In the past I've criticized new construction as putting a load on our dwindling water resource. This, even though the business that I'm in is dependent on new construction. Briefly, I don't believe that long time residents of the city or county should be put in the same boat of inconvenience to accommodate development and expansion. Those dwindling the resource should be the ones to carry the load. Water wise, this would be prohibiting watering lawns, gardens and washing cars in new developments except with water gathered from cisterns or other non-aqufier sources. On site water recycling of gray water should be included with conservation efforts.

Preparation for the diminished used of petroleum should be implemented in the the building code too.  Electricity is the energy of the future. We will power anything with a petroleum engine with it and we will heat our homes with it. As an expert in the heating and cooling business, I can see gas furnaces going the way of oil furnaces in the next twenty years. Honda has shown a natural gas powered fuel cell generator to recharge electric cars and provide power for the home's electric furnace and heat pump/air conditioner. For those of you with hot water heat, there have been electric powered boilers so don't feel left out.

GM will be introducing the electric car, the Volt, which will run entirely on electricity, recharge at home if desired, but have gasoline back-up so you don't get stranded. In my needs, the electricity range is adequate for most all of my driving around. So the Volt can replace one of my cars and the other can be the guzzler used to pull the boat and so forth.

The building code should anticipate the plumbing changes and increased electrical service needs of the near future and require that it be install NOW in new construction and remodeling of existing homes and buildings. 

It is probably too late because the science experts called congressmen have already destined tungsten incandescent light bulbs to extinction in a few years.

To set the record straight, I have compact flourescent bulbs in my house.  I counted eleven. I also have several tube type flourescent fixtures.  All long before it became the "green" thing to do.  I did it because I like to save money and Wisconsin Focus on Energy had a big sale on them some years ago. That's market forces at work rather than dictation.

If you have been following the news, you'll know that compact flourescent bulbs have mercury in them. You may also know that there is a movement for dentists to collect the mercury in amalgams (tooth fillings) before they get into the sewage system and then the water systems. I never did understand how these fillings could be healthy.

I know a bit about mercury. Being in the heating business, we have used blobs of mercury in thermostats for decades. They are now obsolete but we collect old thermostats so the mercury can be salvaged. It probably ends up in our light bulbs now!

I also dabble in gold prospecting. Much of the mercury found in streams was from it being used to attach to gold dust and make it easier to "pan out".  This mercury coated gold would then be heated, the mercury turned to a vapor and the gas would go through a condenser coil and out would come clean fresh blobs of mercury. It was the vapor that was the real killer, but the liquid isn't much better.

So you can see, while we have made efforts to contain mercury from thermostats and tooth fillings, we've created a new way to reintroduce it into our landfills and work it's way into our groundwater. While these bulbs last a long time, I've had a couple fail way short of their touted five year life expectancy. We need to come up with a recycling plan for these bulbs now. Something voluntary would be nice, but I believe the best way is to charge a deposit, perhaps $1.00 each, so incentive to recycle them is made rather than disposing into the garbage.

Is this a bright idea or what?