CFL bulbs: By the skin of your teeth.
July 18, 2012 in Uncategorized by Uniformityville_horror | 12 comments
Not long ago I asked if those energy -saving bulbs we are using have mercury in them that could damage our environment. I don’t remember if anyone answered. I stopped using them about two years ago.
Anyway, nice additional research on those bulbs we are now FORCED to buy!
Harmful Effects of CFL Bulbs to Skin; Energy-Efficient Bulbs Safest When Placed Behind Additional Glass Cover
Of course, the 6 year forcast for big pharms shows they will lose money as a majority of the their drugs go generic soon. So they can be rest assured there will be more skin cancer coming in the near future. Thus these criminal drug companies will be able to bring in some money with skin cancer treatments.
I honestly believe that the United Corporations of America are out to kill us all off, following slow, painful, EXPENSIVE medical treatments now in place.
-
Uniformityville_horror on July 18, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Wow, the news just doesn’t stop today!
If you want to put man at the center of the universe, plant some trees. Don’t hire someone to do it. Do yourself. But do it! I have planted two trees this year. Last year, two or more. Where are the national tree-planting campaigns? I just don’t see them anywhere.Public release date: 18-Jul-2012
American Chemical Society
Green plants reduce city street pollution up to 8 times more than previously believed
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-07/acs-gpr071812.phpTrees, bushes and other greenery growing in the concrete-and-glass canyons of cities can reduce levels of two of the most worrisome air pollutants by eight times more than previously believed, a new study has found. A report on the research appears in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology.
Thomas Pugh and colleagues explain that concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and microscopic particulate matter (PM) — both of which can be harmful to human health — exceed safe levels on the streets of many cities. Past research suggested that trees and other green plants can improve urban air quality by removing those pollutants from the air. However, the improvement seemed to be small, a reduction of less than 5 percent. The new study sought a better understanding of the effects of green plants in the sometimes stagnant air of city streets, which the authors term “urban street canyons.”
The study concluded that judicious placement of grass, climbing ivy and other plants in urban canyons can reduce the concentration at street level of NO2 by as much as 40 percent and PM by 60 percent, much more than previously believed. The authors even suggest building plant-covered “green billboards” in these urban canyons to increase the amount of foliage. Trees were also shown to be effective, but only if care is taken to avoid trapping pollutants beneath their crowns.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes) -
Timbuk3 on July 18, 2012 at 10:41 pm
“I don’t remember if anyone answered.”
I replied that, yes, they do. I added that I think people are too stupid to grasp it. I’ll add, now, that makes me think it may not be a great idea to force people dumb enough to vote Republican to buy them. Just for starters, they have no problem shitting where they live, and are demonstrably sociopaths, caring only about themselves with no concern about how their actions affect others.
“I honestly believe that the United Corporations of America are out to kill us all off, following slow, painful, EXPENSIVE medical treatments now in place.”
I honestly believe that the rich fuckers funding rMoney and various other GOP candidates and organizations want to:
Get the money from our retirement accounts.
Stop average Americans from leaving ANYTHING to their kids while protecting their own ability to pass vast wealth (in a capitalist society wealth = power) off to their own hellspawn.
(For example, look for the mortgage deduction to be on the table, soon, and the ability to protect your house from medical bankruptcy, to be under attack by the GOP in the near future.)
The evil among us, the GOP and their cash-cows, want us to work (to make profits for them, not us) until we die.
And, as Alan Grayson said, when we get sick, “die quickly”.
That’s it. The New American Dream(TM). Start working at 15. Work until you die. Leave nothing to your kids when you die.
Courtesy of fuckstains like Adelman, the Kochs, and the GOP.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)-
Timbuk3 on July 18, 2012 at 10:45 pm
PS – If that post seemed harsh, I was holding back. A lot.
I truly loathe the GOP and anyone or anything that enables them to put the US government, the most powerful force on earth*, into the service of a wealthy few.
*It used to be. Not any more. Thanks GOP!
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)-
iconoclast_555 on July 19, 2012 at 1:35 pm
“I truly loathe the GOP and anyone or anything that enables them to put the US government, the most powerful force on earth*, into the service of a wealthy few.”
Seriously, does the Goldman Sachs admin oppose this – outside the rhetorical flourishes it needs for electoral purposes?
The enemy is NEOLIBERALISM, as practiced by both parties. Until you realize this, for some of us it seems that you confuse the forests for the trees – as is the wont of the “two” parties.
Over here we have the same problem – with a neolib Partido Popular and a third way “Socialist” party. And the people are learning to see the non-difference, the hard way.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)-
iconoclast_555 on July 19, 2012 at 1:47 pm
To remind you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(centrism)
“The term Third Way refers to various political positions which try to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economic and left-wing social policies.”
The reality behind that statement is that the third way applies rw economic policies and paints them as lw social policies. Same shit, different flavour.
“Third Way was created as a serious re-evaluation of political policies within various centre-left progressive movements in response to the ramifications of the collapse of international belief in the economic viability of the state economic interventionist policies that had previously been popularized by Keynesianism; and the corresponding rise of popularity for neoliberalism and the New Right. It supports the pursuit of greater egalitarianism in society through action to increase the distribution of skills, capacities, and productive endowments, while rejecting income redistribution as the means to achieve this”
What this fails to express is that the “pursuit of greater egalitarianism in society through action to increase the distribution of skills, capacities, and productive endowments” means “better employees for less cost”.
