Lead free solder - exposed in a UK national newspaper

[William Sommerwerck]

"clifto" <clifto@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:farkc5-0fr.ln1@remote.clifto.com...

William Sommerwerck wrote:

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of
the principal sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into
trouble over excessive X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though
the tube was situated such that the kids would have had to stick
their feet under the set (!!!) to receive any significant dosage.

Specifically, it was a GE-made 6BK4 that caused the problem,
so it ended up in all brands of sets via repair.

I vaguely remember that it was all alpha radiation, but don't take
my word as gospel.

Alpha rays are helium nuclei. Not likely, and not particularly dangerous.

 

[Jay Ts]

nospam wrote:

Jay Ts <UseWebsiteToReply@example.com> wrote:

Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore, which I
think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead decomposing in
a landfill and seeping into the water supply.

By this I meant that if it's deeper than groundwater, there's
a nearly zero chance of it getting into the water, or being a
problem in any other way.

Also, I had run into some information about lead toxicity several
years ago that said that naturally-occurring lead compounds are
not as much a problem as artificial (industrial) ones, because
living beings are evolved to handle the "organic" (I think it
was orthophosphate, but am not sure) form of lead, and can more
easily flush it out of the body, preventing bioaccumulation.
I tried just now to find that info again, but couldn't.

Lead is an element, it is composed of lead and can't decompose. It is so
soluble that water pipes and roofs are made out of it......

Lead is an element, it is a toxic element, and it can react chemcially
to make toxic compounds. It can corrode when exposed to water,
and the corrosion by-products are soluble enough that lead found
in drinking water comes mostly from the lead in pipes and solder
used to hold the pipes together.

References:
http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/pollairpolead.html
http://www.epa.gov/lead/
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/lead.html
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/t-ioc/lead.html

I went to the EPA site and did a search on "lead" because it
became clear to me from previous discussion here that I really
didn't know enough about lead toxicity to write at my usual
level of knowledge. As I've said, I know more about other,
more toxic, heavy metals, and lead has not been of big concern
to me.

What I read at the EPA's site confirmed that there isn't much
cause for concern with regards to the lead in solder. They
say that although there is cause for concern, lead doesn't
have as great a bioaccumulation factor as other heavy metals.
And they didn't say anything at all about electronic solder
or people who work with it, so it looks like those who said
they got blood tests that showed no problem are justified
to feel they are ok. (If it were me, and maybe it is, I'd
still get the test done that uses a hair sample, just to
make sure.)

Most of the fuss in the past was about lead-based paint and
lead from car exhaust. Both of those have been phased out.
(Although recently there have been problems with lead paint
being used on toys made in China.)

The EPA hardly mentioned solder at all. As far as I could
find, only with regards to water pipe and tin cans (where
it is also no longer used).

Looks like I was right about the lead smelting operations,
though. And wouldn't you know it, most of that is done in
the general region of the planet in which I live (SW USA).
By far, most of the lead in use is for car batteries,
so I don't see any need to give up leaded solder just
for that.

In the Wikipedia article for "solder", it is said that
smoke from solder flux can contain a little lead oxide,
and that the flux smoke itself can be toxic. So I'll be
a little more careful to have good ventilation while
soldering. Pretty simple!

Although the EPA noted that metallic lead does corrode,
resulting in toxic soluble compounds, they didn't say anywhere
(at least that I could find) that lead in landfills is
considered a significant problem, and there was no mention
of danger from tossing used electronics in the trash.

Jay Ts
--
To contact me, use this web page:
http://www.jayts.com/contact.php

 

[Jay Ts]

nospam wrote:

Jay Ts <UseWebsiteToReply@example.com> wrote:

Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore, which I
think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead decomposing in
a landfill and seeping into the water supply.

By this I meant that if it's deeper than groundwater, there's
a nearly zero chance of it getting into the water, or being a
problem in any other way.

Also, I had run into some information about lead toxicity several
years ago that said that naturally-occurring lead compounds are
not as much a problem as artificial (industrial) ones, because
living beings are evolved to handle the "organic" (I think it
was orthophosphate, but am not sure) form of lead, and can more
easily flush it out of the body, preventing bioaccumulation.
I tried just now to find that info again, but couldn't.

