Just heard on the radio that the use of mercury in barometers is to baned in the UK, then the arguments why mercury is dangerous or not, the main argument for mercury not being harmful was the use of it in fillings, from what i can make out mercury vapour is toxic, the metal form is not.
From the BBC News pages; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6725161.stm Seems a shame, as mercury makes for nice an accurate equipment, and I'm sure replacements will be comparatively expensive.
The term (mad hatter) came from the hat making industry using mercury, which some how caused madness in the workers. The thing i do not know is how dangerous mercury is, can it be compared to lead for instance? Mercury has been used in barometers and thermometers for decades, why the sudden outcry?
mercury causes brain neuron degernation which causes the brain to lose brain cells. and if it gets in your blood stream it has some of the same affects as lead. that is why it is so dangerous ten ounces is enough to deteriate the rest of your brain. give or take a few ounces on people.
Do you mean 10ozs ingested, rubbed on your skin, just in the same room as you ? How would mercury contained in a barometer get in your blood stream ?
Fishtail, I would imagine that barometers break at some point, yes? Mercury is bioaccumulative as well. Anything mercury that ends up in the ocean, ends up being concentrated in the sea creatures (such as fish like salmon) that we eat. Ingesting it is certainly not a good idea.
I watched a speech by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the other day on FreeSpeech TV, and he said that because of the currently unregulated coal-burning power plants in the U.S. (unregulated thanks to Bush's non-existent environmental policy), 1 out of every 6 women in the U.S. has such a high level of mercury in their system that their children (if they have them) will be born with some form of cognitive disorder or brain damage. 1 in 6. These high levels of mercury, he said, come from pollutants dropped in rivers by these coal-burning power plants and are absorbed by the fish, which are then eaten by us.
Spot on. Do we really think there are enough significant barometer breakings near waterways, or is it the non-stop chugging of coal fired power plants that is the danger? OK, so the production of Mercury can't be good for the environment, but I should think it's scale rather smaller than energy requirements. Of course, coal fired power stations are also responsible for putting more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear power stations, and also sulphur, which makes acid rain.
phlogistician, this man, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., disseminated so much info in that hour that I can't remember all of it. Fast talker, fast thinker, so sincere, not to mention having some kind of speech or throat or lung disorder that requires him to drink water non-stop to be able to keep talking. I don't know what it is. Anyway, I really liked him. He also said that when Bush came into office, the Clinton justice department had been prosecuting or investigating 75 of the 1100+ coal-burning power plants in the U.S. (I think that number is right, but I might have rememberred the 1100 wrong) for these environmental abuses, and Bush ordered his new justice department prosecutors to drop all the cases. Then he changed the rules for them so that that wouldn't be a problem for them again. Just one thing after another, and it really pisses me off. Imagine not being able to eat the fish you catch with your kids. Imagine not being able to go fishing anymore, not that I like fishing, but still. However, Kennedy and some of his friends have been successfully suing these companies that own the power plants, and have been winning. So, that's one beacon of hope.
Mercury is not "in metal form" (I assume you mean solid) at body temperature, or even room temperature. But I do understand what you're saying.
