Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as was
used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or SnAg
solder?

Thanks!

mc wrote:

Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as was
used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

Gawd knows mate. The politicians probably didn't think of that one.

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or SnAg
solder?

About 50C higher. Hang on, you said " SnSb or SnAg " ! Where do you think you're
going to find those ?

Graham

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!

Georgia ?

How about starting with an Alloy Temperature Chart??
http://www.kester.com/en-us/technical/alloy.aspx

Kester Lead Free Solutions
http://www.kester.com/en-us/leadfree/index.aspx


NPL: UK's National Measurement Labs
http://www.npl.co.uk/ei/research/leadfree.html

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!

BTW, Kester lists 5 eutectic solder alloys on this chart -- can you find
them?
http://www.kester.com/en-us/technical/alloy.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS directive,
that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has been used. To
date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In general, boards made
with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad ( and often, this is
pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints having a shiny appearance,
and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are dull and grey, decidedly
'crystalline' looking, and tend to be volcano-shaped, with straight sides.

Pretty much any commercial equipment from the big far east manufacturers -
Pan, Sony, Hitachi etc - built in the last two or so years, can be assumed
to have been built in lead-free.

When you get a lead-free board for repair, as well as finding your fault,
which may well be joint-related, check the solder joints on anything large
such as connectors, power transistors, heatsinks etc. It's also worth
checking the soldering on any LSIs fitted to the board - particularly the
rows of legs on the downstream side of the soldering process, which is often
marked on the board by an arrow. Give anything suspicious, a good rocking.
Bad joints just don't look the same as with leaded solder. I have had
components just come out in my hand, leaving behind a perfect-looking
volcano of solder. This is because the manufacturers run their solder
process plants at as low a temperature as they can, to avoid damage to LSIs
etc. With the known inferior wetting properties of lead-free, this tends to
result in insufficient heat to properly solder components with a high
thermal inertia. SM LSIs seem to suffer as a result of the inferior flowing
properties of lead-free, resulting in poorer capilliary 'draw-in' of the
solder, under the legs.

As Graham says in this thread, 50 deg C hotter is about right. The
difference in actual melting temperature, is around 30 - 40 deg, depending
on the exact mix. As a matter of interest, the recommended alloy for general
bench rework, is Tin-Copper-3% Silver. This has a melting point about 10 deg
lower, and apparently, rather better wetting properties, but I can't vouch
for this, not having tried any yet.

Arfa

Georgia ?

Yes...

How about starting with an Alloy Temperature Chart??
http://www.kester.com/en-us/technical/alloy.aspx

Kester Lead Free Solutions
http://www.kester.com/en-us/leadfree/index.aspx

Thanks -- just what I was looking for.

How about starting with an Alloy Temperature Chart??
http://www.kester.com/en-us/technical/alloy.aspx

Actually, that gives the melting points, which weren't hard to find in the
first place. What I'm looking for is advice about how to set the
temperature-controlled iron.

Thanks -- that's useful!

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS directive,
that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has been used. To
date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In general, boards made
with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad ( and often, this is
pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints having a shiny
appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are dull and grey,
decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be volcano-shaped, with
straight sides.

Pretty much any commercial equipment from the big far east manufacturers -
Pan, Sony, Hitachi etc - built in the last two or so years, can be assumed
to have been built in lead-free.

When you get a lead-free board for repair, as well as finding your fault,
which may well be joint-related, check the solder joints on anything large
such as connectors, power transistors, heatsinks etc. It's also worth
checking the soldering on any LSIs fitted to the board - particularly the
rows of legs on the downstream side of the soldering process, which is
often marked on the board by an arrow. Give anything suspicious, a good
rocking. Bad joints just don't look the same as with leaded solder. I have
had components just come out in my hand, leaving behind a perfect-looking
volcano of solder. This is because the manufacturers run their solder
process plants at as low a temperature as they can, to avoid damage to
LSIs etc. With the known inferior wetting properties of lead-free, this
tends to result in insufficient heat to properly solder components with a
high thermal inertia. SM LSIs seem to suffer as a result of the inferior
flowing properties of lead-free, resulting in poorer capilliary 'draw-in'
of the solder, under the legs.

