12-17-2013, 11:19 PM
I'm not sure what to think about the new bulbs, but I am sure that the governments of the world are doing it because they're bribed to, at least in the USA (and given how the world politicians were obviously screwing over the environment in obvious ways while meeting to discuss it in Amsterdam I don't think that sort of corruption & callousness is restricted to the US)...are mandating the shift for environmental reasons but for sophisticated bribery (sometimes called "special interest money"). That has a long tradition that I'm sure reaches back into prehistory. And something many forget is that Bush was actually a tougher champion of the environment than Gore back in the 2000 election with him wanting to sign the Kyoto Treaty but that was because he was Enron's bitch who stood to make billions in just a few years if it were signed...once Enron collapsed then Bush's views "evolved" to no longer believe in global warming. (Btw, I don't believe Gore gives a damn about the environment either or even believes his own words.)
Whether CFLs are more friendly to the environment probably doesn't even factor into it. I can understand the argument that they are (though that's not why they're mandated) because it saves on energy and makes less bulbs for the landfills, and yet...mercury. They're supposed to be disposed of a certain way but too many people are throwing them into the garbage like regular bulbs, and worse, I've seen some smashed in parks and streets. And mercury is a cumulative toxin, that is to say it's true a single bulb breaking isn't worth worrying about, but mercury builds up and that which is in nature can get into the ecosystem (once it's in the animals then it can eventually wind up coming back to our food) and more importantly I'm wondering what a million of CFLs with mercury in the landfill (where they're technically not supposed to go) will do? Of course I can hope the bulbs will be perfected so it's not an issue but the pattern is the corporations won't go to the expense unless forced to.
Whether CFLs are more friendly to the environment probably doesn't even factor into it. I can understand the argument that they are (though that's not why they're mandated) because it saves on energy and makes less bulbs for the landfills, and yet...mercury. They're supposed to be disposed of a certain way but too many people are throwing them into the garbage like regular bulbs, and worse, I've seen some smashed in parks and streets. And mercury is a cumulative toxin, that is to say it's true a single bulb breaking isn't worth worrying about, but mercury builds up and that which is in nature can get into the ecosystem (once it's in the animals then it can eventually wind up coming back to our food) and more importantly I'm wondering what a million of CFLs with mercury in the landfill (where they're technically not supposed to go) will do? Of course I can hope the bulbs will be perfected so it's not an issue but the pattern is the corporations won't go to the expense unless forced to.