Gordon
Just a few SHORT rejoinders
1. In some places lead crystal tableware is forbidden for sale. Tests
have shown that drinks with a low pH do leach out lead in potentially
harmful quantities, although I'm unable to quote chapter and verse
without research.
2. Lead is forbidden in pewter tableware in most countries for the same
reason. To the best of my knowledge, no pewter founders/manufacturers
use lead in any of their products, now.
3. As has been shown in Germany, recycling TV tube faceplates is easy
and economical, so why chuck them away? At the same time, the highly
toxic phosphors are collected and disposed of correctly, which is not a
case with landfill disposal.
4. Most TV tubes in a landfill are shattered by the weight of vehicles,
presenting an enormous surface area of lead glass per tube. Lead glass
is notoriously water-soluble so that there will certainly be more lead
in run-off waters than from e.g., solder from the same TV sets. Note
that I am not equating that with a proven hazard but there MAY be a risk
which this measure will economically eliminate.
5. What's the problem?
Brian
"Davy, Gordon" wrote:
>
> Here are excerpts from California's Department of Toxic Substances Control
> August 2001 Fact Sheet: "Managing Waste Cathode Ray Tubes", along with a few
> comments [in brackets]. See
> http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/docs/hwmp/docs/HWM_FS_CRT-EmergencyRegs.pdf .
> It is DTSC's mission to protect public health and the environment from
> harmful exposure to hazardous substances. [With this rule, they're going way
> beyond that. They are preventing exposure to the same material that people
> sometimes drink out of - leaded glass. What they've done is neither
> necessary nor sufficient.]
> A typical CRT contains between two and five pounds of lead. Lead is a toxic
> substance which may cause lead poisoning and can be especially harmful to
> young children. If products containing lead are disposed of to the trash,
> the lead can potentially contaminate the soil and our water supplies [no
> data, just "risk", and overlooks the fact that the soil is already
> contaminated with lead far beyond anything that anyone could assert as
> coming from disposal of CRTs].
> When tested [by a test that does not simulate landfill conditions], most
> CRT's exceed the regulatory threshold for lead and are identified [not by
> scientists but by bureaucrats] as hazardous waste when discarded. Waste CRTs
> are subject to hazardous waste regulations which went into effect August 3,
> 2001. The regulations protect the environment by promoting the safe
> collection and recycling of waste CRT's. Disposing of CRTs to the trash or
> to a municipal landfill is prohibited. People should take their waste CRT's
> to a collection facility for recycling.
> Q: Are there any health risks associated with handling CRT's?
> A: No. There are no health hazards associated with handling intact
> unbroken televisions or CRT's.
> [There are lots of other questions in this "fact sheet", but here are some
> questions that don't appear:
> * Have any cases of lead poisoning been attributed to disposal of CRTs
> in landfills, and do you have any plans to remove CRTs and other, bigger,
> sources of lead from existing landfills to prevent more cases? What about
> all the lead in the ground left over from all those decades when people
> burned leaded gasoline?
> * Did you check with anyone who is responsible for providing drinking
> water to Californians to determine what the present level of lead is and
> whether they believe that what you're doing is going to help?
> * How many lives does DTSC estimate will be saved by imposing these
> restrictions on California's citizens and when will the benefits begin to
> accrue?
> * What sort of cost-benefit analysis was performed in arriving at
> these new restrictions and is it available for public review?
> * What sort of citizen - as opposed to "watchdog" environmental
> organization - input was involved in arriving at these new restrictions and
> what influence did it have? Who is the champion who is seeking these
> restrictions?
> * What new restrictions are you contemplating? In particular, have you
> considered making it illegal to sell or use leaded glass for holding potable
> liquids? Perhaps a buyout, in which you reward people from a
> taxpayer-supplied fund for turning in their "crystal" drinking glasses and
> decanters or promising not to use them?]
>
> Note to DTSC: I'd be happy to post to the IPC Leadfree Forum any response
> you might wish to offer.
>
> Gordon Davy
> Baltimore, MD
> [log in to unmask]
> 410-993-7399
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Leadfee Mail List provided as a free 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 delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
> Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
> Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
> information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leadfee Mail List provided as a free 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 delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
