Another story that sheds light on a confused situation. Good reporting!

This seems like a well-researched, reasonable report on an important topic. I'd like to compare it to other reports on the same topic, but so far it looks like good, factual information, which bodes well for this community news source.

Not really "everything you want to know", but does address the mercury issue a bit. Other things I'd like to know are: how does the actual life compare with claims? My experience with CFLs is that life is far less than package states. If mercury is so dangerous, why aren't warnings more prominant, and recycling or proper disposal so difficult? Most people probably just throw the burned out bulbs in the trash.

light bulbs may not be the most interesting thing to talk about but this does a good job of informing the reader about CFLs.

The importance for me reading this story is as a harbinger of stories to come. As the relevance to all of us of global warming becomes more clear, energy use and sources will take on so much greater importance that main-stream journalism and media will be providing information and analysis to the public about these uses and sources consistently. this story is an interesting and helpful precursor of what we can and should expect.

Yes, as far as it goes. A couple examples: incandescent bulbs also dim with age, CFLs are less directional than incandescents & disperse the light more evenly eliminating shadows causing the illusion of less light. Also, 'dimmable' CFLs are not too hard to find. I have all CFLs since 2000 and even if they saved no energy, they are very pleasant to use. My resistance was overcome by having a solar power back up system in a power outage prone forest. Wanting to make battery power last I bought CFLs. They were a very happy surprise. The story left much of this out but did deal with the mercury issue which is important but probably is out-weighed by the benefits.

This is basic necessary journalism. It takes a question and attempt to find solid answers to as many of the questions as possible. It plays fair with claims from both sides and provides useful information.

What bothered me about this story was the comparison of emissions by power plants needed to "replace" the extra energy consumed by non CFL bulbs to be exclusively coal. That is poor journalism. Had the author made an attempt to compare mercury emissions with the average mercury pollution averaged from ALL power sources in the US, it would have been unbiased. CFL is generally a good thing, though over-hyped. It is a poor light source for reading, so it should not replace all light bulbs, but for general lighting, I have used them for ten years. You don't need to exaggerate in articles like this to make your points.

Every CFL bulb that is crushed in a landfill has the potential of eventually polluting the water with methylmercury, a neurotoxin, which then enters the food chain and is expecially toxic to children. Unless a thorough legislation is produced to govern the disposal of CFL bulbs, then we have no right to introduce them to general usage; the type of disposal can not be arbitrary or voluntary in nature. Because we have already an enormously polluting industry (power), does not mean that we are free to opt for alternatives that support gross pollution (the power industry) through means which we may be cajoled to think adds only a little--to the detriment of our children. Perhaps the better route is to push the rapid development of ... More »

Really thorough -- I had been a bit worried about the mercury, and this article puts that in perspective with admittedly rough calculations. Uses the word "seems" a couple times, but other than that, uses facts and figures. Great story.

The only 'error' in this article is that it accepts the hype about the apocalyptic dangers of mercury. It does note that the amount of mercury in the CFL bulbs is minuscule and that it evaporates very quickly, though. Yes, mercury has been shown to be seriously damaging for fetuses and small children. It's effect on adults is insignificant.

Well done piece on compact fluorescent bulbs.

Pros and cons are given. The benefit of CF bulbs is clearly stated; at the same time, their environmental value is not overstated.