[rsaavedra]

Lead is a whole different story. It is poisonous to everyone period. And even in very low amounts, it is particularly damaging to the development of the nervous system, kids under 6 years are the most affected.

If there's a notion that switching to lead-free solder is going to be "serious", lead poisoning is orders of magnitude a more serious public health matter. Lead is a hugely proven and documented public health hazard. Do a quick google search on lead poisoning, or lead pollution, and see for yourself. Electronics technology simply has to catch up, and if materials engineering has trouble finding cost effective alternatives, well, costly those will be. But lead is getting banned pretty much anywhere it can be a hazard, and for good reasons.

 

[aos]

You're kidding, right? Lead is a WELL known health hazard that, just as any heavy metal, accumulates in the body. It just took a long time to find out about it - I mean, how long have we been washing our hands regularly to prevent spreading diseases? Not more than a few hundred years. For Pete's sake, they used to administer liberal doses of pure mercury to "straighten up" intestines not so long ago. It's just takes time until the concentration is high enough to cause trouble and until recently people were getting sick for so many reasons left and right and nobody was taking count so it was not as easy to discover the relation.

However, you may well make the point that the governments didn't investigate the alternatives they legislated and that indeed a lot of that leadless solder will disintegrate. I only know that one type of such solder that I do have is really hard to work with, especially refusing to re-melt. But don't assume that lead is just a "fad of the year" health hazard, because it's dangers are nothing new.

On the other hand, really, just about everything is dangerous one way or another. Even water! You CAN get water poisoning if you drink HUGE amounts of water and thin your blood too much. We need to have a proper balance, that's all. Unfortunately, humans don't like to balance things. They like extremes.

 

[Whit]

The irony of the matter is that lead-acid car batteries will be exempted from the ban as there is no suitable alternative. Lead is not a danger unless you either eat it or drink it. In order to drink lead contaminated water, there must be a leaching agent in order to draw the lead into the water. If you water is acidic then you may have a problem. Most household plumbing in the US is copper tubing. Copper is also toxic in sufficient quantity. Basically this ban will be bad news for European industries. In addition to banning lead, chromium, cadmium, and mercury are also slated to be banned. Banning chromium would be very bad for European steel companies as chromium is what makes stainless steel stainless. Banning cadmium would also put the worlds largest producer of industrial batteries, SAFT (a French company), more or less out of business. It would also eliminate most electric vehicles. The answer to this problem is not banning every single thing that is bad for the environment but to put in place a recycling program that actually works and is easy for people to use. Banning things is a temporary fix at best.

 

[Nisbeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whit The irony of the matter is that lead-acid car batteries will be exempted from the ban as there is no suitable alternative. Lead is not a danger unless you either eat it or drink it. In order to drink lead contaminated water, there must be a leaching agent in order to draw the lead into the water. If you water is acidic then you may have a problem. Most household plumbing in the US is copper tubing. Copper is also toxic in sufficient quantity. Basically this ban will be bad news for European industries. In addition to banning lead, chromium, cadmium, and mercury are also slated to be banned. Banning chromium would be very bad for European steel companies as chromium is what makes stainless steel stainless. Banning cadmium would also put the worlds largest producer of industrial batteries, SAFT (a French company), more or less out of business. It would also eliminate most electric vehicles. The answer to this problem is not banning every single thing that is bad for the environment but to put in place a recycling program that actually works and is easy for people to use. Banning things is a temporary fix at best.

Whit, good points here. One thing though: I trust someone has already done a cost/benefit analysis of banning heavy metal vs. implementing a recycling system that works. The results may not be accurate and questionable for a number of reasons but I am confident that some form of calculations have been done. Most of the changes required to implent lead free components and processing in a manufacturing environment are one-time expenses. The cost over time will decrease whereas recycling means continuous funding and investments to keep it running.

Secondly, IMO (and admittedly I'm no expert on this) ROHS is only a step further, not a completely new thing. Sony has had a "Green Partner" programme for a long time and if you want to sell anything to them your products and manufacturing processes has to meet their requirements. Many other major Asian manufacturers have similar initiatives either on the way or currently implemented. Lead-free soldering has been discussed for the past few years (at least), as lead has been something you wanted to remove as far away from the enviroment as possible for decades and the signs of a legislative change in this area has been evident for some years if you ask me.

/U.

EDIT: Oh, heavy metals are not the only substances banned. Various nasty chemicals used for flame-retardent coating of transformers and magnetic components are also affected. Ask anyone who makes switch-mode power suppliers about this and you can hear them groan about this as well

 

[guzzler]

the problem with recycling is that it's consumer side not producer side, ie you have to rely on the consumer to be responsible about recycling their own waste. This legislation has been in the pipeline for years, so if companies haven't decided their response to it by now, it's their own fault.

g

 

[chillysalsa]

I just don't think it's the right approach.

A proper recycling program for electronics would solve the whole issue, but that is actually a greater technological challenge.

Sure, banning lead from things like paint, makes sense, there is a real danger there.

But banning lead in electronics is kind of the easy way out. We need to close the loop on the flow of materials, the electronics sent to the landfill should go back to the manufacture to reclaim the useful or toxic materials.

 

[jasonhanjk]

I meant since 100 years ago.

There are so much hazardous chemical that human created everyday to harm our self not knowing until we found out 20 years later. Abestos is cancerous but it was only put to ban 20 years later after use. Now lead will be put on ban and I say this is what we need to protect ourself.

Car battery will still use lead as there are still no other cost effective battery to replace it. NiMH is still to expensive.

Fried food are tasty but they are bad for health, same as lead tainted water.

 

[PinkFloyd]

There seems to be a lot of discussion about the health hazards of lead and this is not in dispute, lead is potentially dangerous if consumed in large quantity.

