News: Turns out mercury in bulbs is just as poisonous as mercury from other sources! Who knew? Well, I did …
You remember all the hate-mail I got when I dared to suggest that those carbon-friendly light-bulbs that the envirowackos are trying to shove down our throats might not really be environmentally friendly because they are filled with mercury?
Turns out I was ahead of the curve on that one:
Compact fluorescent light bulbs, long touted by environmentalists as a more efficient and longer-lasting alternative to the incandescent bulbs that have lighted homes for more than a century, are running into resistance from waste industry officials and some environmental scientists, who warn that the bulbs’ poisonous innards pose a bigger threat to health and the environment than previously thought.
Light bulbs break. So it’s only common sense that when the light bulb contains mercury, a broken light bulb means mercury get loose in the house. Environmentalists who used to get all bent out of shape over microscopic amounts of mercury in fish are for some reason unconcerned about mercury in homes … as long as they come from “green” light bulbs.
Why? Because global waring is the cause du Jour. Environmental poisoning takes a back seat. Environmentalism worships at the altar of Global Warming, and woe be unto all heretics.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Guess what? Burning fossil fuels, especially coal, puts mercury into the environment. The majority of power in the United States comes from coal-fired plants. The Powerton plant here in Pekin is apparently a big contributor, although recently Midwest Generation has made promises to improve their behavior.
The MSN article you link to acknowledges that CFL use reduces emissions of carbon and other pollutants produced by fossil fuels … but doesn’t mention mercury emissions from power plants at all. People who take a fair and balanced view of this issue without calling people who want to be good caretakers of their environment “wackos” at every turn understand the simple concept of a trade-off … slightly increased mercury in landfills while decreasing mercury emissions from fossil fuel consumption.
This equation may swing away from CFL use as power plants become more efficient, mercury emission standards become more stringent, or we move away from using coal … or swing back to CFLs as their mercury content drops and recycling of CFLs becomes more readily available. However, even if there was a net increase in mercury pollution, the fact that other pollutants are also decreased must be taken into account.
Here’s another guess what … the good old tube fluorescents that have been lighting classrooms, businesses and public buildings for decades by the millions also have mercury in them. Have you ever heard a story about the EPA or environmental clean up crews getting called in when one of those breaks??? According to this site, a typical 4-ft fluorescent lamp has about 12 mg of mercury … 3 times the amount in your typical CFL. Before 1988, the same length fluorescent lamp apparently had as much as 45 mg of Hg. Does the MSN article mention anything about that???
That curve is speeding away about a million miles ahead of you, Billy. You’re back in the dark ages.