Image Courtesy of WorldNetDaily

Early last year I wrote about H.R. 1547 which would prohibit the sale of certain inefficient light bulbs, at the time I said it was not a bright idea. I emphasized the point that the alternative to incandescent bulbs would be fluorescent, and although more energy efficient, fluorescent bulbs are not without problems of their own.

They contain the deadly pollutant mercury. You can’t just throw them in your garbage can when they burn out or they will break and contaminate land and water. Instead, you’ll find out after this switch is mandated that you have to take the dead bulbs to hazardous-waste sites. Either that, or expensive new recycling programs will have to be instituted. In all likelihood, they will involve gasoline-burning trucks rumbling through your neighborhood and highly trained hazardous-materials teams.

Of course the usual culprits responded stating this was an overreaction, and I admit the part about haz-mat teams was exaggerated, however the point is still the same. Yesterday the Environmental Protection Agency responding to a report issued by the state of Maine and the Vermont-based Mercury Policy Project, said they would be revising their disposal recommendations. Here are some recommendations from the study:

• If a bulb breaks, get children and pets out of the room.
• Ventilate the room.
• Never use a vacuum — even on a rug — to clean up a compact fluorescent light.
• If there are young children or pregnant woman in the house, consider cutting out the piece of carpet where the bulb broke.
• Use a glass jar with a screw top to contain the shards and clean-up debris.

Although the news report emphasizes that the amount of mercury in fluorescent bulbs amounts to a fraction of what was in old thermometers, the above recommendations hardly give off the impression there is no health risk.

“We found some very high levels (of mercury), even after we tried a number of clean-up techniques,” said Mark Hyland, Maine director of the Bureau of Remediation and Waste Management. During several of the experiments, for example, he said mercury in the air was more than 100 times levels considered safe even after a floor was cleaned. He said such levels would quickly decline if the room were ventilated and people followed their tips.

Of course the risks of dealing with the limited amount of mercury found in fluorescent bulbs is minimal, and I have yet to read a story about someone dying as a result of a broken bulb, but that is hardly my problem with this energy bill. What I had written last year regarding this bill, still stands true to this day “What is relevant is wether we as a Country want elected officials regulating something as basic as the way we light our homes.

Our Country was founded on the free market system, with the principle that the products deemed to be best for the consumer are purchased, while other products simply disappear from the market due to lack of demand. The fact our Government feels the need to prohibit the sale of certain inefficient light bulbs, is proof enough there is a consumer demand for those bulbs.

On a personal note, I only use incandescent bulbs in my own home, I prefer the light they emit over that of a fluorescent bulb. A products efficiency is not judged solely on the power it uses, but also on the result it produces.”

Luckily for those of us who prefer incandescent light bulbs, this bill would only outlaw the sale of, not the use of “inefficient” light bulbs. So be prepared to stock up!

Sphere: Related Content

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Congress, Dumb Dems, Global Warming