Another source of lead is CRTs, many of which are still in use.
They contain about 5 pounds of lead each for radiation protection,
quite a bit more than is contained in the solder in the PC boards.

N_Cook wrote:

Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote
N_Cook wrote:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/apr/03/research.engineering

Within a whisker of failure

About time too.

Never mind the reduced reliability (see the ERA study) caused by
lead-free
solder when equipment is exposed to vibration.


Before I waste time downloading an irrelevant pdf

would this be what you be referring to :

Review of Directive 2002/95/EC (RoHS) Categories 8 and 9 - Final

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/pdf/era_study_final_report.pdf

Results of vibration testing lead-free solder from different researchers
....

Not sure if that's the one I had to be honest but looks interesting.

Graham

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.

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.

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 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

stratus46@yahoo.com wrote:


You mean the fumes from the flux. You don't believe you're breathing
solder vapors, do you? In the 40+ years I've been using solder, I
doubt I've used 5 lbs and I do quite a bit of soldering.

GG

I've never turned on my shop spectrometer to determine if it was the flux
or solder. I just know that the new stuff doesn't smell as friendly to my
human nose.


40+ years, 5 pounds, yadda,yadda...how much 'new' solder have you used? I
suspect you're just trying to pick a fight. I'm not playing. See ya.

-ex

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ruednS26lvW_GGjanZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
As I've said before... It isn't a matter of whether electronic equipment
has
lead in it, but what happens to that equipment when it's disposed of.
It's
the latter that should be considered.




And lead isn't the only toxic substance used in electronic equipment and
the process used to manufacture it.

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 ?

"Jay Tossers"

Another source of lead is CRTs, many of which are still in use.
They contain about 5 pounds of lead each for radiation protection,
quite a bit more than is contained in the solder in the PC boards.



** Silly comparison.

Glass does not break down in the environment.

So how would any of that lead get out ??



...... Phil


Apparently, in America, they crushed the glass to powder or some such to try

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:47F4B8A8.ADD69B04@hotmail.com...


N_Cook wrote:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/apr/03/research.engineering

Within a whisker of failure

About time too.

Never mind the reduced reliability (see the ERA study) caused by lead-free
solder when equipment is exposed to vibration.

Graham


Its good for the way economy works nowadays. Buy, buy, buy the crap
that dies or obsoletes every 2-3 years.

Mark


Absolutely; we are in the replace crap with crap "economy".

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?

Like any sensible person, I don't want to deliberately pollute
the planet for those who come after me, but in recent years,
many badly informed decicisions on this sort of thing, have
been made by departments "jumping on the banwagon" to
justify their own existence.

Jay Ts wrote:

Another source of lead is CRTs, many of which are still in use. They
contain about 5 pounds of lead each for radiation protection, quite a
bit more than is contained in the solder in the PC boards.

** Silly comparison.

Glass does not break down in the environment.

So how would any of that lead get out ??

...... Phil

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.

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.

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

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.

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

Like any sensible person, I don't want to deliberately pollute
the planet for those who come after me, but in recent years,
many badly informed decicisions on this sort of thing, have
been made by departments "jumping on the banwagon" to
justify their own existence.

Instead of banning polluting substances, we should be regulating the
pollution they create.

In other words, it doesn't matter how much of a harmful substance you use in
manufacturing a product, but how much of it gets into the environment. It's
the latter we should be worried about, not the former.



I think you have hit on something here.

It has actually reached the point where I am now
sick to death of hearing the words "green" and "eco" and "carbon footprint"
and "geenhouse gas" and "cimate change" and "global warming" every single
time I turn on the radio or TV. So here's a new word.

Ecobollocks. Covers what a lot of this bull actually is ...