Re: Fluorescent Bulbs Are Known to Zap Domestic Tranquillity; Energy-Savers a Turnoff for Wives

[Marc_F_Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 10:09:19 -0400, "Robert Green"
<ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
<ROednR9xXtMFtf3bnZ2dnUVZ_tTinZ2d@xxxxxxx>:

>"Robert L Bass" <no-sales-spam@bassburglaralarms> wrote in message
>news:2IOdnRjbc8X7v8LbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > The EPA has a step-by-step procedure
>> > for cleaning up after breaking a fluorescent.
>>
>> According to that same EPA document,
>> mercury in CFL's is not the problem.
>
>Not the problem . . . YET.  They, like the FDA, have been gutted over the
>last decade.  Both agencies, like the FAA and numerous others pretty much
>represent industry, not the consumer.  How else would an Arabian horseman
>end up running FEMA?

The agencies that do the hard work and the individuals that somehow resist
relentless pressures from the politicos need support in trying to get the
science and technology right. ( Clinton gutted the USEPA in the last four
years of his presidency? Huh?)

Bobby: Consider responding usefully to the substance and science of the
facts of the quantitative mercury and energy discussion, rather than
attacking the agency because the individuals the agency and individuals that
present facts that you don't like, or, apparently, understand.

(My perspective comes in part from actually having actually have worked with
USEPA researchers and others within USEPA beginning in 1978. My most recent
face-to-face technical discussion with a USEPA environmental PhD scientist
was this Wednesday. Would BobbyG stand face-to-face to one of those
researchers and say "You have been gutted so I dismiss your scientific
conclusions ? If not, why does he do so here?

... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org