LEADFREE Archives

March 2005

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:
Charles Dolci <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
(Leadfree Electronics Assembly Forum)
Date:
Thu, 31 Mar 2005 07:44:47 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (59 lines)
Brian, et al.

I am waiting for the article to download so I can read it, so while I am
waiting for that I thought I would throw in my $.02 worth.

I don't know about Europe, but in the US virtually all paper comes from
plantation trees that are grown and harvested just for paper production.
It is a crop, just like wheat or corn.

Here in my quaint little community we are required by city ordinance to
recycle all houdehold paper, glass, plastic and metal waste. I was
recently at a Home & Garden show in SFo and the theme of the show was
recycling (i.e. how to use recycled materials in the home and garden). I
noticed that the recycled products were a lot more expensive than the
"natural" materials for which they were supposed to be substitutes.
 This is interesting in that we pay the city to pick-up the
recycleables. So if  I have to subsidize the raw materials and still pay
more for a product containing recylced materials where is the economic
viability of that?

Just a thought.

Chuck Dolci

Brian Ellis wrote:

> As you know, Gordon, I am very much pro-recycling, ....

>
> In fact, much recycling is already done and is economically viable.
>
> As for the paper you cite, a 10-year old kid could drive a horse and
> cart through a lot of what is said. For example, it cites Germany's
> green dot system and its cost. But it does not offset this against the
> need to not to produce virgin materials. Paper and plastics recycling,
> which is what it applies to, IS economically viable and the recycled
> materials cost about 90% of virgin materials for paper and cardboard and
> 80% for plastics (and reduces oil-dependence). It quotes electronics as
> being flame-retarded with deca-bde, when tetrabromobisphenol A is used
> for FR-4 AND polycarbonate housings. There is another point that should
> be considered and that is that WEEE is European and Europe has far less
> available space for landfills, so it is not possible to extrapolate
> conditions to countries like the USA.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
> Davy, Gordon wrote:
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2