Home Page link

Eco-Grandstanding, Mercury Vapor, and Human Health

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Architecture and Design - Building design/construction and related topics. 

Page 2 of 2       << first < 1 2 Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
Eco-Grandstanding, Mercury Vapor, and Human Health Michael Bulatovich 04-25-2007
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by Michael Bulatovich on April 27, 2007, 6:07 pm

> Since it's not common for peoiple to use bare light bulbs, the use of a
> lampshade (translucent and of an appropriate light neutral color, of
> course) mitigates fluorescent lighting. Also, many fluorescents are
> available in "warm" tones, and there are an increasing number of Full-
> Spectrum lights available.

I disagree. What they call "full spectrum" is actually a series of spectral
spikes.

> All in all, because of that, incandescents have no advantage that I know
> of in terms of light quality. Also, IIRC, it's the near-UV components of
> light which stimulate vitamin D production in humans (in the skin IIRC),
> and incandescents are red-shifted. All of the SAD light-therapy units
> I've researched use fluorescent bulbs, not incandescent.

Unfortunately true, but the SAD lights on the market filter for all UV, as
UV is "bad".
The point of the article was to not that incandescents are good for the
photo-endocrinological system, but rather that levels, and colors, of
artificial light should be avoided that start that system going without
providing the UV dampening effect.

> The problem I see with fluorescents is proper disposal. Here, for
> example, I'd hav eto use a gallon of gas (and that is in a relatively
> fuel-efficient vehicle...) to get to and from the recycle center - and
> that one doesn't even take gglass, so I'd have to go somewhere else to
> drop the glass. It's hard enough to get people to rinse their cans and
> separate papers from plastics, never mind have them divvy it all up and
> then make a 30+ mile round trip to take it all to teh recycling center.
> Meaning, that the bulbs, when they do burn out, all end up in landfill.

You got that right.

> Just because people drive oversized vehicles (because the
> current administration trashed mileage standards and allowed reduced
> safety standards), that means nobody is supposed to bother making any
> other changes/inprovements? I don't understand the logic of that.
>
> Been using CFLs exclusively for many years, BTW.

No. The point was that this is grandstanding (making a big public gesture of
limited significance) while we keep building auto-suburbs, use aluminum for
disposable beverage containers, drive SUVs, etc. Making it worse is that it
is done with the usual human disregard for the Law of Unintended
Consequences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequence
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca



Posted by Edgar on April 30, 2007, 5:11 pm


--
Edgar
> In a minor political scandal, a Canadian federal 'environmental plan'
> speech was leaked to the press yesterday before it was delivered. In it
> there is the intention for Canada to follow Australia in banning
> incandescent light bulbs for the sake of energy savings.
>
> http://www.thestar.com/News/article/206903
>
> Funnily enough, in the last issue of Professional Lighting Design, the
> editorial takes aim at the folly of the Australian move:
>
> http://www.via-verlag.com/1465.0.html?&L=1
>
> (Warning: written in German, then translated into English.....with limited
> success.)
>
> More significantly, the same issue of the magazine has a significant
> article on the effects of mercury vapor lighting on human physiology which
> I noticed because of my other research into this area because of my
> history with SAD (treated last winter with Vitamin D with ***total***
> success, BTW). From the article, it turns out that vitamin D is one of the
> major players in human photo-endocrinology, and is partly responsible for
> countering hormonal stresses induced by some types of artificial light.
> Here's the abstract of the article:
>
> http://www.via-verlag.com/1471.0.html?&L=1
>
> I have crudely scanned my copy of the full article and have made it
> available online here:
>
> http://www.michaelbulatovich.ca/ArtificialLightingAndHeatlth.pdf
>
> The very visible gesture of banning incandescent light bulbs reminds of
> some the other public relations gestures of the last "energy crisis",
> given the other ways we now waste energy, like driving SUVs on the best
> roads in human history. Rather than being merely foolish, it seems
> possible that it could have uncalculated health effects. If we're lucky,
> as a sanguine Sigmund Freud once said, "From error to error one discovers
> the entire truth."
>
> --
>
>
> MichaelB
> www.michaelbulatovich.ca
>
>
> (More info on vitamin D available here: http://www.vitamindcouncil.com/ )
>

Speaking of mercury:

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,268747,00.html

this seems kinda crazy.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Posted by Michael Bulatovich on April 30, 2007, 6:59 pm

> Speaking of mercury:
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,268747,00.html
>
> this seems kinda crazy.

"The DEP sent a specialist to Bridges' house to test for mercury
contamination. The specialist found mercury levels in the bedroom in excess
of six times the state's "safe" level for mercury contamination of 300
billionths of a gram per cubic meter."

That's one bulb. Now knock a bike over onto a case of them, then sell the
house to some unsuspecting human. It's nuts.

There are so many ways North Americans can save the same amount of energy
without bringing such toxins into everyday use in the home. This is
knee-jerk politics.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca



Posted by Edgar on April 30, 2007, 8:20 pm
>
>> Speaking of mercury:
>>
>> http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,268747,00.html
>>
>> this seems kinda crazy.
>
> "The DEP sent a specialist to Bridges' house to test for mercury
> contamination. The specialist found mercury levels in the bedroom in
> excess of six times the state's "safe" level for mercury contamination of
> 300 billionths of a gram per cubic meter."
>
> That's one bulb. Now knock a bike over onto a case of them, then sell the
> house to some unsuspecting human. It's nuts.
>
> There are so many ways North Americans can save the same amount of energy
> without bringing such toxins into everyday use in the home. This is
> knee-jerk politics.
> --
>
>
> MichaelB
> www.michaelbulatovich.ca
>
>

I have to agree with you there from the look of things. We have such a huge
resource of scientists and specialists in this world, and a simple matter of
asking a question is too much for politicians. Maybe it's not the asking of
the question, but getting an answer that won't get you re-elected.

--
Edgar



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Posted by Michael Bulatovich on April 30, 2007, 8:43 pm

>>
>>> Speaking of mercury:
>>>
>>> http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,268747,00.html
>>>
>>> this seems kinda crazy.
>>
>> "The DEP sent a specialist to Bridges' house to test for mercury
>> contamination. The specialist found mercury levels in the bedroom in
>> excess of six times the state's "safe" level for mercury contamination of
>> 300 billionths of a gram per cubic meter."
>>
>> That's one bulb. Now knock a bike over onto a case of them, then sell the
>> house to some unsuspecting human. It's nuts.
>>
>> There are so many ways North Americans can save the same amount of energy
>> without bringing such toxins into everyday use in the home. This is
>> knee-jerk politics.
>> --
>>
>>
>> MichaelB
>> www.michaelbulatovich.ca
>>
>>
>
> I have to agree with you there from the look of things. We have such a
> huge resource of scientists and specialists in this world, and a simple
> matter of asking a question is too much for politicians. Maybe it's not
> the asking of the question, but getting an answer that won't get you
> re-elected.

It's all about "OPTICS".



Page 2 of 2       << first < 1 2
Similar ThreadsPosted
Wall design and vapor barriers April 28, 2006, 2:21 pm
WALL DESIGN and vapor barrier April 28, 2006, 3:49 pm
The Earth As a House and The Scale of Human Activity February 2, 2007, 5:36 pm
The Earth As a House and The Scale of Human Activity February 2, 2007, 5:37 pm
"For some unaccountable reason we seem to be determined to vandalise these few remaining sites which retain the kind of human scale and timeless character that so attract people to them." February 6, 2008, 11:00 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap