I recently came across an article on the Daily Mail site regarding a Labour peer who just happens to own shares in a firm who recycles the new ‘eco-friendly’ lightbulbs the enviro-fascist government is currently forcing into all homes.
Lord Barnett, who was Treasury Chief Secretary in the Seventies and later vice-chairman of the BBC, is a major investor in a company that stands to reap massive profits as the new-style bulbs are recycled.
Why must these bulbs be recycled in this way (as opposed to normal bulbs)? Well it is because the new ‘environmentally friendly’ bulbs contain mercury, one of the most toxic substances on Earth.
Breaking one of these bulbs in your home technically qualifies that area as a toxic waste site. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has issued guidance in the event one of these ‘eco’ bulbs breaks, which will release mercury vapour into your home, and incase you are wondering…
..there is no safe level of mercury, and no one has actually shown that there is a safe level. I would say mercury is a very toxic substance… – Dr Lars Friberg, Former Chief Adviser to the World Health Organization on Mercury safety.
The mainstream excuse for this pushing of this product is to reduce CO2 emissions by lower energy consumption and ‘waste’ through heat etc.
CO2, a naturally occuring gas that exists in trace levels in the atmosphere is essential for plant life. The 0.038% of the atmosphere that contains CO2 represents the planets total outgassing, not just man-made which is again, a trace of the above percentage, but I have written about this here: I will declare Carbon Dioxide a pollutant: Obama. Those useful idiots pushing for global centralisation of power in the name of ‘stopping global warming’ fail to mention that there hasnt been any global warming since 1998. Polar bear numbers are at an all time high and there has been a record increase in sea ice, which is now back to 1979 levels. On top of that many are predicting cooling for years to come. Quite simply, CO2 exists in trace quanitites, and is less of a greenhouse gas than methane, and a gas called nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), used during the construction of solar panels, among other things, is 17,000 times more potent than CO2.
But let’s focus on mercury, otherwise we will be here all day.
By forcing people to buy these new bulbs, the proto-global government is forcing one of the worlds most toxic elements into your home, an element that is toxic to all life and will now help you save the planet (by potentially poisoning and killing yourselves), and with your own money too! Sounds like the thinking of the anti-human elitists to me.
I wanted to a) find out what the ‘acceptable’ level of mercury exposure was, and b) how much mercury is in each bulb.
After a bit of digging, I found a document called ‘Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) for Hazardous Substances’, published by the Department of Health and Human Services (US). Fluoride is listed in it by the way. According to this document, which defines the MRLs as “an estimate of the daily human exposure to a hazardous substance that is likely to be without appreciable risk of adverse noncancer health effects over a specified duration of exposure.”
The minimum risk for mercury exposure is 0.0002 mg per m3. That is, twenty thousandth of one milligram per cubic metre.
Fine, now how much mercury does one of these new fangled bulbs contain? According to the Health Protection Agency (haha), “Nowadays, the typical amount is around 4 milligrams per lamp – just enough to cover the tip of a ball point pen and just enough to last the expected life-time of the lamp.”
So, 4 milligrams per lamp. Back to the first Daily Mail article we see this;
‘There are 20 million households in the country. That means between 700 million and 800 million lights will need replacing and will have to be recycled.’
So one may not think that a broken bulb in the home is a big deal, even if that bulb can release 40,000 times the maximum acceptable amount of mercury into your locality. How many people will put all of these CFL’s into a special bag and take them down to the controlled recycling environment? What will happen to all of that mercury when dumped in landfills? We cannot even be sure that councils in the UK will recycle the bulbs, as they haven’t been doing the same for all the other materials suitable for recycling. Doesn’t 3,200 kilogrammes of one of the worlds most toxic substances, mercury, being put into the environment sound healthier than CO2, a naturally occuring gas? How does mercury poisoning of the water supply sound? Good!
I didn’t fucking think so, but I suppose CO2 doesn’t have quite the same effect on the brain, on child and fetal development, on reducing sperm count and countless other negative effects which can be easily researched online, but the following statement warrants mention:
All forms of mercury are toxic to the fetus, but methylmercury most readily passes through the placenta. Even with an asymptomatic patient, maternal exposure can lead to spontaneous abortion or retardation.
This doesn’t even touch on all of the other issues this kind of light can generate in people;
dermatologist Dr John Hawk, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that some people already find it difficult to tolerate the fluorescent-strip lighting that is widely used in schools and offices, which works in the same way as the eco-friendly bulbs.
He said: “Fluorescent lights seem to have some sort of ionising characteristic where they affect the air around them.
“This does affect a certain number of people, probably tens of thousands, in Britain, whose ailments flare up just by being close to them.
Why has the government forced these bulbs on the population? If we had ‘free market capitalism’ (which we don’t) these two families of products could compete openly, but the state deems it necessary to impose their sick agenda on the people without their consent. There is nothing FREE about being FORCED to do anything. It is like ‘compulsory volunteering‘. This in itself should have your spidey-senses tingling. I suppose the unelected scum do not believe you are capable of making these decisions for yourself, I am under the impression that this is part of a larger agenda of 1. funding a new industry 2. released neurotoxins into the general public 3. providing the health ‘industry’ with many sick serfs for decades to come, 4. attack fertility (population control) 5. condition nations to accept rulings from supranational agencies.
By the way, there are ways of cleaning the emissions of coal-powered plants of CO2, mercury etc. Would be better to clean it there than to distribute it to 20 million plus locations than collect it at the source?
Maybe I’m being stupid, but this whole issue makes me fucking sick. More fascism from the elites and more ignorance and apathy from the public. Remember, concern yourself first with the EFFECTs of their proposals, ignore the EXCUSES. These bastards will say anything to make you go along with their agenda, and people will believe it because it’s easier than realising they are pathetic slaves and thus have to DO something about it.