香港寵物小精靈村落 論壇

標題: 環保野來了~! 有關燈泡 [打印本頁]

作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 20/8/2007 06:04 PM
標題: 環保野來了~! 有關燈泡
溫室效應, 全球暖化...擔心嗎?

行動吧!
叫印度ban燈炮(compact fluorescent lamps), 改用慳電膽!
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/banthebulb/petition

Compact Fluorescent Lamps use only 20% of the energy used by an ordinary light bulb. By replacing all ordinary light bulbs with CFLs, we can reduce India's CO2 emissions by 55 million tonnes.

(如果你屋企都用埋慳電膽就更加好! XD)

NB: 簽左名之後要去你個E-mail 到activate ga!! 唔好亂填個E-mail 呀!!!!!


想做更加多ge野呢, 可以去呢度睇 http://www.greenpeace.org/intern ... ke-action-feed-on-y

你可以將個css加入你個網 (上邊個網有得抄)
好似我果2個網咁 (請scroll 到最底) http://www.freewebs.com/dolphin8ice/ http://www.freewebs.com/cherubfish/

[ 本帖最後由 dolphin_ice 於 20/8/2007 06:31 PM 編輯 ]
作者: ben    時間: 20/8/2007 06:10 PM
reduce India's CO2 emissions by 55 million tonnes.

單位係..-0-?
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 20/8/2007 06:20 PM
原帖由 ben 於 20/8/2007 06:10 PM 發表

單位係..-0-?

tonnes
2 tonnes = 2000 kg
作者: ben    時間: 20/8/2007 06:38 PM
原帖由 dolphin_ice 於 20/8/2007 06:20 PM 發表

tonnes
2 tonnes = 2000 kg

i mean per year? per month? or?
作者: 莫邪    時間: 20/8/2007 06:59 PM
慳電膽包不包括光管?
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 20/8/2007 07:08 PM
原帖由 莫邪 於 20/8/2007 06:59 PM 發表
慳電膽包不包括光管?

包括

Re Ben,
我幫你問清楚先
作者: ben    時間: 20/8/2007 08:54 PM
原帖由 dolphin_ice 於 20/8/2007 07:08 PM 發表

包括

Re Ben,
我幫你問清楚先

純粹問下咋-.-
唔洗特登幫我問-0-
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 20/8/2007 10:19 PM
原帖由 ben 於 20/8/2007 08:54 PM 發表

純粹問下咋-.-
唔洗特登幫我問-0-

其實冇人答我

不過應該係year
作者: elven2001    時間: 20/8/2007 10:42 PM
慳電膽用的汞~同樣也是污染~~~
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 21/8/2007 12:05 AM
原帖由 elven2001 於 20/8/2007 10:42 PM 發表
慳電膽用的汞~同樣也是污染~~~

現在global warming的問題較大
作者: fish    時間: 21/8/2007 12:30 AM
原帖由 dolphin_ice 於 21/8/2007 12:05 AM 發表

現在global warming的問題較大


同時共存之問題,要毒還是要熱

直接去限制用電量~或者限制只用排污量極少的工廠所製之燈泡好了

Global warming不是好玩且較Hg長遠,但Hg多起來可不是很好玩耶


綠色和平.....我最不喜的「環保」機構之一 OTL

印度人口甚多,經濟卻仍是弱
ban掉便宜燈泡對政府及大部份市民只會加重負擔
問1: 有國家原意去救濟嗎?
問2: 救完印度,別國要求時又如何?
問3: 哪國能夠保證自己是為大局著想,而非私利呢?

光是這3條已好好玩了XD
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 21/8/2007 01:23 PM
原帖由 fish 於 21/8/2007 12:30 AM 發表


同時共存之問題,要毒還是要熱

直接去限制用電量~或者限制只用排污量極少的工廠所製之燈泡好了

Global warming不是好玩且較Hg長遠,但Hg多起來可不是很好玩耶


綠色和平.....我最不喜的「環保」機構 ...

你還真坦白...

Taking the above totals into consideration, mercury emissions by a CFLlamp from electricity consumption over its lifetime is about 2.4mg ofmercury. Emissions from an incandescent light bulb is about 10mg forthe same period through electricity consumption. Therefore a CFL bulbemits 76% less mercury over the same time period. However, mercurystored in CFL bulbs is perfectly safe unless the glass is in somewaydamaged, in which case the bulbs can then emit mercury vapour. If themercury from a CFL was to escape it would total 6.4mg, a 36% reductionon emissions from an incandescent.

