The following is by Architect Paula Baker-LaPorte, a recognized authority on healthy homes.  She addresses the unanticipated consequences of the rapid and widespread adoption of CFLs.  It, along with the rush to corn-based ethanol, are perfect examples of the fallout–both the hazards and the loss of potential from failure to pursue more systemic solutions, of narrowly focusing on single target variables like fossil fuel consumption.

Confessions of a CFL detractor
To declare that I am against the use of compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs) and still call myself an environmentalist seems, in today’s green world, to be an oxymoron. More than any other consumer item, the CFL has come to represent the green movement. The arguments in their favor are compelling. They use 1/3 to 1/5 the electricity of incandescent bulbs. Because they last from 6,000 to 15,000 hours, compared to the incandescent bulb’s 750 to 1,000 hours, the initial higher price is a good, long-term investment that can save as much as $30/bulb over its life.

It has been estimated that if the 110 million American households each replaced only one incandescent bulb with a CFL, the energy saved would be equivalent to closing two coal-burning power plants and a reduction of greenhouse gases equivalent to removing 1.5 million cars off the road.
Changing out every bulb would certainly be a no-brainer, a patriotic duty for every world citizen that I would fully embrace if I could also swallow the following beliefs:           More

We’ve poured huge amounts of energy into the atmosphere and, well, the atmosphere is energized.  It’s time to learn how to dance with this increasingly energetic partner. Dancing is a good metaphor for the kind of response demanded by climate change. Dancing implies controlled relaxation, improvisation, and the ability to recognize and generate patterns in a swirling changing field.  And it’s fun, creative, and good mental and physical exercise.

Because climate change is happening rapidly, we need to begin experimenting and adapting now—not waiting for someone to figure it out and tell us what to do.  Here’s an example.  Two decades ago, Tim Murphy told me one of his ideas for addressing climate change:  plant oak trees.  Here in the western interior of the U.S., the larger and more productive species of oaks are found in the temperate south.  As one moves northward and to higher elevations, the dominant species are scrub oaks.  But if the climate warms up, southern oaks should be able to grow further and further north.  How will we know?  By trying it. More

In 2000 the U.S. Green Building Council officially launched the LEED^® Green Building Rating System. LEED is a grading system that assigns points and levels of performance to various criteria relating to our health and the health of the ecosystem. It grades a client and design team’s willingness to reduce impact in a number of broad areas such as energy and atmospheric pollutants; community issues; habitat; water quality and conservation; material resources; and the quality of our indoor environment. The purpose of this rating system was to put these issues in front of us as a grouped system. While it has been very successful in its impact on the marketplace, the danger is that users think that LEED helps create sustainable buildings.  It does not.  More