"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:21:50 -0500, Jim Yanik
wrote:

the manufacture of CFLs produces much more pollution than making
incandescent lamps. it probably outweighs any savings from the use of CFLs
over I-lamps.
you don't need -any- mercury in making I-lamps,nor do you need phosphors.

True. Dumping 4 tons of mercury into landfills every year is not a
good thing. However, to put that in perspective, the coal that we use
to generate most of our electricity has an estimated 75 tons of
mercury mixed in, each year, two thirds of which is belched into the
atmosphere. If you include the mercury emissions from generating the
power needed to run an incandescent lamp, the CFL lamp dumps 1/4th the
mercury into the environment as the incandescent.
http://www.cflknowhow.org/cfl-mercury-information.html

Permit me to point out that US domestic and commerical electricity
consumption has been increasing quite constantly at the rate of about
1.5%/year. If there were any energy savings from the existing CFL
lamps in service, it would have appeared as a drop in the consumption
trend. It's a bit tricky to use, but you can dig the history and
trends out of:
http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/tablebrowser/#release=AEO2011

Tungsten, as used in incandescent lamps, may not be all that
environmentally correct:
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/science/87/8703sci2.html
There's not much known about the effects of tungsten in the
environment, but it is becoming yet another thing to worry about.

I wouldn't worry much about phosphorus as we're scheduled to run out
in 50-100 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_phosphorus

--
Jeff Liebermann

But as I said, coal fired plants have been declining over the years in
Europe - for instance, we operate just 14 here in the UK now. France has
none, I believe. Apparently, the vast majority of increase in CO2 emissions,
and use of coal to fire power plants, is coming from India and China. These
are both technologically competent nations, who are ignoring any
responsibility they might have to reduce emissions. So why does that mean
that I have to suffer a '****ing into the wind' replacement for technology
that I am happy with, so they can carry on regardless ?

http://www.engineerlive.com/Power-En...0_years/21600/

Arfa