Lead is an element, it is composed of lead and can't decompose. It is so
soluble that water pipes and roofs are made out of it......

Lead is an element, it is a toxic element, and it can react chemcially
to make toxic compounds. It can corrode when exposed to water,
and the corrosion by-products are soluble enough that lead found
in drinking water comes mostly from the lead in pipes and solder
used to hold the pipes together.

References:
http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/pollairpolead.html
http://www.epa.gov/lead/
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/lead.html
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/t-ioc/lead.html

I went to the EPA site and did a search on "lead" because it
became clear to me from previous discussion here that I really
didn't know enough about lead toxicity to write at my usual
level of knowledge. As I've said, I know more about other,
more toxic, heavy metals, and lead has not been of big concern
to me.

What I read at the EPA's site confirmed that there isn't much
cause for concern with regards to the lead in solder. They
say that although there is cause for concern, lead doesn't
have as great a bioaccumulation factor as other heavy metals.
And they didn't say anything at all about electronic solder
or people who work with it, so it looks like those who said
they got blood tests that showed no problem are justified
to feel they are ok. (If it were me, and maybe it is, I'd
still get the test done that uses a hair sample, just to
make sure.)

Most of the fuss in the past was about lead-based paint and
lead from car exhaust. Both of those have been phased out.
(Although recently there have been problems with lead paint
being used on toys made in China.)

The EPA hardly mentioned solder at all. As far as I could
find, only with regards to water pipe and tin cans (where
it is also no longer used).

Looks like I was right about the lead smelting operations,
though. And wouldn't you know it, most of that is done in
the general region of the planet in which I live (SW USA).
By far, most of the lead in use is for car batteries,
so I don't see any need to give up leaded solder just
for that.

In the Wikipedia article for "solder", it is said that
smoke from solder flux can contain a little lead oxide,
and that the flux smoke itself can be toxic. So I'll be
a little more careful to have good ventilation while
soldering. Pretty simple!

Although the EPA noted that metallic lead does corrode,
resulting in toxic soluble compounds, they didn't say anywhere
(at least that I could find) that lead in landfills is
considered a significant problem, and there was no mention
of danger from tossing used electronics in the trash.

Jay Ts
--
To contact me, use this web page:
http://www.jayts.com/contact.php

 

[Hattori Hanzo]

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:47:53 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

When I was young (and stupid), I took some sealed Polaroid ASA 3000
speed "film" sheets, attached some coins to the surface, and plastered
them all over a late 1960's vintage color TV, where I was working.
After running the TV all day, I developed the pictures, and found a
noticeable lightening around the coins. (Polaroid "film" is positive
exposure, not negative). The shadow wasn't very distinct. The "film"
on the front screen was barely exposed, while the "film" near the Hi-V
cable was more noticeable. The "film" had to be attached to the CRT
to get any kind of exposure. Those on the cabinet showed no shadows.
About the only change that this prompted in my lifestyle was to not
leave my loaded film camera on top of the TV set.

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

The principal source of X-ray emissions on a CRT is from the electrons

hitting the slot mask immediately behind the phosphor screen face, as
well as electron impacts on the phosphors themselves..

X-rays are exhibited whenever an electron strikes a metal surface.

With things like a welding arc, it is barely measurable and considered
negligible. A TV screen, however, is thousands of "arcs" at one time. It
is still fairly negligible, however.

No, HV power supplies, even those intended for use as an anode supply,
do not emit X-rays.

 

[Hattori Hanzo]

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 09:47:53 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote:

When I was young (and stupid), I took some sealed Polaroid ASA 3000
speed "film" sheets, attached some coins to the surface, and plastered
them all over a late 1960's vintage color TV, where I was working.
After running the TV all day, I developed the pictures, and found a
noticeable lightening around the coins. (Polaroid "film" is positive
exposure, not negative). The shadow wasn't very distinct. The "film"
on the front screen was barely exposed, while the "film" near the Hi-V
cable was more noticeable. The "film" had to be attached to the CRT
to get any kind of exposure. Those on the cabinet showed no shadows.
About the only change that this prompted in my lifestyle was to not
leave my loaded film camera on top of the TV set.