As Graham says in this thread, 50 deg C hotter is about right. The
difference in actual melting temperature, is around 30 - 40 deg, depending
on the exact mix. As a matter of interest, the recommended alloy for
general bench rework, is Tin-Copper-3% Silver. This has a melting point
about 10 deg lower, and apparently, rather better wetting properties, but
I can't vouch for this, not having tried any yet.

Arfa

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!



Dead easy - lead free solder joints fall apart in less than a year!!!

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS directive,
that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has been used. To
date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In general, boards made
with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad ( and often, this is
pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints having a shiny
appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are dull and grey,
decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be volcano-shaped, with
straight sides.

snip

Any chance the half-arsed RoHS directive was thought up by the stuck up gits
who pepper the countryside with 12bore lead shot?

"mc" wrote in message
. ..
How about starting with an Alloy Temperature Chart??
http://www.kester.com/en-us/technical/alloy.aspx

Actually, that gives the melting points, which weren't hard to find in the
first place. What I'm looking for is advice about how to set the
temperature-controlled iron.


OK. You mean the mind-less idiot knob on the current soldering stations?

Personally my range is 650 to 750 degree -- the KEY is to stay in the range
and then select the proper tip SIZE (1/64" to 1/4" in 1/32 or 1/64"
increments) and PROFILE (screwdriver, conical, single flat) -- as well as
solder. Works well for 63/37 Tin/Lead eutectic and 60/40 alloy.

For the Weller WTCP, I still use 700 degree F tips, PTA, PTB for
screwdriver, the other 3 tips that I occasionally use depending upon the
work (reach, SMD, etc) a PTH, PTL, PTS

I do know some people who jump to 800 degree for the no-leads -- depending
upon formulation being used.

For Lead free solder, call Alpha/Cookson Electronics (Jersey City, NJ) and
have them send you a sample of:

96.5% TIN; 3% SILVER and 0.5% COPPER in the
..020 diameter either with a 3.3% flux or WRAP2 flux


g. beat

"ian field" wrote in message
news

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS directive,
that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has been used.
To date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In general, boards
made with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad ( and often, this
is pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints having a shiny
appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are dull and grey,
decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be volcano-shaped, with
straight sides.

snip

Any chance the half-arsed RoHS directive was thought up by the stuck up
gits who pepper the countryside with 12bore lead shot?

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall. Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying where it
is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead, over 80%
going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have managed to
organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to carry on using
lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no suitable
alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end of life
electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the same way,
so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do it, I'm sure
that the electronic people can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

The point about the RoHS directive as it stands with regard to leaded
solder, is that it is forcing a changeover from a mature, tried and tested
technology, which had reached the point of almost perfect reliability, to a
less than satisfactory alternative, with at best, woolly reasoning to try to
justify it. This is well understood by such people as the US military, who
refuse to use the stuff, the avionics industry, who have obtained
exemptions, and the medical instrument industry, likewise. Any ecological
advantage from the poisoning angle, will probably be outweighed in the long
run by the additional energy budget worldwide to run all those solder
production lines and hand soldering irons 50 degrees hotter, and all the
extra recycling brought about by electronic equipment being junked earlier
due to owners getting fed up with all the intermittent problems from bad
joints ...

Just keep your fingers crossed that avionics are not finally forced down
that route, coz that'll be the day that I stop flying.

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
news

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder as
was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial melting
problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb or
SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS
directive, that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has
been used. To date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In
general, boards made with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad
( and often, this is pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints
having a shiny appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are
dull and grey, decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be
volcano-shaped, with straight sides.

snip

Any chance the half-arsed RoHS directive was thought up by the stuck up
gits who pepper the countryside with 12bore lead shot?

