As you probably know, we're losing our wonderful, dim-able, natural-warm-light-able incandescent bulbs over the next few years. Some states are jumping the federal gun and are already planning on banning 100-watters by the end of the year, and we'll presume 75- and 60-watters will soon follow.
Now, you could write an angry, passionate letter to your Congresscritter and that might, indeed, have a small impact. But I have a better idea. A tried and true idea used by many of the greatest thinkers and persuaders in history:
Exploitation.
One of the reasons the word hideous applies to the Environmental Protection Agency is the way they go so overboard in their 'toxic level' figures. The problem is manyfold.
First, there's the same built-in bias from the scientists testing these things that we see in the global warming industry. Their job isn't to determine if something is safe; they've been instructed to find out how safe it isn't.
And they're certainly not going to risk being wrong and facing legal repercussions, so they're going to multiply any 'fudge factor' by 10 — just to be on the safe side.
Likewise, the administrative arm of the EPA isn't going to put its legal ass on the line, so they're going to reduce the acceptable level by another factor of 10 — just to be on the safe side. After all, as they'll hurriedly tell you, children's lives are at stake.
As a result, whereas 300 parts per million of Ingredient X is perfectly safe for the human body, the official EPA number ends up being something completely ridiculous like 20 parts per million.
One chemical that's been in the news recently is the mercury dust found in fluorescent light bulbs. Numerous experts agree that the minuscule 5 milligrams of mercury dust in a curly bulb poses no danger, whatsoever, to human beings should the bulb break. Haul out the vacuum cleaner, sweep things up, get on with your life.
EPA, meet the petard:
If you would be so kind, please hoist thineself upon one.
Though the amount is tiny, 5 milligrams of mercury is enough to contaminate 6,000 gallons of drinking water, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
That's right. The wise, careful scientists at the EPA have determined that mercury dust is right up there with plutonium on the toxicity chart and what amounts to five grains of pollen is enough to (here's that word) contaminate a body of water the size of a small swimming pool. By this logic, if a crate of curly bulbs ever fell off a cargo ship in Boston, they'd have to close down the Atlantic Ocean.
The article I'm quoting from goes on at length:
Low level mercury exposure can cause tremors, mood shifts, sleeplessness, muscle fatigue, and headaches. High level or extended length exposure can lead to learning disabilities, altered personality, deafness, loss of memory, chromosomal damage, and nerve, brain, and kidney damage, as stated by the EPA. There is a particular risk to the nervous systems of unborn babies and young children.
It then rambles on about the environmental dangers of mercury, the danger to animals, and every word of it 100% true when it comes to real contamination — and thus not one word of it has anything to do with curly light bulbs.
But, because of the EPA's excessive guidelines on what the toxicity level is for mercury dust, they're literally forced to write such articles. As a result, more people — who are clueless about the subject otherwise — have it drilled into them what a danger curly bulbs pose, and they'll pay a little more attention when that Republican candidate on the 2012 ticket starts talking about repealing the ban on incandescents.
In other words, articles like this should be encouraged.
After all, children's lives are at stake. Just ask anyone.
An exploitative idea on saving the aforementioned children's lives — not to mention our own sanity — is below the fold. If you want to make a stand for incandescent light bulbs, here's an effective way.
The basic premise here is that it's better having the media work for us than against us. Since the EPA, in its zealotry, has given us a weak point, it should be exploited. As long as the media is so in love with perpetrating fear, I say we stoke the fire to a frenzy.
I suggest you cobble together something along the following and mail a paper copy to your periodical of choice. Send one to every big-wig's name you can find on their web site. If you're near a library, there are books in the reference section that list out all of the major players in big corporations.
Put it in your own words, make up your own horror stories. Keep it respectful, but don't pull any punches.
Dear Time Magazine:
You REALLY need to publish more articles warning people about these new "curly" light bulbs on the market! My neighbor, a great old guy named Bob, has a bit of palsy and dropped a whole box of those curly bulbs on his kitchen floor about six months ago, and now suffers from nervous spasms and breathing disorders. The poor old guy is kind of feeble and probably didn't clean up very well after the spill.
Won't you please help educate the public about this menace? It's only going to get worse and worse from here on out. The EPA, itself, estimates that over one BILLION curly bulbs have already been released to the environment. That is, people throw them away like normal and they end up in land fills, then the mercury dust goes into the air, eventually settles to the land and is washed into the water table by rain.
When it comes to public health, please remember the valuable role you play. It's magazines like yours that we count on for the truth.
Sincerely,
Joe Blow
Anytown, USA
To magazines catering to animal lovers:
Dear Dog Lovers Magazine:
You people really need to get your act together. My golden retriever almost DIED because of those goddam new curly light bulbs on the market, and if you folks care half as much about dogs as you claim to, you'll start educating your readers about the many dangers those nasty little time bombs pose.
For starters, you're going to hear the "experts" claim that the mercury dust each bulb contains doesn't pose any danger to humans -- and maybe they're right -- but what they're not mentioning is that animals are about 100 times more sensitive to heavy metals than people. And, if we may ask, if they're so safe for humans, then why is "clean or replace any carpet the mercury dust may have contaminated" on the EPA's official 25-step clean-up list? And, if they're so safe, why does there actually have to be an elaborate, multi-step process to clean them up in the first place?
In my case, Roxie caught hold of the cord to a table lamp and knocked it over. It was actually kind of scary, in that I could see this poisonous cloud of dust rising from the broken bulb, and then Roxie went bounding over to give it a big sniff. I actually lunged at her and grabbed her tail to stop her.
My neighbor a few doors down has a male Chow that he's keeping an eye on. The dog sniffed at a broken bulb a few weeks ago and the owner says it seems like he's sleeping longer these days, poor little guy.
I don't know if your magazine ever ran one of those goofy "green" articles promoting these evil things, but, if it did, there'll be blood on your hands in the end.
Respectfully,
Josephine Blow
Anytown, USA
And if your periodical of choice has just published an article promoting curly bulbs:
In response to your article promoting the new fluorescent light bulbs:
Do you know what the sad part of this is? Your magazine probably won't be around 30 years from now when the mercury poisoning our toddlers receive from these time bombs (when they break) manifests itself in leukemia and other nasty ways. I guess in your ideal "green" world, everyone disposes of their curly bulbs at the proper toxic waste disposal site -- but that simply isn't how real life works. The EPA, itself, estimates that over one BILLION curly bulbs have already found their way into the great outdoors. That is, people throw them in the garbage just like any normal broken item and they end up in land fills, with the dust eventually wafting off in the air, settling on the ground, washed away by rains and eventually making its way into the water table.
And have you considered how unbelievably hypocritical this article makes you look? Here you are, promoting "green energy" for the supposed long-term health of our planet -- but the long-term health of its people doesn't count?
One day, decades down the road, the accumulative toxic mercury dust in our air and water is going to have a real effect on people. But no one's going to be blaming magazine articles like yours at the time, right?
How very fortunate for you.
Sincerely,
Upset reader
Anytown, USA
Remember, persuasion is a by-the-numbers game. If the magazine editor receives X amount of letters on a subject, he'll pay attention and do something about it. If then more people read about the toxic dangers of curly bulbs, X percent of them will write their Congressperson in protest. If the Congressional office receives X number of vociferous complaints, they'll start paying attention to the issue. When the X figure doubles, and then doubles again, at some point someone at the staff meeting is going to use the delicate phrase "the next election" — and then they'll really start paying attention to it.
