Good to hear from you again Chuck. I appreciate your comments.
I was reminded when reading your missive of a valuable acronym that has been part of the make up of the heading on my life path compass and have tried to hold true to that course heading these last 45 plus years since I first heard it. I credit Timothy Leary as originator (only because he was the one I first heard say it):
"TFYQA" ... Think For Yourself, Question Authority.
Though not mentioned by historians in those exact terms (so far as I know) such principles of mental rigor seem to have been work in ushering in the Renaissance. Critical thinking and ethics should be required courses in high school if not before. What is most elusive is how to to generate curiosity and inquisitiveness in the youth of today. (unless one considers figuring out how to get to the next level in a video game an act of inquisitiveness) Perhaps a return to the Socratic method for at least one hour a day?
While I appreciate your experiences and disappointment at the current situation you are encountering as a teacher, I share Werner's hopefulness about the future realizing fully that one cynical definition definition of an optimist is a fellow, who when he falls off a building, yells out at every floor on the way down "I am OK so far"... ;-)
Keep up the good fight...
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Dolci <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thu, Feb 11, 2010 11:03 pm
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer--Defining "GREEN"
This sudden flurry of activity on the forum compels me to make a few
observations.
There is an old saying in the law "Be careful what you ask for, you just might
get it." Well, it seems we got what we asked for and now we are not too happy.
For years we have allowed sloppy thinking to dominate the political and
scientific discourse, and we all went along with it because no one wanted to
challenge the green gospel. Those few that stood up were shouted down and became
victims of vicious ad hominem attacks. Any reasoned challenges, and even any
questions, to the popular green dogma we never answered with intelligent and
rational replies, only name calling.
We were told that there would be mountains of electronic waste seeping life
threatening chemicals into the environment, but no one dared challenge the
obvious silliness of the claims.
Green people went apoplectic over mercury, insisting that mercury had to be
totally removed from anything with which man or animal might come in contact.
Many states banned the sale of just about anything containing even the most
minute traces of mercury. Of course, now we are told that to save the world we
should all use compact fluorescents (that just happen to contain mercury). What
happened to all the paranoia over mercury?
We, in the U.S., were told that we were running out of landfill (Japan and
Europe may have a problem, but I can only address that which I know) so now
everything has to be recycled. We were told that it was good and that it was not
only environmentally sound but it was good economics as well. We were told that
the recycling industry could sustain itself and be profitable. So Californians
now pay a fortune to recycle aluminum and plastics and it still does not pay for
itself. With the State in a budget crisis it has had to cut the subsidies to
recyclers and as a result recyclers have been reducing operations, shutting down
facilities and eliminating many “green jobs”. If this industry was self
sustaining then how come it needed massive taxpayer subsidies just to survive?
By the way, those “green jobs” that are supposed to be created in the new
economy – I recycle my cans and plastic bottles, so I see the people in those
“green jobs” when I take my stash to the recycling center. Trust me, I did not
send my kid to an expensive college so she could get a job sorting colored
plastics from clear plastics in a foul smelling, wretched recycling center. Just
what are those “green jobs” that are supposed to be created?
Someone (Werner?) in an earlier post expressed optimism that the younger
generation may have more sense than us. Well, sorry guys – this new generation
is not going to be our saviors. I’ve been teaching in a northern California
public high school, in a fairly affluent community, for the last few years and
two things have become painfully obvious: 1) today’s kids have been green-washed
since entering the system. They buy into the green gospel, hook, line and
sinker. 2) Whatever, critical and analytical thinking skills they might have
been born with have been totally knocked out of their heads. Of all the
cultural shocks that I experienced going from industry to academia, the total
inability of our young people to think for themselves has been the most
disquieting. Maybe I expect too much from 17 and 18 year olds, but the problem
is that they are going to be going on to our colleges and universities where
much of this “scientific drivel” was
spawned and where critical and independent thinking is downright verboten. I
don’t hold out much hope for this new generation.