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

The principal source of X-ray emissions on a CRT is from the electrons

hitting the slot mask immediately behind the phosphor screen face, as
well as electron impacts on the phosphors themselves..

X-rays are exhibited whenever an electron strikes a metal surface.

With things like a welding arc, it is barely measurable and considered
negligible. A TV screen, however, is thousands of "arcs" at one time. It
is still fairly negligible, however.

No, HV power supplies, even those intended for use as an anode supply,
do not emit X-rays.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

Close. Most HV rectifiers were inside steel boxes, with the flyback
transformer. The HV shunt regulator was exposed on some chassis, and
were the worst source. GE made replacements with a thick, lead
impregnated synthetic rubber coating to modify TVs built with those
chassis series. Then changes were made to the entire HV system to
eliminate the HV shunt regulator on later designs.


--
aioe.org is home to cowards and terrorists

Add this line to your news proxy nfilter.dat file
* drop Path:*aioe.org!not-for-mail to drop all aioe.org traffic.

http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

Close. Most HV rectifiers were inside steel boxes, with the flyback
transformer. The HV shunt regulator was exposed on some chassis, and
were the worst source. GE made replacements with a thick, lead
impregnated synthetic rubber coating to modify TVs built with those
chassis series. Then changes were made to the entire HV system to
eliminate the HV shunt regulator on later designs.


--
aioe.org is home to cowards and terrorists

Add this line to your news proxy nfilter.dat file
* drop Path:*aioe.org!not-for-mail to drop all aioe.org traffic.

http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

 

[clifto]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

Specifically, it was a GE-made 6BK4 that caused the problem, so it ended up
in all brands of sets via repair.

I vaguely remember that it was all alpha radiation, but don't take my word
as gospel.

--
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080331/D8VOMVT02.html
Chelsea Clinton Criticizes Bush in N.C.

Talk about "dog bites man"...

 

[clifto]

William Sommerwerck wrote:

My memory (which might very well be wrong) was that one of the principal
sources of X-rays was the HV rectifier. GE got into trouble over excessive
X-radiation from their HV rectifier -- though the tube was situated such
that the kids would have had to stick their feet under the set (!!!) to
receive any significant dosage.

Specifically, it was a GE-made 6BK4 that caused the problem, so it ended up
in all brands of sets via repair.

I vaguely remember that it was all alpha radiation, but don't take my word
as gospel.

--
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080331/D8VOMVT02.html
Chelsea Clinton Criticizes Bush in N.C.

Talk about "dog bites man"...

 

[James Beck]

In article <FesJj.8136$h65.861@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>,
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com says...

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22600b4b45cc522198a537@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore,
which I think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead
decomposing in a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.


In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000
years ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so
toxic that health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow
people to dig there, even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?


BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health,
that of others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.


I tried lead-free solder, and gave up on it, at least for prototyping.
I was feeling a little bad about returning to traditional solder,
until the OP posted the article. Thanks - I feel vindicated. I hope
that someday there is a better alternative to lead-based solder,
but evidently it hasn't happened yet.

Jay Ts


Until they come up with better alternatives, I'll stick with good old
lead/tin. When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Jim

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

I understand.
I'm sure we will have something similar here soon too, and I will be
forced to comply. Resistance is futile.

 

[James Beck]

In article <FesJj.8136$h65.861@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>,
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com says...

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22600b4b45cc522198a537@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore,
which I think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead
decomposing in a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.


In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000
years ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so
toxic that health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow
people to dig there, even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?


BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health,
that of others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.


I tried lead-free solder, and gave up on it, at least for prototyping.
I was feeling a little bad about returning to traditional solder,
until the OP posted the article. Thanks - I feel vindicated. I hope
that someday there is a better alternative to lead-based solder,
but evidently it hasn't happened yet.