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway, the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead,
over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have
managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to carry
on using lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no suitable
alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end of life
electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the same way,
so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do it, I'm sure
that the electronic people can also do it with less than 1/80th the
volume.

The point about the RoHS directive as it stands with regard to leaded
solder, is that it is forcing a changeover from a mature, tried and tested
technology, which had reached the point of almost perfect reliability, to
a less than satisfactory alternative, with at best, woolly reasoning to
try to justify it. This is well understood by such people as the US
military, who refuse to use the stuff, the avionics industry, who have
obtained exemptions, and the medical instrument industry, likewise. Any
ecological advantage from the poisoning angle, will probably be outweighed
in the long run by the additional energy budget worldwide to run all those
solder production lines and hand soldering irons 50 degrees hotter, and
all the extra recycling brought about by electronic equipment being junked
earlier due to owners getting fed up with all the intermittent problems
from bad joints ...

Just keep your fingers crossed that avionics are not finally forced down
that route, coz that'll be the day that I stop flying.

Arfa


Some good points there, I didn't know lead was no longer used for 12bore
shot - any idea what they use instead?

Regardless of the WEEE directive, lead was originally mined out of the
ground and one way or another it will eventually end up back there, also I
had always held the opinion that the common solder alloys were substantially
less toxic than lead on its own, if this is true then the manufacture of
lead/tin solder actually reduces the availability of lead wherever it ends
up at end of life.

One thing I have been trying to find out if anyone knows, is how much lead
the petroleum industry procured annually for TEL additives before leaded
petrol was discontinued, the figures I read somewhere (can't remember where,
or how much!) were huge - thousands of tons of lead converted into exhaust
particulates to be inhaled, washed onto agricultural land and into the water
table, I suspect that lead in solder is insignificant compared to previous
usage of TEL!

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall. Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying where it
is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead, over 80%
going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have managed to
organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to carry on using
lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no suitable
alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end of life
electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the same way,
so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do it, I'm sure
that the electronic people can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

"ian field" wrote in
:

One thing I have been trying to find out if anyone knows, is how much
lead the petroleum industry procured annually for TEL additives before
leaded petrol was discontinued, the figures I read somewhere (can't
remember where, or how much!) were huge - thousands of tons of lead
converted into exhaust particulates to be inhaled, washed onto
agricultural land and into the water table, I suspect that lead in
solder is insignificant compared to previous usage of TEL!

Yes, but the lead coming out of tailpipes was widely distributed in the
air, whereas electronics that wind up in landfill dumps just sit there
for a long time and continuously leach their chemicals into the nearby
ground, whence it flows down into water tables and gets into drinking
water. I'd prefer my drinking water lead-free, thank you.

"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying where it
is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead, over 80%
going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have managed to
organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to carry on using
lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no suitable
alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end of life
electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the same way,
so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do it, I'm sure
that the electronic people can also do it with less than 1/80th the
volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First to Jim two posts above. You are missing the point. The electronic
waste will no longer sit in landfill, because the new WEEE directive, in
Europe at least, will make sure that the equipment is recycled, and any lead
content removed. Electronic equipment in landfill will soon become a thing
of the past. Anyway, just how soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure,
but I expect some clever chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water
was delivered to all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older
properties, it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead
pipework. I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead
poisoning, or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced
brain damage. In fact, since lead piping has been being removed here, the
kids have been getting progressively thicker ... !! I have heard people say
that delivering water via lead pipes is of no consequence, because the pipes
quickly get an internal coating of limescale, that insulates the water from
the lead, but some areas of the country have very soft water, with little or
no calcium content, so I'm not sure that this argument " holds water " (
ouch !! ).

