First and foremost, we want to say a great big THANK YOU for moving ahead so quickly and efficiently with the pesticide ban. We’re householders who’ve never used pesticides but who live on a street where “Danger Pesticide” signs are as much a sign of spring as robins and daffodils. We’re very concerned about all the chemicals polluting our environment so we really appreciate that you placed this issue at the top of Council’s list of priorities for the new term and acted on it so decisively. BRAVO!!
One other thing that’s been in the news lately and is of great concern to us: the safety of compact fluorescent bulbs, in regards to mercury content and as a potential fire hazard. We know these bulbs are a done deal what with the 2012 incandescent ban, and realize that this issue is not under municipal jurisdiction… That said, the bulbs are being promoted by the City.
I have phoned around to numerous places for information regarding our questions and concerns about the personal and environmental safety of these bulbs and either heard things we did not like or I couldn’t get any answers at all – not even from the Ministry of Natural Resource’s Office of Energy Efficiency who said they didn’t know the answers to my questions, would “look into my concerns” and hopefully get back to me in 5-7 business days. This lack of available information is troubling, to say the least., especially as fluorescent bulbs are being so widely promoted and a ban on the sale of incandescents is already in the books for 2012.
Our carbon footprints are very small – we do all we can to save energy and care for our personal and planetary environment. Along with not using pesticides, we don’t have air conditioning, keep our house cool in winter, drive a fuel-efficient compact, use as little water and electricity as possible, never water our lawn, eat organic and/or local food almost exclusively, use cloth bags for groceries, etc. etc. But we can’t support these compact fluorescent bulbs as we don’t understand how using or promoting something that contains mercury (and by all accounts is a potential fire hazard) is good for any individual or our planet – both in the short and long run, especially as even a miniscule amount of this biocumulative neurotoxin can have devastating effects.
Anyhow, I’ve submitted a Letter to the Editor of the Guelph Mercury about this issue but just in case they change what I’ve written, I’ve attached my original, F.Y.I.
Dear Editor:
In “Bulbs raise mercury concerns” (Guelph Mercury, May 2), the Ontario Electrical Safety Authority claims that compact fluorescent bulbs don’t present a fire hazard even though the Office of the Ontario Fire Marshal states they “can produce a sufficient amount of heat to melt the plastic base and create enough smoke to trigger a smoke detector’s alarm.” Which part of that doesn’t sound like a fire hazard? Other sources indicate that these bulbs aren’t safe to use with recessed lighting or with energy-saving(!) dimmer switches.
The article also states that although fluorescent bulbs contain “only a few milligrams of mercury”, if one breaks, we should immediately open a window – and not inhale! No kidding. Mercury quickly vaporizes at room temperature, thus entering the bloodstream and attacking the nervous system. Then we’re told, “The closer to the end of the lifespan the bulb breaks, the less mercury it contains…” So where does it go? Are these bulbs continually releasing neurotoxic biocumulative mercury vapour into the air we breathe? And you can be sure that not everyone will dispose of these biohazardous bulbs properly. That said, one gram (.035 oz) of mercury is enough to contaminate a 20-acre lake along with all its fish. So why, as mercury-filled thermometers are being banned due to breakage and disposal toxicity concerns, are mercury-filled lightbulbs being promoted?
There are many sensible ways to save energy. Participating in an initiative that threatens personal as well as environmental health and safety is not one of them. RR & KM