I agree. With all due respect to the folks researching the "toxicity" of
lead in electronics assemblies and lobbying on this matter, it does seem
that there is a VERY good chance (inevitability?) that we (North America &
Europe) will be forced to switch to lead-free in the near future. It's fine
to try to prevent this, but it is already occurring in Japan, and I believe
that our main focus (as an industry) must be to determine acceptable
lead-free solutions. This takes a great deal of research, shared
experiences, and perhaps a bit of consensus. That does not minimize the
importance of environmental research and lobbying, but perhaps we are only
creating confusion by lumping all of these ideas together.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bradley Edwin-EEB002 <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: [LF] Environmental risk from CRT's?
>maybe we should divide this lead-free forum into two forums
>1) anti-lead free lobbying
>2) lead-free solutions.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bund Martin-marbund1 [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 1999 9:25 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [LF] Environmental risk from CRT's?
>
>
>"...if this project is enacted, the world electronics industry will be hard
>hit, possibly causing the increased costs..."
>
>Everyone except the Japanese (forgot about those guys?), whom are running
>lead free products at this time to cost and within agreed timescales, more
>to be introduced I understand, pity because it constrains an otherwise
>entertaining dialogue below to that of fantasy.
>
>Remember, there is no such thing as fear, only lack of understanding.
>
>Any updates on lead free trials?
>
>Regards,
>Martin.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Brian Ellis [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 09 November 1999 09:36
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [LF] Environmental risk from CRT's?
>
>
>Guenter
>
>I agree with 10 000 000% that the problem is purely political. About 8
>years ago, as I remember, the same problem happened in the USA but it
>never came to fruition because industry lobbied Congress and the act did
>not pass.
>
>OK, so what can we do? The proposed WEEE directive is a project and
>concerted lobbying can still block it entirely or cause significant
>modifications to be made. It still has to be adopted by the European
>Parliament. If nothing is done by industry, it will not even be debated
>in Parliament, it will be enacted, along with a hundred others because
>Parliament cannot debate every single one. Every trade organisation
>should alert every European Member of Parliament (EMP) and every member
>of the parliaments or equivalents of all the member states (MP) that, if
>this project is enacted, the world electronics industry will be hard
>hit, possibly causing the increased costs involved to cause increased
>unemployment (a very sensitive point) and to cause essential
>electronics, such as in weapons systems and aircraft or used in medical
>life-supporting apparatus, to become less reliable. Then, every
>manufacturing or importing company and individual within the EU should
>write to their/his national MP AND EMP that the individuals have helped
>to elect stating the hardships that would touch them directly, should
>the directive be enacted. Some MPs and EMPs who are sympathetic to the
>problem should be identified and briefed in further detail, so that they
>can raise the problem with some detail for debate in national and
>European parliaments, so that every attempt can be made, democratically,
>for this technocratic procedure to be nipped in the bud. However,
>because of the emotional issues involved, it is unlikely that any action
>will succeed in doing more than sending the issue back to the
>technocrats for severe revision but, next time round, the notion of
>lead-bearing solders may be acceptable provided that recycling
>procedures can be implemented. At the worst, it will give us a few more
>years of grace: at the best, it will allow us to continue status quo
>indefinitely. In these debates, Switzerland's and Germany's (also
>Sweden's??) experience in recycling, both politically and practically,
>should be given as examples.
>
>What else can be done? Let us suppose that the directive becomes law, as
>the current project. According to Art. 4 Para. 4, Member States can
>exempt the provisions (sub para b, ii) if the use is unavoidable. If
>many companies claim that the use of lead-bearing solder is unavoidable
>because of economic pressures, loss of reliability, inability to use
>low-temperature solders because they will not stand up to environmental
>testing, inability to use high-Sn alloys as they may weaken active
>components subjected to higher temperatures, inability to match TCs over
>the greater range, etc., then the Member States will be obliged to
>provide exemptions. There will then be a de facto situation whereby the
>directive will become virtually meaningless. Just a thought...
>
>Brian
>
>Guenter Grossmann wrote:
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> No need to fall in a trap, since I agree with you. See, I am in the funny
>> situation that I am involved into recycling of electronic waste, where
>> tin-lead is one of the easier problems and on the other hand I am
>> confronted with the request of industry to provide reliability data for
>> leadfree solder since no one believes that the EU bureaucrats can be
>> stopped.
>> Again: There is no scientific reason to stop the use of lead in
>solderings,
>> but the debate has left the scientific ground since long and is now
>> hoovering in the political clouds. I see little chance to change the EU
>> directive and there is no point in arguing how senseless the lead ban in
>> solder is. IT WILL COME. I feel too that it is ironic that now when we
>> established a working takeback / recycling concept in order to minimize
>the
>> impact on the environment we are forced not to use the substances we made
>> the concept for. That's politics.
>>
>> Cheer up Brian
>>
>> Guenter
>>
>> ################################################################
>> 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
>> ################################################################
>> IPCWorks -October 25-28 featuring an International Summit on Lead-Free
>Electronic
>> Assemblies.
>> Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
>> (http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
>> For technical support contact Gayatri Sardeshpande [log in to unmask] or
>847-790-5365.
>> ################################################################
>
>################################################################
>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
>################################################################
>IPCWorks -October 25-28 featuring an International Summit on Lead-Free
>Electronic
>Assemblies.
>Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
>(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
>For technical support contact Gayatri Sardeshpande [log in to unmask] or
>847-790-5365.
>################################################################
>
>################################################################
>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
>################################################################
>IPCWorks -October 25-28 featuring an International Summit on Lead-Free
>Electronic
>Assemblies.
>Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
>(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
>For technical support contact Gayatri Sardeshpande [log in to unmask] or
>847-790-5365.
>################################################################
>
>################################################################
>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
>################################################################
>IPCWorks -October 25-28 featuring an International Summit on Lead-Free
Electronic
>Assemblies.
>Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
>(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
>For technical support contact Gayatri Sardeshpande [log in to unmask] or
847-790-5365.
>################################################################
>
################################################################
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
################################################################
IPCWorks -October 25-28 featuring an International Summit on Lead-Free Electronic
Assemblies.
Please visit IPC's Center for Lead-Free Electronics Assembly
(http://www.leadfree.org ) for additional information.
For technical support contact Gayatri Sardeshpande [log in to unmask] or 847-790-5365.
################################################################
|