Jay Ts


Until they come up with better alternatives, I'll stick with good old
lead/tin. When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Jim

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

I understand.
I'm sure we will have something similar here soon too, and I will be
forced to comply. Resistance is futile.

 

[Jay Ts]

James Beck wrote:

In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore, which I
think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead decomposing in
a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.

In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000 years
ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so toxic that
health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow people to dig there,
even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?

Not if you can get all your lead from recycled materials,
and won't have to dig up any more ore and process it.

Otherwise, we have to look at the entire process.
That's just good engineering.

BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health, that of
others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.

Maybe we go on different definitions. To me, "pinhead" refers
more to people who have very pointed, narrow ways of thinking,
and foolishly fail to choose wisely in regards to the big picture.

When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Easy one! Blood tests often fail to show up heavy metal toxicity.
You shouldn't expect them to, because the problem with heavy
metals is that they build up in body tissues, not the blood.
That's exactly the problem! They hang around in the body,
building up in and causing problems with vital organs (e.g.,
liver, colon, brain, bones) and *don't* easily dissolve out
in the blood and get flushed out.

The blood test may be good for cases of extreme (acute)
toxicity. I suppose that's why the doctors have them.
They like to get credit for saving lives. But there
is also chronic low- to moderate-level heavy metal
poisoning. It is bad too.

Don't expect an allopathic doctor to help you discern
heavy metal toxicity. They are too busy putting them *in*
your body while avoiding lawsuits to be of much assistance.

If you want a good test for heavy metals, you need to use other
methods. The one I'm most aware of is using a small sample
of hair. Removing bits of liver, bone or brain aren't really
practical, so this is the only method I know that's practical
and that naturopathic practitioners seem to prefer.

I've actually never heard of anyone having that test done
and finding out they had an issue with lead. Usually, its
cadmium or mercury. In my area, arsenic and copper are a
problem. That is a result from a local copper mine that was
very active about 100 years ago. The processing of the ore
put a lot of arsenic and copper in the environment, and it's
been leaching into the local water supply. This is in the
middle of a huge national forest, where you'd think the
water would be not as bad. Maybe that has something to
do with my concern for the effects of mining and processing.

The people who ran the mine probably had no idea at all
this would ever happen. Instead of being more concerned,
they just shrugged it off and did what made them the quickest
money. I think a more careful and conservative approach is
prudent. Sometimes, "better safe than sorry" applies.

Jay Ts
--
To contact me, use this web page:
http://www.jayts.com/contact.php

 

[Jay Ts]

James Beck wrote:

In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore, which I
think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead decomposing in
a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.

In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000 years
ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so toxic that
health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow people to dig there,
even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?

Not if you can get all your lead from recycled materials,
and won't have to dig up any more ore and process it.

Otherwise, we have to look at the entire process.
That's just good engineering.

BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health, that of
others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.

Maybe we go on different definitions. To me, "pinhead" refers
more to people who have very pointed, narrow ways of thinking,
and foolishly fail to choose wisely in regards to the big picture.

When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Easy one! Blood tests often fail to show up heavy metal toxicity.
You shouldn't expect them to, because the problem with heavy
metals is that they build up in body tissues, not the blood.
That's exactly the problem! They hang around in the body,
building up in and causing problems with vital organs (e.g.,
liver, colon, brain, bones) and *don't* easily dissolve out
in the blood and get flushed out.

The blood test may be good for cases of extreme (acute)
toxicity. I suppose that's why the doctors have them.
They like to get credit for saving lives. But there
is also chronic low- to moderate-level heavy metal
poisoning. It is bad too.

Don't expect an allopathic doctor to help you discern
heavy metal toxicity. They are too busy putting them *in*
your body while avoiding lawsuits to be of much assistance.

If you want a good test for heavy metals, you need to use other
methods. The one I'm most aware of is using a small sample
of hair. Removing bits of liver, bone or brain aren't really
practical, so this is the only method I know that's practical
and that naturopathic practitioners seem to prefer.

