Oh, I was thinking you were going to talk about the PLANET Mercury and how man's carbon footprint was causing its polar ice cap to melt, possibly endangering Mercurial polar bears. After all, the latest scientific discoveries have just stated that sun-spot activity is responsible for the rising the temperatures on Earth and Mars. Gee whiz, I guess this means that Al Gore may have to give back his Oscar for most compelling slide-show of make-believe.

Oops, is this inconvenient to say right now? Some people are making a LOT of money right now in the Global Warming Alarmist biz.

Apparently the term "global warming" is a red flag for a lot of stubborn bulls out there. How about if we start calling energy saving what it is: energy saving.

The CFLs are a good example of a way to save energy. The Maine PUC has done a great job making an energy saving device accessible to all. Perhaps they might develop an equally convenient way to dispose of the bulbs - I suspect there are opportunities to expand on the hazardous waste collection models that are currently out there.

When we pursue ideas and actions to increase our energy saving we all benefit. We all participate in an effort to safeguard that which we value: clean air, water and land.

By consciously using the term energy saving, we will help clarify for folks what the goal is, and at the same time, promote the concept.
The inverse, energy wasting is never a good thing, no matter what.

The amount of mercury in a CFL is about 1/5 the amount in a typical digital watch battery.

I prefer grape KoolAid. Is that the one recommended by Algore?

He must have a zillion cfls in his mansion. Good thing he pays people to drive out in their SUVs and plant trees to absorb all his carbon. Otherwise we might be underwater as we speak!

It's really funny - and predictable - that a scapegoat has emerged in the whole global warming issue. Can't effectively pick on the largely nameless scientists who have done the hard science, we of course we easily attack a messenger - Gore.

Really, who cares about Gore?

Why is it so hard to believe that global warming is a man-made, feasible and real issue? Is it because we've never seen humankind's industrial impact on the environment? Doesn't make sense - we see it all the time, and have been. PCBs in the Hudson, acid rain, the extinction of whole species (time and time and time again), DDT and its effect on raptor egg shells.

Frankly, I think the reason there's so much push against global warming is because it's so huge: we have a hard time fathoming that we've screwed things up so royally this time, and that what we've done has potentially extinction-level consequences for everybody - not just unfortunately named dodo birds, but us, too.

So what do we do when we can't wrap our heads around something so big and bad? We attack messengers and poke mean fun at people who disagree with us and even take issue with even a little bit of news that talks, simply, about things like how to throw away bulbs that are supposed to save you money by saving energy.

Funny you should mention DDT, another myth. Malaria in Africa kills million every year, people who could be saved by use of DDT, which effects are NOT proven to do damage to birds.

Apply this same principle to Global Warming steps to "save" the planet, and we'll see even more humans dying for no good reason. You may think you're all taking the high road in saving the planet from human beings, but the result is to kill untold millions of people. That is not a neccessary evil, my friends.

DDT effects a myth??? Someone needs to review his high school biology notes...if he went at all.

Ah yes, a place for morons to spout their BS.

Interesting article, but I must comment on your lame bio, "noone has called you a tree-hugger" and the rest of that crap. Give me a break, what we need is people with the courage to go all out. This is a culture war against sickos like Dick, who care not about the future, and want to spread the lies that Rush Limbaugh fed him. Why should anyone be afraid to be called a tree-hugger?

Dick what is your issue..you seem angry..lighten up!!

Most of us don't want to change our lifestyle to "save the Earth." The truth is that we can have a significant impact on conservation, etc., just by being aware and making very minor changes to how we use and dispose of water, packaging, energy, and the like. I agree with most of the commentary on using CFL bulbs. The use of programmable digital thermostats is also a very easy way to conserve energy and save you money (after an initial $30 to $40 purchase).

Any more thoughtful commentary from the aptly named Dick?

Dick is figuring out he has staked his claim to the losing end of history...

The most embarassing thing about these comment sections is seeing these same tired old stories come up over and over again.

Countries with malaria epidemics (not the US, by the way...) did not stop using DDT because of fears of what it would do to birds. DDT use dropped because mosquitos gained resistance to DDT through OVERUSE, primarily in agricultural spraying.

No environmentalist ever advocated letting humans die to save wildlife. It's just a lie.

What possible steps that we are talking about to stop pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere could possibly "kill untold millions of people"?

If anything will "kill untold millions of people", it's a 5 foot sea level rise in Southeast Asia. Let's get real here.

I do so apologize for disagreeing with you. I never thought that having a different opinion than you all would elicit such personal attacks against my intelligence and charactor. I forget that I am encroaching on holy ground ie, Global Warming and Mother Earth.

Dick.. It's not what you say , it's the way you say it..

I will never buy another one of those bulbs. Not only do they produce a weird yellowish light, but they're dim and don't live up to the light output advertised.

The materials that go into them are toxic and present an environmental hazard. The mercury levels may be low in the light bulbs but added up a few million times it can be significant. And a recent report on a national news program indicates the gas contained in them is extremely harmful to the ozone.

For every action there's an opposite and equal reaction. Just as with the highly toxic batteries in hybrid cars, just because something may save a few pennies in operating costs, there's a serious environmental impact to consider.

Fluorescent lights are hard on my eyes. When I've worked at jobs that use them, I've found I have a hard time seeing at night. My eye doctor poo-poo-ed by questions about some reports that these flickering lights contribute to cataracts, but my experience has shown me that they are harmful to my eyes. Once incandescent lights are illegal (they're pushing this in CA) then you'll see me down in the bad part of town trying to buy them from the drug dealers. Or maybe I'll just learn to make candles...

Just like when we started the whole recycling concept in the early 90s, an infrastructure needed to be developed for those items collected to be re-used and reintroduced to consumers as a useful product to complete the recycling loop. It took time, I know because I spent fourteen years helping with that.

The infrastructure for recycling mercury containing products is probably still in its infancy stage, and people will have to participate in the collection efforts to generate enough material to make it economically feasible for the entity that will actually be handling the material, to invest in the infrastructures expansion. Unless of course, investors just give them money to develop such infrastructure. Not likely, I guess.

The mercury inside the bulbs is not harmful to anything or anyone while encapsulated. As long as the bulbs, watch batteries, old-style thermostats and vehicle switches that function like old thermostats, are not burned, broken or otherwise destroyed before they can be shipped to the facilities which will be recovering the mercury, it is safe to use. Not only safe to use, but also mercury is the only thing that CAN be used to make a fluorescent light bulb work. Increased collection volumes of these waste materials will, over time, help to develop the aforementioned infrastructure. An increased collection volume comes with people’s participation.

Now, let me tell you about people’s participation in recycling. As I said, I worked fourteen years in the industry at a collection facility. One of the things I detested during that was while the (sorry in advance, girls) little-old-ladies struggled to carry all there separated recyclables to our various drop-off points before proceeding to where trash went (left over after recycling) young, strapping, pot-bellied, beer-drinking, football-watching couch-potatoed, good-ole boys drove right by and dumped everything in black garbage bags into the trash dumpster. Way too busy to be bothered with helping.