Comments on: Response to light bulb exchange http://lastblogonearth.com/2007/07/12/response-to-light-bulb-exchange/ Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:11:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: edwindecker http://lastblogonearth.com/2007/07/12/response-to-light-bulb-exchange/#comment-4380 Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:09:46 +0000 http://lastblogonearth.com/2007/07/12/response-to-light-bulb-exchange/#comment-4380 Thanks for the heads up on WorldNet. After reading your comment, I perused the site further and found your analysis of, um, “fair and balanced” to be true. Still, my point remains — the law of unintended consequences dictates that a massive, uneducated rush toward one solution often creates a new problem.

Currently my outdoor bulbs are all all fluoros, while the indoors are incandi’s. I’m waiting to see what happens before doing a total switch.

]]> By: Miriam http://lastblogonearth.com/2007/07/12/response-to-light-bulb-exchange/#comment-4379 Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:34:40 +0000 http://lastblogonearth.com/2007/07/12/response-to-light-bulb-exchange/#comment-4379 It is true that the bulbs contain mercury, and should be disposed of properly. However, WorldNetDaily (especially on science) tends to have a very…fair and balanced…interpretation of events. In brief, mercury is not very toxic until a methyl group is attached, which happens via bacteria when mercury is released into the environment. The small amount of mercury in a bulb is not methylated, and can be cleaned up with care like other hazardous household materials (antifreeze, paint thinner, oven cleaner, etc.). A $2000 cleanup is HIGHLY unusual.

It’s important that people recycle their florescent bulbs, though, because mercury in landfills becomes methylmercury and that is quite toxic. These exchange events should definately publicize the importance of proper disposal.

Here is an NPR article on this issue, with links to EnergyStar (EPA) and GE explanations of how to dispose of bulbs and what to do if they break.

]]>