Not a lot of comments / observations on the "safety" issues Graham has outlined. If unleaded solder "will" lead to premature failure of circuits (whether they be in a Sony Walkman or a Boeing 747) isn't this more important an issue than human ingestion of "very" minute traces of lead?

Planes dropping out of the skies, cars breaking down, medical equipment failing, trains crashing into one another, weapons malfunctioning etc. etc. All this seems a bit far fetched but "if" it proves to be the case and many lives are lost as a direct consequence of going unleaded it'll just end up being covered up by the powers that be and a few people will face law suits....

This so called "ecosol" 96TSC lead free colophony free solder which is comprised of 95.5% tin, 3.8% silver and 0.7% copper costs £30 for a 500 gram reel of 18swg solder as opposed to £5 for a 500 gram reel of 18swg 60/40 tin/lead alloy solder. Six times the cost of conventional leaded solder........ Companies may use it, they may not. One thing you "can" be assured of.... the cost of the solder and the expenditure related to gearing up for the lead free directive will be passed on to the customer so not only should the consumer expect reliablity issues from equipment that uses lead free solder, they should also expect to pay a lot more for it.

I'd recommend reading Graham's article over again, especially the part about the seeds of destructive grey tin being sewn into consumer equipment in cold temperatures, once a seed has been sewn they multiply in 2's so 2 = 4 = 8 = 16 = 32 = 64 = 128 = 256 = 512 = 1024 = 2048......... so on and so forth. All it takes is just one seed to be sewn in cold weather and the process is unstoppable..... even if you keep the equipment in a warm oven, after exposure to -13C, you can't stop the seeds multiplying....... it's like rust, once it starts it's virtually unstoppable. The beauty of rust, however, is that it can be seen by the naked eye and can be cut out and replaced with a new panel of sheet metal...... tin solder joints housed inside equipment enclosures will go unnoticed and will disintegrate behind closed doors.

Lead free solder, the silent enemy within?

If Graham's predictions come to pass then Europe will have a bigger recycling problem on their hands with all these defective products turning up at landfill sites awaiting disposal.

Somebody mentioned earlier in this thread that traditional materials will be replaced with alternatives if they pose a threat to health or the eco system. Solid wood furniture made 600 years ago is still in use today, MDF furniture and chipboard kitchens will last a few years before going into the landfill (so called eco friendly alternatives to solid wood).... what's more sensible, buying a piece of quality furniture that will last generations or buying a piece of modern crap that will be in a landfill site in a few years??

It's not the materials that are in question here, it's the quality and longevity of the materials. A good old fashioned leaded amplifier with top quality components will last you a lifetime.... a cheap and nasty ABS blow moulded piece of junk will last you a year if you're lucky.

Banning good quality materials is futile......... encouraging people to buy good quality that will last and encouraging manufacturers to produce good quality equipment that will last would be a much more sensible approach.

We are sadly living in a world where people are encouraged to buy the latest and greatest piece of junk on a yearly basis... "pink plastic is this years colour so you better dump your blue plastic" "I'm sick of taking a crap in that powder blue pan, I wan't a Pink pan to crap in" another toilet makes it's way to the landfill site.

We are "not" destroying the planet by using traditional materials, we are destroying the planet with our insatiable appetite for constant change and "progress" as Roger Waters sings "this planet has amused itself to death"

It's not the materials that should be banned it's the "gimme gimme gimme" "I want it now" "I'm bored with that colour" culture that needs educated on what part "they" play on Mother Earth.

Quality will always stand the test of time.

Pinkie.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nkd Mostly lies. I use lead free solder, and it's little different to the old kind. It just has a (slightly) higher melting point.

Are you a tin expert?

 

[skitlets]

Pinkfloyd, if the legislation passes, do you really think they would allow planes to fall out of the sky and cars to crash? I think you're underestimating the government just a tad too little here. Manufacturers have strict production guidelines, and I don't think Boeing would allow the sale of a plane that was prone to crashes. They'd get a lot of heat for that, not to mention a loss of business and credibility, and would completely damage their profitibility. Same goes for car companies. If they're reputation becomes a manufacturer of cheap cars that fail, do you really think people are going to buy them? Although you may think companies (or countries, as you *know* China will use pure tin) will use cheap solder to boost profit, it will turn around and bite them in the ass, as they already know.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skitlets Pinkfloyd, if the legislation passes, do you really think they would allow planes to fall out of the sky and cars to crash? I think you're underestimating the government just a tad too little here. Manufacturers have strict production guidelines, and I don't think Boeing would allow the sale of a plane that was prone to crashes. They'd get a lot of heat for that, not to mention a loss of business and credibility, and would completely damage their profitibility. Same goes for car companies. If they're reputation becomes a manufacturer of cheap cars that fail, do you really think people are going to buy them? Although you may think companies (or countries, as you *know* China will use pure tin) will use cheap solder to boost profit, it will turn around and bite them in the ass, as they already know.

Please read what I said.

"All this seems a bit far fetched but "if" it proves to be the case and many lives are lost as a direct consequence of going unleaded it'll just end up being covered up by the powers that be and a few people will face law suits.... "

 

[skitlets]

I think it's more than a little far fetched.

 

[PinkFloyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by skitlets I think it's more than a little far fetched.

Can you explain why you think that?

 

[skitlets]

Because the government does more research than that article suggests. The government will not blindly remove lead from solder without fully investigating the effects. I'm sure there have been complaints to the union of how it is not cost effective, so the union would look into that. They don't just run around saying, "let's remove this" and then everyone cheers and the companies it affect sit around crying. That is not how things work.

 

[Welly Wu]

Hmmph...we're battling the war against terrorism and you're battling the war against lead...