snip

I wonder just how much of a problem lead bearing solder used in
electronic devices is compared to the lead that used to be in paint
and gasoline? In the July 28th issue of Science News there is an
article about California Condors ingesting lead from animals killed by
being shot with lead bullets or shot. According to the article the
condors are being poisoned by the lead and it has such a deleterious
effect on the condors that without human care the condors would die
out. Their population is not self sustaining without human
intervention because of the lead. And there is plenty of evidence that
lead in gasoline and lead bearing paint has caused neurogical damage,
among other health problems, in children. Banning leaded gasoline and
lead bearing paint has shown a marked decrease in neurological
deficits in children typically exposed to lead in the past. Even so,
how much of a problem is lead in electronic devices? Would we be
better off with some type of legislation that requires electronic
devices to be accepted by retailers for recycling? Maybe by putting a
deposit on electronic devices that is refunded when the device is
replaced?
Eric

Removal of lead from gasoline and paint, were valid exercises, as the lead
from the gasoline fumes was easily ingested, and the lead from paint could
find its way into the environment in an ingestible form, reasonably easily.
However, solder appears to have gotten itself hitched to these campaigns,
merely by association. It was, as far as I can tell, another example of
hysteria that surrounds the eco-bollox movement, and any perceived
detrimental effects of lead being in solder, have been hugely exaggerated,
and are largely without foundation.

Tin and lead is a stable compound, and the lead does not wash out of it in
water. Pure lead is not soluble in water. There was talk of it being a huge
problem with electronic items in landfill, having the lead 'leeched out' of
the solder by ground water, but there seems to be little evidence that this
ever did, or could occur, without the rain being extremely acidic, and that
situation hasn't existed for years since industrial airborne pollutants were
legislated against in most of the civilised world.

For some years now, EU countries have had the Waste Electrical and
Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive in place, and this ensures that all
electronic equipment is 'recycled' in some form. As Nigel says in his posted
reply, this does not actually ensure that much in the way of 'true'
recycling is done, but as all of the equipment now *has* to find its way
back into the system, paid for by the manufacturer as a levy on his sales,
then it *could* be. It would not be that hard to re-extract the lead, if
possibly a little more costly.

Everyone at the sharp end knows, in truth, that lead-free solder is pretty
useless stuff. Like eco-bollox lightbulbs, it's not a replacement
technology, it's a substitute one. It has caused both the electronic
manufacturing and repair industries huge problems in the requirement to
change equipment and processes, and in increased energy useage, And for what
? To address a 'problem' that wasn't there in the first place. Aside from
the manufacturing and service problems it has caused, I would contend that
it has almost certainly resulted in a far larger quantity of consumer
electronic equipment being life-ended earlier than would have previously
been the case, due to bad joint-related failures that are not worth getting
repaired, because it's cheaper to just buy a replacement piece of Chinese
junk from the nearest shed or supermarket. This has the knock-on effect of
being hugely wasteful of resources and energy, which is a far greater
overall problem to the well-being of fauna on this planet, than lead in
solder ever was ...

You might want to consider why in any areas where equipment is likely to be
used to preserve human life - e.g. avionics, medical, military - such
equipment is exempt from the lead-free solder manufacturing requirement,
that non-critical equipment has to abide by.

Arfa