We asked for this situation, and now we have it. So the complaining and the
whining seem a bit disingenuous. Please, do not misunderstand me, I am not
directing these comments at anyone in particular on this forum. Many, if not
most, of the people here do seem to have their heads screwed on straight. But
for the last several years our employers lacked the backbone to stand up and
challenge the green hysteria, no one wanted to speak up, no one wanted to rock
the boat. Many companies became green cheerleaders, promoting the very nonsense
we now criticize. So now they are paying the price with higher production and
warranty costs, customer dissatisfaction, and second-rate products. Well I, for
one, don’t have a lot of sympathy for them. And for those who wonder “What are
we to do?” The only answer I have for that is “What can a dead man do? Go and
get buried!”
‘nuff said.
Chuck Dolci
--- On Wed, 2/10/10, Werner Engelmaier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Werner Engelmaier <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer--Defining "GREEN"
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 11:35 PM
Hi Robin,
I wished I had your confidence in the power of theses. I have seen too much good
research simply been ignored.
I am all for sustainability, because quite clearly the status quo is not. And
the approach needs to be multi-faceted aimed goods lasting longer [ actually
'planned obsolescence' was/is not planned at all (with some infamous exceptions)
but simply happened because of bad engineering , corner cutting and
ignorance—'planned obsolescence ' implies you KNOW what you are doing which in
most cases is not true (do you really think the current Toyota debacle was
'planned'?—that still do not know what their problem is), recycling, alternate
energy sources, etc.
I sure hope this 'new generation' not only is willing to "weigh the sciences"
but then go into the political trenches to implement what they ave learned.
Werner
-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Ingenthron <[log in to unmask]>
To: (Leadfree Electronics Assembly Forum) <[log in to unmask]>; Werner Engelmaier
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thu, Feb 11, 2010 12:01 am
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer--Defining "GREEN"
How to overcome this?
My experience is that there is a generation of humanities graduates who
established nonprofit credentials on the free market's weakness - consumption of
natural resources.
That generation was able to parlay the loss of rainforest, toxics fears, and
general unease over disposal and planned obsolescence to rebound and regulate
your industry.
There is a new generation - my company has recruited several undergrads and
grads - who is genuinely open-minded, still even more concerned, about the
environment.
They are more than willing weigh the science. After all, they are going to live
through the mistakes.
They do not like the status quo, which is not sustainable. But the
"sustainability" people are the friends of leadfree engineer/victims. By
rephrasing the endpoint from "non-polluting" to "sustainable", they have opened
a thousand thesis researchers who are willing and eager to discover that
"antidote B causes, rather than cures, blindness"
My read, at age 48 a lifelong environmentalist, is that "environmental health"
or the "health of the whole ecosystem" is parellel to the study of human
health. Which is superior in Western Medicine. Which took root in alchemy.
Just as the best doctors medicine could afford fed liquid mercury to King Edward
of Britain (as I understand, it improved his bowel movements, aka waste flows).
The research over what killed rather than cured the King is the genesis of
dialectic and university research, which wrestled control of the hospitals from
the Church.
The analogy is that the eco-priests are prescribing mediocine to electronics
industries (the king), and bad effects occur. But the next generation is
willing to listen if you all can put your concerns in the form of a thesis topic
which can be tested and promoted by a bunch of twenty-somethings who have no
more loyalty to Al Gore than the kids in the 60s (my generation) had to C.A.
Swanson (inventor of TV dinners, once the rage).
My point is that we can channel your anger and frustration into thesis
topics. I am working with several universities, via WR3A.org (a "Fair Trade"
electronics export organization which fights to reform, rather than ban,export
for repair and reuse).
Incidentally, I am, for the time being, a completely self-owned recycling
company at war with some irrational "environmentalists". I am confident they
will lose, just impatient over the amount of time it is taking to kick their
butts.
