TECHNET Archives

February 2004

TechNet@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:
"Jason W. Gregory" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Tue, 17 Feb 2004 10:15:52 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (102 lines)
Joe/Ken/All,

I look at this situation like I look at the situation in Texas (where I'm
located now, and was for a long time...a long time ago). Texas started
mimmicking California EPA emission standards around 5 or 6 years ago, when
George Dubbya was governor. The plan started that the three largest metro
area counties (Houston-Harris Co., Dallas-Tarrant Co., and San
Antonio-Bexar Co.) implemented emission standards. The cost was around 25
to 30 dollars per vehicle to test. If you owned a vehicle that was built
from 1968 to 1972 (and never had emission equipment installed as standard),
you had to pay a "waiver" fee. Any other year up to current was required to
be tested. Much of the ideas went to legislation and many changes were
made. However, the underlying basis meant, to me, that if "Jonny" had a
1994 Camry that ran good, didn't burn oil, and was maintained correctly, he
was FORCED to pay a fee and have his car checked for emission output in
order to drive his car legally, if he lived in one of these three counties.
If "Bubba" drove a 1971 pickup that burned excessive oil, needed rings, was
never maintained at all....but he lived one block over in Fort Bend County,
then he had to do nothing, just obtain a vehicle safety sticker, that only
meant his turn signals, horn, headlights/taillights worked. Texas does not,
for the most part, regulate the railroad system (diesel burning
locomotives), the ship channel (diesel burning ships and barges), nor the
refinery systems (all kinds of pollutants coming from pipestacks). My
confusion remains in the fact that if we are REALLY concerned about
environmental safety and longevity, then where's the other regulations? I
know that the absence of the other regulations that are missing come from
congessional lobbying and the ever-present cash cow. If something makes
money and would cost more money to regulate, then it gets over-looked.

Now, since I've transferred to Texas and our core business is down-hole,
oilfield products. I use lead-free alloys for solder joint reliability, not
for environmental concerns. I've really become incensed that this lead-free
push is for other reasons ($) than just envronmental concerns.

My opinions only,

Jason Gregory
Manufacturing Engineer




                      "Bloomquist, Ken"
                      <ken.bloomquist@G        To:       [log in to unmask]
                      D-AES.COM>               cc:
                      Sent by: TechNet         Subject:  Re: [TN] Is removal of lead from electronics solders a legitimate
                      <[log in to unmask]>         effort?


                      02/17/2004 09:51
                      AM
                      Please respond to
                      "TechNet E-Mail
                      Forum."; Please
                      respond to
                      "Bloomquist, Ken"






Joe,

That is great information! Now how do we use it to drive back the
initiative? It appears that industry and a great number of scientists are
in agreement that going lead free is not any where near the highest
priority for improving the environment, not to mention the potential impact
on product reliability. If the efforts and dollars being spent on going
lead free in electronics were redirected to real problems we might just see
a real improvement.

The problem? How do you turn the train around???

Thanks again Joe,

KennyB

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts 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
847-509-9700 ext.5315
-----------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts 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 847-509-9700 ext.5315
-----------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2