Chronology
Current Month
Current Thread
Current Date
[Year List]
[Month List (current year)]
[
Date Index
] [
Thread Index
]
[
Thread Prev
] [
Thread Next
]
[
Date Prev
] [
Date Next
]
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From
: Crawford J Maccallum <
mccallum@unm.edu
>
Date
: Wed, 16 May 2007 14:00:34 -0600 (MDT)
We have to remember that the tradeoff is between 4 mg mercury in the landfill for a CFL vs a much larger amount put into the _air_ by a coal fired power plant providing the extra energy for an incandescent.
At least that's what I read.
Crawford MacCallum
Follow-Ups
:
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From:
"Polvani, Donald G." <donald.polvani@ngc.com>
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From:
John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>
References
:
[Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From:
Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From:
Clarence Bennett <bennett@oakland.edu>
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
From:
"Edmiston, Mike" <edmiston@bluffton.edu>
Prev by Date:
Re: [Phys-l] Inscrutable words
Next by Date:
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
Previous by thread:
Re: [Phys-l] In-class homework
Next by thread:
Re: [Phys-l] CFL's not such a hot idea
Index(es):
Date
Thread