Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : John McCain for President -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (6269)	11/28/2008 8:36:49 AM
From: RetiredNow	1 Recommendation Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 6579

What do you say about all the CO2 in the atmosphere? You are like a dog with a bone. Your myopia is acute.

To: longnshort who wrote (6269)	11/28/2008 2:48:55 PM
From: Land Shark	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6579

Actually, CFL's DECREASE mercury emissions. The amount of mercury emitted from a coal fired operation for a normal light bulb is 10 mg. The average CFL has 4 mg Mercury, with the amount of mercury emitted from coal firing station being 2.2 mg. So the total for a CFL is 6.2 mg vs. 10 mg for a normal light bulb. en.wikipedia.org On top of that consideration is proper disposal and processing of waste bulbs. Facilities are in place to safely recover the Mercury from the bulbs. The enviornmental choice clearly is CFL. But, dimwits like you refuse to study the problem and make a political point of dismissing CFL's... (just because they're environmentally superior to incandescent bulbs). I can see that you're just a lazy old cynical fart that doesn't want to see change.