1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Environmental pet peeve

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Beef03, Apr 25, 2010.

  1. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    If we're limiting the conversation to littering as unsightly refuse and not considering other potential negative environmental impacts like wildlife or wildfires, then I'd suggest it comes down to size, stench and biodegradability. That probably makes beer cans, food wrappers and six-pack rings all worse than a cigarette butt.
     
  2. EStreetJoe

    EStreetJoe Well-Known Member

    The new more efficient light bulbs come in packaging that says "not for use with dimmers".
    The new light bulbs also contain high levels of mercury. If you drop one and it breaks, you practically need to call in a hazmat crew to clean it up.
     
  3. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    Europe has been able to manufacture low-flow toilets that work. Light bulbs are another story.
     
  4. Bamadog

    Bamadog Well-Known Member

    Ethanol is quite damaging to fuel pumps, eats up plastic fuel lines and retains water, which is very, very bad for your motor, especially ones on boats. Also, E85 reduces your gas mileage, raises food prices because of all of the farming of corn for fuel and is very inefficient. It's just a nice corporate welfare program for already wealthy farmers.

    I hate the low-flow toilets. How are you supposed to dispose of the after-effects of a dinner at the local Mexican joint without waging olfactory warfare on the entire house? Stupid idea. I'm all for saving the environment, but how do you save water when one courtesy flush turns into three or four?
     
  5. Brian

    Brian Well-Known Member

    You need to be careful disposing of CFL's, but in no way need a hazmat crew. The story Fox News blew up over the woman and the $2,000 clean-up bill (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268747,00.html)only needed a crew because the woman practically boarded up the room the broken bulb was in and didn't allow the mercury to dissipate. Simply open a window, use some rubber gloves and put the glass in a container with a lid.

    http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

    As for Fox News' motives for perpetuating its own version of junk science in a piece purported to be about spotting junk science, I'll leave that to the imagination.

    If broken fluorescent lights needed hazmat crews, the guys in the 40-year Old Virgin were in big trouble.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page