“Some also classify the Third Way as neosocialism or “neoliberalism with a social touch”.[35][36] Other examples include Samuel Brittan describing the Third Way as ‘Capitalism with a human face’”
The terd way, and Bubba and Obama and Bliar and Zapatero – are time-servers who seek power while selling out the values they purportedly support. They are the original “surrender monkeys”, and the heirs of Weimar. With an opposition to neoliberalism such as theirs, who needs republicans? They sell us the repub wet dream while scaring us with the repub monster – and destroying the very basis of progressive ideals in the process.
From the long-term POV, the third way is more insidious, and dangerous, than Ronald Dubya Romney McNorquist. The 3rd way might slow down evolution, but it will make it much more secure.
———-
Social warfare NOW, before it’s too late (which it probably is).
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)-
Uniformityville_horror on July 19, 2012 at 2:20 pm
I just am not going to buy the scare tactics of the Gore movement.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
-
-
-
Uniformityville_horror on July 19, 2012 at 2:09 pm
It used to be that the GOP back the conservation of soil and resources. Then the party morphed in a strange and zealot direction, just like I see in the Democrats
My dad and grandfather were super-conservative about the soil, about our farmland, and water. He sat on the water conservation board in this state for many many years these days.
Now there are irrigation systems that actually measure the water loss.
Now the greens and sustainability people push to remove w. kansas water rights from the farmer. That is absolutely atrocious. So happy just this once to have a GOP governor. I have been to the green meetings, and the sustainability people, and find them as a unit to be very short-sighted. They think the ogalala is losing it’s water. However, the earth’s axis shifts, sometimes drasitically from one year to the next, to where measurements of the Ogalala are skewed, perhaps presenting a picture that may well not be accurate anymore, if it ever was. I go to the KS geological department to get the printed material, since it is here in this town. I watch it, … not as closely as they themselves do but close enough.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
-
-
-
iconoclast_555 on July 19, 2012 at 1:49 pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=1
So who is now taking up the GOP talking point of balanced budgets? Three guesses and the first two don’t count.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)-
Timbuk3 on July 19, 2012 at 8:25 pm
I have to reply to this one, too.
“the GOP talking point of balanced budgets?”
So now I’m GOP, too???!
Look, I know that wasn’t specifically aimed at me (I’m not paranoid), but I’m all for balancing the budget.
DURING THE GOOD TIMES!
That’s classic Keynesian economics!
What I’m NOT for is the one-button solution the GOP proposes in any and all situations; “cut taxes on the wealthy”.
ESPECIALLY during the BAD times. Which we are STILL in. Thanks to Bush getting us here, and the GOP/teabagger congress refusing to let anyone do anything about it.
And I absolutely agree with Krugman, on this;
“It should be time, then, for conservatives to explain which parts of the beast they want to cut. And President Obama has, in effect, invited them to do just that, by calling for a bipartisan deficit commission.
Many progressives were deeply worried by this proposal, fearing that it would turn into a kind of Trojan horse — in particular, that the commission would end up reviving the long-standing Republican goal of gutting Social Security. But they needn’t have worried: Senate Republicans overwhelmingly voted against legislation that would have created a commission with some actual power, and it is unlikely that anything meaningful will come from the much weaker commission Mr. Obama established by executive order.
Why are Republicans reluctant to sit down and talk? Because they would then be forced to put up or shut up. Since they’re adamantly opposed to reducing the deficit with tax increases, they would have to explain what spending they want to cut. And guess what? After three decades of preparing the ground for this moment, they’re still not willing to do that.
Make the GOP show the American people just how evil and stupid they really are.
Krugman’s piece isn’t exactly the “look, Obama’s as evil as Bush” link you wanted it to be, but what the heck. Obama haters don’t let facts get in the way.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)-
iconoclast_555 on July 20, 2012 at 5:55 am
“Krugman’s piece isn’t exactly the “look, Obama’s as evil as Bush” link you wanted it to be, but what the heck. Obama haters don’t let facts get in the way.”
First off, I’m not an Obama hater. I just don’t think that he’s lived up to his rhetoric and that he’s done a tremendous disservice to the progressive cause. As for the Krugman piece, my only intention was to show how Mr. Third Way kowtows to GOP framing.
As for the rest of your post, spot on! We’ve almost always seen eye-to-eye on that aspect.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
-
-
-
Uniformityville_horror on July 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm
I challenge every one of you here to plant at least one tree or plant this year, and to care for it if you are in that location frequently.
So why are we using those bulbs and not able to buy the others?
Why is there this institutionalized plundering-peter-to-pay-paul with the environment?What I have done is go back to the original bulb, stocked up. I reduced the amount of bulbs I use. the overhead lights require three bulbs, while i use one. Yes, the house is dimmer, reading is a touch harder, but I won’t get skin cancer and won’t feel the need to call something like Hazmet to dispose of the mercury-laden bulb.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)-
iconoclast_555 on July 19, 2012 at 3:16 pm
1 plant per year? Hell, I’m set for a few decades already.
At home – 4 sages, 10 basils, a mat of chives, 10 cilantros. In my gf’s place in Asturias – literally dozens of different herbs, plus cranberries.
It’s hot as hell in Madrid, so we usually turn on one very small light at a given time. AC only when it breaches 100º, and that only because of my high blood pressure.
No car. Walk more often than public transport.
My PC is probably my highest carbon footprint.
VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
-
Reply Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.

12 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.timbuk3.com/discuss/wp-trackback.php?p=8403