I've actually never heard of anyone having that test done
and finding out they had an issue with lead. Usually, its
cadmium or mercury. In my area, arsenic and copper are a
problem. That is a result from a local copper mine that was
very active about 100 years ago. The processing of the ore
put a lot of arsenic and copper in the environment, and it's
been leaching into the local water supply. This is in the
middle of a huge national forest, where you'd think the
water would be not as bad. Maybe that has something to
do with my concern for the effects of mining and processing.

The people who ran the mine probably had no idea at all
this would ever happen. Instead of being more concerned,
they just shrugged it off and did what made them the quickest
money. I think a more careful and conservative approach is
prudent. Sometimes, "better safe than sorry" applies.

Jay Ts
--
To contact me, use this web page:
http://www.jayts.com/contact.php

 

[Don Bruder]

In article <FesJj.8136$h65.861@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>,
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

Y'know, normally I'm not of a political bent, but this one just screams
for it...

Didn't you fools in Europe learn *ANYTHING* from the examples of the
USA, USSR, and similar "one government over all" schemes? Take a hint:
Big Central Government equals Big Central Screwing to all persons
unfortunate enough to be subject to its whims.

<sigh>

Look, mommy! See how much better life is under the nuturing wing of the
EU?

(So says an American victim...)

--
Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info

 

[Don Bruder]

In article <FesJj.8136$h65.861@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>,
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

Y'know, normally I'm not of a political bent, but this one just screams
for it...

Didn't you fools in Europe learn *ANYTHING* from the examples of the
USA, USSR, and similar "one government over all" schemes? Take a hint:
Big Central Government equals Big Central Screwing to all persons
unfortunate enough to be subject to its whims.

<sigh>

Look, mommy! See how much better life is under the nuturing wing of the
EU?

(So says an American victim...)

--
Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net - If your "From:" address isn't on my whitelist,
or the subject of the message doesn't contain the exact text "PopperAndShadow"
somewhere, any message sent to this address will go in the garbage without my
ever knowing it arrived. Sorry... <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd> for more info

 

[Arfa Daily]

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22600b4b45cc522198a537@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore,
which I think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead
decomposing in a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.


In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000
years ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so
toxic that health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow
people to dig there, even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?


BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health,
that of others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.


I tried lead-free solder, and gave up on it, at least for prototyping.
I was feeling a little bad about returning to traditional solder,
until the OP posted the article. Thanks - I feel vindicated. I hope
that someday there is a better alternative to lead-based solder,
but evidently it hasn't happened yet.

Jay Ts


Until they come up with better alternatives, I'll stick with good old
lead/tin. When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Jim

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"James Beck" <jim@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.22600b4b45cc522198a537@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...

In article <47f58171$0$8439$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com>,
UseWebsiteToReply@example.com says...
Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore,
which I think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead
decomposing in a landfill and seeping into the water supply.
Mettalic lead has been shown to have very little impact on the
environment. Especially after it has built up an oxide layer.


In Europe, there are places where the Romans smelted lead 2000
years ago, and 8" or so below the topsoil, the dirt is still so
toxic that health officials (in Britain at least) don't allow
people to dig there, even wearing protective gear.
Ah, but we aren't talking about running a smelting operation, are we?


BTW, I'm not a pinhead, just someone who cares about my health,
that of others and a quality environment for us to all live in.
I don't know.
Comparing burying metallic lead VS a smelting operation, that borders on
pinheadiness.


I tried lead-free solder, and gave up on it, at least for prototyping.
I was feeling a little bad about returning to traditional solder,
until the OP posted the article. Thanks - I feel vindicated. I hope
that someday there is a better alternative to lead-based solder,
but evidently it hasn't happened yet.

Jay Ts


Until they come up with better alternatives, I'll stick with good old
lead/tin. When I left my last job, I had a full physical including a
lead test, and even though I had been "exposed" to lead solder almost
daily for 13 years, my blood lead levels were almost not measurable and
that puts me below the national average for people that don't work with
solder at all. Why would that be if lead/tin solder were so dangerous?

