LEADFREE Archives

June 2000

Leadfree@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Leadfree Electronics Assembly E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Sat, 3 Jun 2000 10:18:01 +0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (72 lines)
Werner

Bravo and three cheers!

Best regards

Brian

Werner Engelmaier wrote:

> Dear Kazuo Ozawa,
> You write:
> >Environmental protection has been common expectation in many countries in
> >these years. Investors also want campanies to realize the products which
> will have
> >no negative effect for the earth. Evaluation of the comapnies will be
> affected by
> >their concept and output for Environment. Many companies think that they
> should
> >realize such vision and concept for environmetal protection within
> reasonable cost >for many purpose, one is very ideal, the other is very
> commercially. And for these
> >purpose, we who are dealt with technologies should be requested to make
> possible >such concept.
>
> I do not have any argument with the above statement, but before you start
> such an endeavor, you should be reasonably sure that you what you are doing
> is technically sound and does not more harm than good. So far, the evidence
> suggests that any environmental threat by lead in electronics is pretty much
> political hysteria, rather than supportable by technical facts. Further, the
> current evidence also suggests that environmentally speaking we may be doing
> more harm than good with changing to lead-free solders, because of worse
> contamination, increased energy consumption, and increased loads on
> landfills. This is not the apparent emergency we had with the holes in the
> ozone, nor do we have the reasonable alternatives that where available for
> CFCs--so we do not have to blindly jump on controversial evidence.
> >Even WEEE legislation dead line is postponed, if we can realize lead free
> products in
> >reasonable cost, some manufacturers will supply lead free products before
> dead line?
>
> Well, this sounds like a PR ploy rather than really caring about the
> environment, does it not? Playing on the hysterical misinformation dished out
> to the public by self-serving politicians and the sensational media.
> Werner Engelmaier
>
> ################################################################
> Leadfree E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
> ################################################################
> To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask]
> with following text in the body:
> To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE Leadfree <your full name>
> To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF Leadfree
> ###############################################################
> Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
> (http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
> For technical support contact Keach Sasamori [log in to unmask] or 847-790-5315.
> ################################################################

################################################################
Leadfree E-Mail Forum provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8c
################################################################
To subscribe/unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask]
with following text in the body:
To subscribe:   SUBSCRIBE Leadfree <your full name>
To unsubscribe:   SIGNOFF Leadfree
###############################################################
Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
For technical support contact Keach Sasamori [log in to unmask] or 847-790-5315.
################################################################

ATOM RSS1 RSS2