Robin
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Werner Engelmaier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Hi Harvey,
I know Tom Graedel from our Bell Labs days.
When a book like "Industrial Ecology" calls Pb-free solder anti-environmental,
which of course has been proven many times over on multiple issues, what else
can the experts do in terms of education.
Al Gore reads the conclusions from a couple of one-sided papers, and becomes an
authority. The main stream media takes the most negative side of any issue and
runs with it.
How do you overcome this?
Werner
-----Original Message-----
From: Harvey Miller <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, Feb 10, 2010 4:09 pm
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer--Defining "GREEN"
Bob Landman obviously knows the difference between absolute "environmentalism"
and its intelligent application. The latter is called
"Industrial Ecology", which happens to be the title of a book published
in 1995, by the two authors mentioned below. Lead-free solder was determined
to be anti-environmental in that 1995 book.
The challenge is one of education. To reflexively condemn all those dumb
politicians and environmentalists is counter-productive. Let's learn and teach
Industrial Ecology. That means cost-benefit analysis applied to the entire
system,
through the entire life cycle of "contaminant" substances and their
alternatives.
In general, we would find that PCBs (halogenated polyphenyls) are indeed bad
period, But DDT can be selectively applied, and so can Pb. (Don't put tetraethyl
lead in gasoline). We would re-establish that there are few absolutes in the
world and that most substance risks and benefits are dosage-dependent. People
have died from too much hydrogen dioxide.
I think, bottom line, that we are faced with a human problem. People like simple
answers in a scenario of action-reaction per Newton's 3d Law. With the advent
of the Industrial Revolution, we humans began polluting the earth
indiscriminately.
We didn't know any better. When we did learn better, the game looked like
Industry, the bad guys, vs. the "environmentalists". the good guys.
Well it is time to change that game. Memo to the human species: TIME TO GROW
UP.
The authors of "Industrial Ecology" and many subsequent books on the topic:
Braden R. Allenby (born 1950) is an American environmental scientist,
environmental attorney and Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and
of Law, at Arizona State University.
Thomas E.
Graedel is Clifton R. Musser Professor of Industrial Ecology, Professor
of Chemical Engineering, Professor of Geology and Geophysics, and
Director of the Center for Industrial Ecology at Yale University. He is
the author of Streamlined Life-Cycle Assessment and lead author or coauthor of a
number of other books.
________________________________
From: Bob Landman <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, February 10, 2010 10:43:16 AM
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer
Denny,
Spot on indeed. My company will speak up. We are an environmentally
responsible company.
The RoHS banning of lead was idiotic and definitely NOT green.
We have to continue to use tin-lead solder until a PROVEN replacement exists.
One that has been proven by extended studies (studies that last far longer than
JESD-201 dictates). We don't yet have the years of experience with lead-free
materials but we know, based on what is being said here, it's not going to be
good news.
Lead is not perfect, but it is, thus far, the best antidote nature has provided
us with. Perhaps, besides being the best shield for radiation, we'll discover,
after much research and many billions of dollars being spent on replacements,
that lead remains, by far, the only substance to suppress tin whiskers.
Won't that be a interesting discovery? And then what will we do?
Landfills are still swelling with discarded electronics in the EU and the USA
(and I'm sure everywhere else on the planet).
Why didn't the EU first make compulsory, environmentally sound recycling?
If lead in landfills is such a problem, then perhaps finally we'll do what
should have been done in the first place? Keep the disposed of products OUT OF
THE LANDFILLS and properly recycle them (which by the way, saves energy).
Whiskers cause the failure of electronic products long before consumers and
industry are ready to replace them. There are a lot more electronics products
than cell phones. Using them as the metric for banning substances for the
entire industry is gross mistake as they have a short useful life span. As Joe
Fjelstad points out, saying 3 years is an adequate lifespan for durable goods is
nonsense.
While it can't be proved (yet) that some of Toyota's problems stem from the
adoption of lead-free manufacturing, we know that the automotive environment is
a severe mix of heat, cold, vibration and humidity.