Even if lead is soluble in water, I can't imagine that it is extremely so,
and I would have thought that water treatment plants would have removed any
in their raw input, or could be made to do so fairly easily. Of much more
concern, I would have thought, must be the organic fertilizers and such that
get into the water supply. I don't know what the situation is your side of
the pond ( I'm assuming you are US based ) regarding landfill. All we ever
hear over here, is that your glorious leader is not a very eco-friendly guy,
but I'm sure from what I've seen on my frequent visits, that isn't the case
amongst the general population.

To Franc. I'm not sure what the percentage of lead is in the lead-glass that
is used for CRT faceplates, but as far as I am aware, it's another
technology that has been deemed not to have a viable alternative, so has
been granted an exemption from the RoHS directive. Total recycling of this
glass should be possible, with no lead-to-environment contamination. As well
as the faceplate glass, I seem to recall that there is some issue also, with
getting a vacuum-proof seal between the CRT pins and the glass, that
involves possibly some other hazardous substance covered by the directive.
Interesting stuff. If anyone has any strong objections on the grounds of
this being off-topic, say so, and I'll stop raising new points ...

Arfa

"ian field" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
news

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder
as was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial
melting problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb
or SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS
directive, that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that has
been used. To date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In
general, boards made with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad
( and often, this is pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints
having a shiny appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they are
dull and grey, decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be
volcano-shaped, with straight sides.

snip

Any chance the half-arsed RoHS directive was thought up by the stuck up
gits who pepper the countryside with 12bore lead shot?

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway, the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead,
over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have
managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to
carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no
suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end
of life electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the
same way, so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do
it, I'm sure that the electronic people can also do it with less than
1/80th the volume.

The point about the RoHS directive as it stands with regard to leaded
solder, is that it is forcing a changeover from a mature, tried and
tested technology, which had reached the point of almost perfect
reliability, to a less than satisfactory alternative, with at best,
woolly reasoning to try to justify it. This is well understood by such
people as the US military, who refuse to use the stuff, the avionics
industry, who have obtained exemptions, and the medical instrument
industry, likewise. Any ecological advantage from the poisoning angle,
will probably be outweighed in the long run by the additional energy
budget worldwide to run all those solder production lines and hand
soldering irons 50 degrees hotter, and all the extra recycling brought
about by electronic equipment being junked earlier due to owners getting
fed up with all the intermittent problems from bad joints ...

Just keep your fingers crossed that avionics are not finally forced down
that route, coz that'll be the day that I stop flying.

Arfa


Some good points there, I didn't know lead was no longer used for 12bore
shot - any idea what they use instead?

Regardless of the WEEE directive, lead was originally mined out of the
ground and one way or another it will eventually end up back there, also I
had always held the opinion that the common solder alloys were
substantially less toxic than lead on its own, if this is true then the
manufacture of lead/tin solder actually reduces the availability of lead
wherever it ends up at end of life.


I have a friend who owns a clay range. A few years back, there was a big
thing locally about shot from his range ending up in a wheat field behind.
This also lead to complaints on the noise issue. As far as I recall, they
changed over to a different cartridge, that has a non-lead shot content, and
a lower velocity powder charge, which cuts down on the noise, making more of
a soft whumph noise than the previous sharp bangs. I haven't seen him for a
while, nor been to the range, so I don't know what the effects of this have
been on the sport, but I will try to find out, if you like.

I think that the issue with ' out of the ground / back to the ground '
that's usually quoted, is that it came out of the ground as a naturally
occuring ore, but goes back as refined lead. But I'm still not convinced
that this whole thing is not just an eco smokescreen, keeping beaurocrats in
a job. I'm sure that there are much more hazardous substances getting into
the eco system, than lead from solder.