One study looking at long tubular fluorescent bulbs found that over atwo week period, only 17 to 40 percent of the mercury in the bulbevaporated. The rest remained stuck in the bulb. Roughly one-third ofthe mercury that evaporated did so in the first eight hours after thebreakage; the rest seeped out slowly over the remainder of the studyperiod.


The mercury in a CFL can however be reclaimed and reused through theprocess of recycling. Collected bulbs are crushed in a machine thatuses negative pressure ventilation and a mercury absorbing filter.Therefore if you use a CFL with renewable energy and recycle it, themercury emmission level is actually negated completely."

http://howtosaveenergy.blogspot.com/2007/05/cfl-mercury-myths.html

[ 本帖最後由 dolphin_ice 於 21/8/2007 03:44 PM 編輯 ]
作者: _藍天_    時間: 21/8/2007 07:02 PM
>3<如果有自然分解ge 慳電膽更好!!
作者: 莫邪    時間: 21/8/2007 07:56 PM
原帖由 Miffy 於 21/8/2007 19:02 發表
>3

這就要靠你了
作者: _藍天_    時間: 21/8/2007 08:14 PM
原帖由 莫邪 於 21/8/2007 07:56 PM 發表

這就要靠你了


這是各人的責任,我有機會一定會實現(說不定更早就出現)
嚴肅致敬(0v0)\
作者: fish    時間: 22/8/2007 02:26 AM
原帖由 dolphin_ice 於 21/8/2007 01:23 PM 發表

你還真坦白...

Taking the above totals into consideration, mercury emissions by a CFLlamp from electricity consumption over its lifetime is about 2.4mg ofmercury. Emissions from an incandesce ...


直接去限制用電量~或者限制只用排污量極少的工廠所製之燈泡好了


偶的著眼點是工廠....我才不管那些出了廠的貨耶....這麼煩- -

對於我來說,那篇article的可信性只屬中等,主因為"Wikipedia"及citation format = =||

藍字:
不明白
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 22/8/2007 03:19 PM
原帖由 fish 於 22/8/2007 02:26 AM 發表





偶的著眼點是工廠....我才不管那些出了廠的貨耶....這麼煩- -

對於我來說,那篇article的可信性只屬中等,主因為"Wikipedia"及citation format = =||

藍字:
不明白

藍字: 你很直接...
你說你不喜歡Greenpeace, 對我來說有點shock
作者: elven2001    時間: 22/8/2007 03:57 PM
即使發明到真正省電無污染的省電膽又點~難道成為大企業之間相互爭奪的奪財工具?

當所有野普及化~全球石油用量減少,產油國哥面的政治因素會做出d咩相應的政策,而哥d國際的正義大國又會點,到時又多幾場戰爭?

加上現行的科技~大量普及化的省電膽,一旦廢棄後~d汞點處理?點保證到唔會求其比人丟下海?點保證到幾十年前類似日本的水俣病疫等等的各種危害唔會再發生?

與其綠化環境~不如先由人的思想開始綠化~
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 22/9/2007 06:27 PM
我搵到一種慳電電燈冇水銀! (Mercury Free)

叫LED bulb
作者: 路人2號    時間: 22/9/2007 08:32 PM
原帖由 dolphin_ice 於 22/9/2007 06:27 PM 發表
我搵到一種慳電電燈冇水銀! (Mercury Free)

叫LED bulb

大哥(大姐).....
LED有水銀才怪吶/.\
作者: dolphin_ice    時間: 22/9/2007 09:04 PM
原帖由 路人2號 於 22/9/2007 08:32 PM 發表

大哥(大姐).....
LED有水銀才怪吶/.\

大佬
冇水銀先係正野
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Greenpeace Forum 有隻傻仔咁話:
Have anything occured to you guys that a bulb might serve as a source of warmth in very cold environments???

If bulbs are to be totally banned, there might be another possibility that heaters (more waste of energy) be put in placed instead and the poor might not be able to live off the environment except to burn stuff which might be worse...


即刻比壇主串
Do you heat your house with bulbs? Seriously? How do you sleep? Do you close your eyes very strong?

[ 本帖最後由 dolphin_ice 於 22/9/2007 09:09 PM 編輯 ]




歡迎光臨 香港寵物小精靈村落 論壇 (https://proxy.archiver.hkpnve.pokebeacon.com/)Powered by Discuz! X3.2