This is an interesting debate. To me the main issue is the lack of research 
(once again) into the effects of the "environmentally friendly" alternative 
before making a call to change. Another prime example of a home goal caused 
by the precautionary principle.

The origins of this issue are in poisening of fowl by lead shot when feeding on 
the beds of swanpland and lakes. The article 
http://www.teachingtools.com/H2O/LeadPoisoninghtm.htm is a good overview. 
It details 280 lead pellets are contained in a single shot from a 12 gauge shot 
gun. There is an average of 6 shots per successful kill. This gives 1680 lead 
shot pieces (minus those in the dead bird) that end up in the lake bed, swamp 
etc per kill. This soon mounts up. The study found up to 100,000 pieces of 
lead shot per acre. The study also cited 2% of waterfowl in the USA die from 
lead poisoning caused by lead shot.

To then take this argument and apply it to munitions in general is erroneous as 
there is a vast difference between the size and quantity of lead shot and the 
normal size of a piece of shrapnel. Also the issue is with wetlands and 
waterfowl, not lead leaching into the soil and water ways per se (which it 
doesn't). Perhaps this is another great example of the loss of common sense 
that seems to arise when well meaning people consider issues about lead?

From my research there are 5 applications where lead is a hazard.
1) Gasoline
2) Paint
3) Lead shot
4) In newsprint for wrapping fish and chips
5) Lead water pipes (if the water is acidic)

The common factor in all of these is availability of the ingestion path. In 
gasoline, it is breathed in from the fume. In paint, it dusts and can be 
breathed in or eaten by infants sucking their fingers. In lead shot, eaten by 
ground feeding birds. In newsprint wrapping fish and chips and water pipes- 
well go figure.

Where do I stand on the issue with Lead in electronics - you would need to 
eat the PCA for it to be a health hazard. Occupational exposure? - more of an 
issue with flux in hand soldering applications, oh and doesn't lead free solder 
need more heat, ergo more flux fumes. And what about the lack of wetting 
and the aggressivness of the flux needed???

Best
Roland Sommer

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Leadfee Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------