Funny how you didn't include my entire comment...but then again, doing so would show how you are just disingenuous liar, editing and taking people's comments out of context to try and make your point.
No other points you brought up merit discussion if you can't even discuss my very straightforward comment honestly.
Yurts just being a partisan hack showing he can spin anything the GOP supports. Never mind the fact that the energy bill that put this standard in place was approved by a GOP congress and signed into law by a GOP Presidents. Now their opposed to it and so Yurt is now too.
Here are some facts about CFL's. First, a typical CFL lasts about 6,000 to 15,000 hours of use where a comparable incandescent lamps will last 750 to 1,000 hours. So essentially a CFL will last ten times as long or longer then an incandescent one. CFL's also use about 1/4 the energy to produce the same quantity of light. For example, a 100 watt incandenscent lamp will generate about 1,600 lumens of light. It only takes 25 watts of power for a CFL to produce the same amount of light.
Then there is the quality of light. Recent formulations of phosphors make the light from a modern CFL of very near to same quality as incandescent lamps, so that is a very over stated issue and if you don't believe me, do the pepsi challenge. Go into a room lit by one, then the other in a blind test and tell me if you can tell the difference. I couldn't.
Then there is the issue of cost. A CFL will cost a bit more in purchase price then an incandescent lamp but because they use less electricity, produce more light per watt and last 10 times longer they are more cost affective then incandescent lamps and they are about 5 times more efficient in energy use.
So so far you have a huge advantage in performance and energy savings at a minute difference in light quality which brings us to the issue of CFL's and mercury.
In terms of environmental impact CFL's that go into a landfill or incinerator will discharge their mercury into the environment. In areas where energy sources other than coal is used to generate electricity this is a legitimate criticsm. So for example if you life in a western area where electricity is generated via hydroelectric power their would be a net increase in mercury into the environment. However, most of the US used coal and since coal contains mercury then the net affect is that the wide spread use of CFL's would reduce mercury emmision into the environment by about 2/3. For example, for about every 8000 hours a 100 watt incandescent lamp is used about 5.8 mg of mercury is emmited into the environment from the consumption of coal powered electricity. Conversely when a comparable CFL is used for 8000 hours only about 1.2 mg of mercury is emitted from coal powered electricity and about 0.6 mg mercury from the disposal of the lamp for a net total of 1.8 mg mercury. So from that standpoing CFL's represent a 66% decrease in mercury emmisions in regions where coal powered electricity predominates. Emmisions of mercury from CFL's can also be easily mitiagated by placing the lamp inside a ziplock baggie, then inserting it inside another (double bagging). This simple method can retain upwards to 90% of mercury emmisions from CFL's.
There there is the issue of mercury exposure. Mercury is a developmental toxin. In it's elemental form or as a hydride (the form found in CFL's) it's not that toxic to adults at the levels found in a CFL and the exposure from a broken lamp is so small as to be fairly insignficant. Young children are a different story and exposure to mercury is a concern but again, the levels of mercury are so low that this risk can be mitigated by simply removing children from a room were a CFL has broken and opening the windows for about 20 minutes to allow the mercury vapors to dissipate. So again, not really much of a concern there.
The biggest concern I have for CFL's is that they are mostly produced in nations like China which do not have worker safety standards for mercury exposure, i.e. work place PEL's (permissable exposure limits) nor do they have the appropriate administrative or engineering controls to prevent worker exposure to mercury and thus mercury poisoning has been a significant issue for those workers.
On the balance though there is much to be gained in energy conservation by using CFL's with little, if any, sacrifice in quality, safety or environmental impact.