Jim

Unfortunately, if you are professionally involved in the repair of
electronic equipment in Europe, continuing to use leaded solder, unless the
equipment was placed on the market prior to June 2006 or is manufactured in
leaded solder now due to an exemption, is no longer a legal option. I am
required under threat of law, to use only solder and components, which
preserve the RoHS approval of the equipment in question. I don't suppose
realistically, that any 'solder police' are going to come knocking on my
door to enforce this, but with some of the jobsworths that there are in
local government departments now, it's just not worth the risk of a whopping
fine and even the potential for prison, for disobeying the directive.

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:V-GdnbYGe_UbimvanZ2dnUVZ_tKinZ2d@comcast.com...

Is a lead-free item that fails and ends up in the landfill
after 2 years better than a lead-containing device that
lasts a decade?

And is then properly recycled?

Recycling is the issue. The only current economical way to do it is to
ship
the equipment to third-world countries where poverty-stricken can
dismantle
it.

In days gone by, prisoners in the UK sewed mailbags. It seems to me that
there is a vast untapped pool of labour there now, languishing at my
expense, in the jails. So why not set up electronic recycling plants in the
prisons? That way, you get the job done in a properly supervised manner, and
the cost of labour is not an issue. Ever. Bish bash bosh, the jobs a good
'un, as they say ...

Just as a matter of interest, I saw a documentary on TV a while back, where
a UK company is recycling computer hardware for the gold that's used to
plate connectors and so on. In order to get at the gold loaded components,
it is necessary for them to dismantle and effectively recycle virtually the
whole machine. Even given the fact that they have to do this, which is a
useful side effect of the process, and the fact that they then have to put
the stuff through assorted chemical processes to recover the pure gold, they
are still recovering enough to be covering their costs plus making a very
large profit on the whole operation.

So if a few politicians pulled their fingers out of their arses, and started
thinking outside the box on how to manage the pollution as William suggests,
instead of trying to stop it with inane directives such as RoHS, we wouldn't
need to have so much ecobollocks thrust at us.

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:V-GdnbYGe_UbimvanZ2dnUVZ_tKinZ2d@comcast.com...

Is a lead-free item that fails and ends up in the landfill
after 2 years better than a lead-containing device that
lasts a decade?

And is then properly recycled?

Recycling is the issue. The only current economical way to do it is to
ship
the equipment to third-world countries where poverty-stricken can
dismantle
it.

In days gone by, prisoners in the UK sewed mailbags. It seems to me that
there is a vast untapped pool of labour there now, languishing at my
expense, in the jails. So why not set up electronic recycling plants in the
prisons? That way, you get the job done in a properly supervised manner, and
the cost of labour is not an issue. Ever. Bish bash bosh, the jobs a good
'un, as they say ...

Just as a matter of interest, I saw a documentary on TV a while back, where
a UK company is recycling computer hardware for the gold that's used to
plate connectors and so on. In order to get at the gold loaded components,
it is necessary for them to dismantle and effectively recycle virtually the
whole machine. Even given the fact that they have to do this, which is a
useful side effect of the process, and the fact that they then have to put
the stuff through assorted chemical processes to recover the pure gold, they
are still recovering enough to be covering their costs plus making a very
large profit on the whole operation.

So if a few politicians pulled their fingers out of their arses, and started
thinking outside the box on how to manage the pollution as William suggests,
instead of trying to stop it with inane directives such as RoHS, we wouldn't
need to have so much ecobollocks thrust at us.

Arfa

 

[nospam]

Jay Ts <UseWebsiteToReply@example.com> wrote:

Allodoxaphobia wrote:
Arfa Daily wrote:

At 30th tonnes, the potential environmental impact of the lead in
solder, even if you *did* dump it all in the ground, is minuscule.

And, where do these pin-heads think the lead came from, in the first
place?

It came from deep within the ground, in the form of lead ore,
which I think is much less of a health hazard than metallic lead
decomposing in a landfill and seeping into the water supply.

Lead is an element, it is composed of lead and can't decompose. It is so
soluble that water pipes and roofs are made out of it......
--