TECHNET Archives

March 2012

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:
Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum <[log in to unmask]>, Brian Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 29 Mar 2012 18:30:58 +0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
I've been having a wee think about this. Firstly, what is a conflict 
area? OK, the DRC has been cited but this is world's primary producer of 
cobalt and is also high on the list for copper. According to 
http://www.cfr.org/africa/africas-conflict-zones/p14543, Africa alone 
has 16 conflict zones, some of which are very important producers of 
minerals, including fossil fuels. So, if a metal is smelted with energy 
from a CZ fossil fuel, where does that lead us? And what about tin? 
Colombia springs to mind as an up-and-coming major producer, but there 
is also the perpetual conflict between "pirate" alluvial tin ore miners 
and the authorities in countries like Indonesia.

Worse than conflict minerals, what about those mined by kids? 
http://framework.latimes.com/2011/05/14/in-india-coal-towns-many-miners-are-children/#/0 
is related to coal but I wouldn't mind betting that some of the gold on 
those connectors you use was mined by kids subjected to mercury or 
cyanide, whether from a conflict zone or not.

Then there are minerals from countries with a despotic dictator. Should 
we support their use?

Introducing ethical standards into the origin of materials, including 
conflict zones, is a bottomless can of worms being opened. If it is to 
be considered, it must not stop at countries in conflict but extend to 
all non-ethical treatment. This includes transport (most conflictual 
material is transported using energy from countries which are not 
ethical by our western standards, if only because they deny rights to 
women).

Where does it logically end?

Brian

On 29/03/2012 15:44, Blair Hogg wrote:
> We have been receiving requests from customers for statements thta our products do not have any content of minerals from conflict areas, e.g. Congo. Anyone else getting these? How are you handling them?
>
> The point behind this is apparently to avoid providing funding of aggressors through the purchase of minerals from areas in conflict. A quick glance at this makes it look even worse than RoHS, now it is not simply the materials in the components, but from where they originate.
>
> Blair
>

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask] 
______________________________________________________________________

ATOM RSS1 RSS2