I came across this article about CFL (Compact Fluorescent Lightbulb)s perhaps being worse for the environment than the traditional incandescent bulbs:
It's quite odd that environmentalists have embraced the CFL, which cannot now and will not in the foreseeable future be made without mercury. Given that there are about five billion light bulb sockets in North American households, we're looking at the possibility of creating billions of hazardous waste sites such as the Bridges' bedroom.
Usually, environmentalists want hazardous materials out of, not in, our homes. These are the same people who go berserk at the thought of mercury being emitted from power plants and the presence of mercury in seafood. Environmentalists have whipped up so much fear of mercury among the public that many local governments have even launched mercury thermometer exchange programs.
Via Flutterby [1], “The CFL mercury nightmare [2]”
and was greatly amused at the unintended consequences (Why Things Bite Back: Technology and the Revenge of Unintended Consequences) [3] of attempting to be enviromentally sound.
Then I came across some additional information about mercury filled CFLs at Instapundit [4] and maybe, just maybe, things aren't quite as bad as they seem.
Personally, I almost wish it were true, just to see the environmental greenies get their panties in a wad and try to spin this (and yes, I'm bad that way).
[1] http://www.flutterby.com/archives/comments/9965.html
[2] http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=aa7796aa
[3] http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0679747567/conmanlaborat-