Talk:Environmentalism/Archive1

Real Vs. Woo section
Can someone expand this to actually include REAL environmentalism? Otherwise, it looks more like an opinion rather than a compare and contrast, and I think (when it comes to woo and pseudscience) that showing the difference is of utmost importance.The Goonie 1 23:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * +1. Two years later, this article is still shit.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that the whole "real", and "disputed" breakdown is a bad idea.
 * Few things in this category are so black and white and almost all involve some balancing of priorities in respect of things like: the needs of human populations vs the effect on the environment and whether we are looking short term, long term or very long term.--BobSpring is sprung! 17:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nature woo and greenwashing are firmly in the woo category, though. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 17:09, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually I wasn't talking about the "woo" category - just the "real" and "disputed".--BobSpring is sprung! 06:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Incandescent vs. Fluorescent
The mercury issue isn't quite as clear cut as presented, as the coal used for the incandescent lights releases, I am told, more mercury than the light contains. Imarcuson (talk) 03:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)