In the final days of the year, it’s usual for the web to get really introspective and navel gaze better than a pop star with an exposed midriff. And in that spirit of looking back (or looking down at ones’ belly button lint), here are some amusing lists to read through.
The most disappointing gadgets of 2007. I’m actually considering buying one of these, can you guess which one based on the categories I put this post into? And in mind bending hypocrisy, the Wired list has some devices on the Worst List, also on the Best List.
Worst employees according to CNN.
Personal sustainability. Does anyone know where in Canada we can have our Compact Fluorescent bulbs recycled, since they contain the toxic metal mercury?
Jon Swift’s 2007 roundup.
–
Hat tip to The Galloping Beaver, and Miss Cellania.
==
I find it too funny that I have the first, and as I write this only published, comment on Ezra’s new, moderated, blog. Where will his blog be at the end of 2008?
@hotmail.com
![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
Dave | 29-Dec-07 at 2:52 pm | Permalink
I find it too funny that I have the first, and as I write this only published, comment on Ezra’s new, moderated, blog. Where will his blog be at the end of 2008?
You do indeed seem to stand alone there. Did you feel the need to dryclean yourself after the visit? :)
Happy New Year!
Saskboy | 29-Dec-07 at 6:40 pm | Permalink
Something like that :-)
Happy New Year to you and yours too.
willy be frantic | 29-Dec-07 at 11:01 pm | Permalink
“The Home Depot, is starting to turn green. The home renovation retailer announced that as of November 22nd 2007, they will take in compact fluorescent bulbs (CFBs) for recycling”
The above is from the Sask Waste Reduction website. I don’t know how to make links here. Cut & paste would work, I guess.
http://www.saskwastereduction.ca/news-bits.htm
‘Course it begs the question : Does Home Depot actually ensure the bulbs get properly re-cycled or just throw them out with their regular trash. That’s an answer that I don’t know.
Miss Cellania | 30-Dec-07 at 12:57 am | Permalink
Happy New Year, Saskboy!!
Saskboy | 30-Dec-07 at 1:12 am | Permalink
Happy New Year Miss C.
Willy, Sounds like a call should be made to Home Depot in Regina, and we could find out where they send their collected bulbs to.
I know when I dropped off used batteries at Future Shop one day long ago, a few weeks later they were still in the collection box which was nearly empty save for my pile of “piles” (har har, french joke).
Aurelia | 30-Dec-07 at 10:17 pm | Permalink
Those CFL’s cannot be recycled in any reasonable way. If they are delicately transported and not broken the mercury can be removed at great expense, but if the danger of mercury contamination after breakage in the home is so overwhelming and dangerous to pregnant women and small children that it isn’t worth it to use them.
I stopped buying them and got rid of them completely after hearing that California has banned them and will not allow them to be sold or used anymore. The latest trend? LEDs, more advanced than the kind used in your Christmas lights, and completely safe to recycle.
Not to mention, much easier on the eyes…
willy be frantic | 31-Dec-07 at 1:50 pm | Permalink
You make some interesting points, Aurelia. I’m not looking to be a pain in the ass, but do you have any links to back them up ? I did a blog post over at dKos a while ago about compact fluorescent lightbulbs.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/25/05135/3821/503/305616
It touched on the disposal problem and there were some links in the comments about mercury.
This is from a less than prominent web-site. It mentions the high cost of re-cycling and the dubious final destination of the mercury. I have quoted the conclusions of the author.
http://www.bluefish.org/cflconun.htm
“But one thing is certain: An artificial light source without environmental consequence does not yet exist. Therefore, impacts must be assessed comprehensively and not in regards to mercury alone. CFLs prevent the emissions of substantial quantities of mercury, greenhouse gases and other pollutants; they reduce consumer energy bills; and they last far longer than incandescent alternatives. They are currently the environmentally preferable product despite their mercury content – whether they are recycled or not.”
This is another site that says that re-cycling can be done.
http://www.zerowaste.org/cfl/cfl_index.htm
“The technology already exists to separate the glass, phosphor powder, mercury and other materials in CFLs for recycling”
This is a really basic run down of the ‘how’. It is a ‘pdf’ link
http://www.sylvania.com/content/display.scfx?id=003692155
Quite a comprehensive site on recycling.
http://www.lamprecycle.org/
SaskPower’s site that gives links to three Western Canada businesses that recycle fluorescent bulbs.
http://www.saskpower.com/power_saver/cfl_safety.shtml
This is the fourth recycler in Canada ( from the lamprecycle site ).
http://www.flr.ca/
All I can find is that California might ban — incandescent bulbs.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=2839113&page=1
The mercury problem is not trivial. CFL’s contain a small amount compared to the amount of mercury in other devices – old thermostats and thermometers, watch batteries. There will be way more bulbs than watch batteries so proper recycling is a must. The potential health hazard to the user of a CFL is pretty small.
LEDs will be the product of the future, but not quite there yet. I am still advocating CFL’s if you are replacing a lightbulb today and I look forward to using and advocating LED’s
It’s good to ask questions and to become informed. Thanks for posting.