Thursday, 21 April 2011

dim bulb or mad as a hatter

A consumer advocacy lab in Berlin, completely outfitted a simulated living space with energy saving light bulbs, to study their ambient effects, compared to older, filament style incandescent ones. Researchers noticed a rotten smell in the enclosed space and found it was from the toxic gasses, like phenol and mercury, leeching from the bulbs, if left on for extended periods of time. Foremost, consumers do not derive any benefit if they switch on and off these energy saving bulbs like normal people since they burn out fast and one cannot recuperate the significant extra cost, and second that with the fact that they are potentially and frighteningly hazardous to one's health and are nearly impossible to recycle, this makes for a really prime example of industry hijacking environmentalism and forcing it on the public through the governments who've been paid-off or duped into thinking they are backing the responsible horse.
It is very similar to the unpalatable choice that the failing campaign of E10 petrol raises: is it more ecological to dilute one's tank with ethanol, grown from corn that is diverted from the food supply and cultivated by highly energy intensive means (maybe only made profitable because it is subsidized by the government), or to simply perhaps drive ten percent less?