usage which isn't getting nearly as much attention as it should, and
makes the claims that Don K. and others have made about how much CFLs
will result in *reduced* mercury emissions dubious at best.

Even if residential use of CFL's gets to 100%, the amount of mercury
involved that gets into the environment will still be dwarfed by the
mercury from coal fired power plant emmisions, or what comes from
conventional florescent tubes.

It's more like an organ grinder's monkey than a gorilla.

Oh, and unlike conventional florescent tubes, you can take CFL's to
any Home Depot for free environmentally safe recycling of the mercury.
The much greater amounts of mercury in conventional tubes still goes
to the landfill, and all the mercury from burning coal goes into the
atmosphere and then settles everywhere, getting in the groundwater and
the oceans, where it accumulates in fish for your convenience.





Mercury is a natural element, and has been in the environment forever, no?

Your point, as it relates to this discussion?