What has been done is very bad for the environment.
Sincerely,
Bob Landman
H&L Instruments, LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: Leadfree [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dennis Fritz
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 11:06 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LF] Toxic-free computer
WOW, YOU SURE KNOW HOW TO GET MY BLOOD BOILING ON A SNOWY INDIANA MORNING!!!!!!
I am absolutely SICK of the over use of the word "TOXIC". Conjures up horrible
images of all of us being poisoned by typing responses on our laptops.
By whose definition is something "toxic"? Used to be that we depended on our
governments to make that decision. In the US, we have had the "Toxic Substances
Control Act" with a methodology to report the nature of "toxic" hazards -
ingestion, breathing, skin contact, etc. Seemed pretty orderly - BUT IT DID
NOT OUTLAW CHEMICALS AT A PACE SATISFACTORY TO "GREEN" ORGANIZATIONS.
By politicizing "TOXIC" political candidates, particularly in the European
Union, began to be elected for their stance on "TOXIC". The result has been
the RoHS regulations where if there is any chance of harm - eleminate the
substance - our wonderful RoHS regulations banning lead - even if we now solder
40 C hottter and tear up untold rain forests to dig up more tin metal. A bit
more sensible has been REACh - where supposedly there is to be a cost/benefit
analysis before banning chemicals. The whole world is watching the EU unpile
from the hundreds of thousands of applications they have received for subsance
use under REACh.
Finally, I refer you to the the E-PEAT website trying to catagorize the
"green-ness" of electronic equipment -
http://www.epeat.net/
There, you will see the grading system drawn up for the "required" properties of
computers, monitors, and being extended to other electronic equipment. Then,
the percentage completion of "optional" factors give an OEM a Bronze, Silver, or
Gold rating. - Call it the Electronics Olympics since the winter games are
coming this weekend. While I do not personally agree with all the factors -
lead-free, halogen free, etc, I do agree with factors such as easy disassembly
for recycle, % recylced material used, etc.
Now, Greenpeace seems upset with the pace of E-PEAT, and has taken to grading
electronics on their own. Your posting is just their latest bow-shot. They had
a booth at the January Consumer Electronics Show to publicize the the same
thing.
This is not scientific - it is ENVIRONMENTAL DICTATORSHIP BY GREENPEACE AND
WHATEVER THEIR AGENDA HAPPENS TO BE. No companies dare speak up - they would
not be "GREEN".
How about some new slogans - techies?
Relaibale is GREEN - I don't need new electronics every 2 years
It is "TIN-RISK" solder - not Lead-Free.
"TIN-RISK" components give us tin whiskers.
"GREEN" is a halogen containing pigment!
Denny Fritz
-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Tort <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, Feb 10, 2010 10:04 am
Subject: [LF] Toxic-free computer
I doubt anyone can assure something is absolutely toxic-free, (remember the osts
to this forum long time ago about the dangerous Dihydrogen Monoxide?) ut the
Greenpeace gurus look to be sure enough to bless this Indian Greenware”.
<http://www.evertiq.com/news/16170> http://www.evertiq.com/news/16170
Pedro Tort
uality Manager
DigiProces, S.A.
olsonès, 87 - P.I. Pla de la Bruguera
.O. Box 127
-08211 CASTELLAR DEL VALLÈS
EL. +34 937 142 132
AX. +34 937 142 072
ww.digiproces.com
a Sistel Group Company
_____________________________________________________________________
his email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
or more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
_____________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Leadfee
ail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d o unsubscribe, send a
message to [log in to unmask] following text in he BODY (NOT the subject
field): SIGNOFF Leadfree o temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for
vacation breaks send: SET eadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL) earch previous postings at:
http://listserv.ipc.org/archives lease visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
for dditional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or
47-615-7100 ext.2815
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Robin Ingenthron
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
