Comments on: Compact Fluorescent Bulbs http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/ Share, Converse, Stimulate Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:47:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: 2487 http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/comment-page-1/#comment-3726 2487 Tue, 15 May 2007 14:45:14 +0000 http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/#comment-3726 Bought my CFL bulbs yesterday. Not bad but they take a few seconds to turn on which is annoying. Bought my CFL bulbs yesterday. Not bad but they take a few seconds to turn on which is annoying.

]]> By: Dr. Wombat M.D. http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/comment-page-1/#comment-3386 Dr. Wombat M.D. Tue, 08 May 2007 03:02:54 +0000 http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/#comment-3386 http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

]]> By: wiredwoodsman http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/comment-page-1/#comment-3242 wiredwoodsman Mon, 30 Apr 2007 23:46:52 +0000 http://johnnyvonline.com/2007/04/30/compact-fluorescent-bulbs/#comment-3242 It is a worthy argument, to be sure. Mercury is a dangerous pollutant, and is not to be taken lightly in the home. I have these bulbs throughout my home. I am as careful with them as I am with any bulb. Broken light bulb = bad. The article neglects to mention that these light bulbs are recyclable. Many places will take your bulbs, and I am certain that many more will take them as they become more popular. A much better gauge would be a total impact study from manufacture to electrical consumption to disposal per light bulb. I have read that although incandescent light bulbs are much cheaper, they take a much larger environmental toll to manufacture. Also, one cannot ignore the mercury released into the air by good old fashioned coal burning power plants. The EPA did a study that claims that less total mercury will get into the environment by using CFLs, because of the decreased energy use. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/merc-emi/merc-pgs/emmrpt.pdf It's a hard question to answer, but I still believe CFLs to be a much better route. My .02c It is a worthy argument, to be sure. Mercury is a dangerous pollutant, and is not to be taken lightly in the home.

I have these bulbs throughout my home. I am as careful with them as I am with any bulb. Broken light bulb = bad.

The article neglects to mention that these light bulbs are recyclable. Many places will take your bulbs, and I am certain that many more will take them as they become more popular.

A much better gauge would be a total impact study from manufacture to electrical consumption to disposal per light bulb. I have read that although incandescent light bulbs are much cheaper, they take a much larger environmental toll to manufacture.

Also, one cannot ignore the mercury released into the air by good old fashioned coal burning power plants. The EPA did a study that claims that less total mercury will get into the environment by using CFLs, because of the decreased energy use.

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/merc-emi/merc-pgs/emmrpt.pdf

It’s a hard question to answer, but I still believe CFLs to be a much better route.

My .02c

]]>