Arfa

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in
:


"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined
lead, over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery
industry have managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so
are allowed to carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention
that there is no suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE
directive shortly, end of life electronic equipment will have to be
safely recycled in much the same way, so where's the difference ? If
the car battery people can do it, I'm sure that the electronic people
can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First to Jim two posts above. You are missing the point. The
electronic waste will no longer sit in landfill, because the new WEEE
directive, in Europe at least, will make sure that the equipment is
recycled, and any lead content removed. Electronic equipment in
landfill will soon become a thing of the past. Anyway, just how
soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure, but I expect some clever
chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water was delivered to
all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older properties,
it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead pipework.
I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead poisoning,
or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced brain
damage. In fact, since lead piping has been being removed here, the
kids have been getting progressively thicker ... !! I have heard
people say that delivering water via lead pipes is of no consequence,
because the pipes quickly get an internal coating of limescale, that
insulates the water from the lead, but some areas of the country have
very soft water, with little or no calcium content, so I'm not sure
that this argument " holds water " ( ouch !! ).

Even if lead is soluble in water, I can't imagine that it is extremely
so, and I would have thought that water treatment plants would have
removed any in their raw input, or could be made to do so fairly
easily. Of much more concern, I would have thought, must be the
organic fertilizers and such that get into the water supply. I don't
know what the situation is your side of the pond ( I'm assuming you
are US based ) regarding landfill. All we ever hear over here, is that
your glorious leader is not a very eco-friendly guy, but I'm sure from
what I've seen on my frequent visits, that isn't the case amongst the
general population.

To Franc. I'm not sure what the percentage of lead is in the
lead-glass that is used for CRT faceplates, but as far as I am aware,
it's another technology that has been deemed not to have a viable
alternative, so has been granted an exemption from the RoHS directive.
Total recycling of this glass should be possible, with no
lead-to-environment contamination. As well as the faceplate glass, I
seem to recall that there is some issue also, with getting a
vacuum-proof seal between the CRT pins and the glass, that involves
possibly some other hazardous substance covered by the directive.
Interesting stuff. If anyone has any strong objections on the grounds
of this being off-topic, say so, and I'll stop raising new points ...

Arfa




I believe the lead in CRT glass does not leach out.
It's probably the monitor electronics is where the lead is coming from.
Also,it's not just the faceplate the lead-glass is used,as the lead is
intended to attenuate X-rays which I believe scatter BACK from the target.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:41:32 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

Anyway, just how soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure,

See:
http://www.floridacenter.org/publica...ility_99-5.pdf
The proceedure is to test for leaching using moderately acidic water
(Ph = 5.0) and to literally pulverize the glass to accellerate the
leaching (See Method Phase I). As expected this yielded the worst
case results at about 3 times the US limits.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 00:48:39 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

A bit more on the topic:

Is this Ban Really Necessary?
A Critical Investigation of the CRT Ban.
| http://www.wrppn.org/hub/hub36/Is_th...ssary_CRT_.pdf

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:41:32 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

Anyway, just how soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure,

See:
http://www.floridacenter.org/publica...ility_99-5.pdf
The proceedure is to test for leaching using moderately acidic water
(Ph = 5.0) and to literally pulverize the glass to accellerate the
leaching (See Method Phase I). As expected this yielded the worst
case results at about 3 times the US limits.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Yes Jeff, I too have seen similar scenarios for producing the public scare
results that the instigators of some of this legislation need in order to
validate it ( and the existence of their jobs and departments, and their own
over-inflated opinions of themselves ). I didn't realise that it had got as
far as trying to ban lead glass over there. At least here in Europe, as I
said, CRT technology has been granted an exemption. Going back to schoolboy
chemistry, I seem to think that normal rain is actually slightly acidic -
picks up carbon dioxide on its way down and becomes carbonic acid or
something like that ?? But very weak anyway, certainly nothing like as low a
ph as 5, I wouldn't have thought. Of course, there is genuine acid rain,
created by pollution in the atmosphere, but I would have thought that if it
was reaching anywhere near 5, every piece of exposed metal would be rotting
away every 2 years, and that there were serious and more pressing problems
with the legislation regarding reducing and removing atmospheric emmissions
from factories.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against doing away with dangerous manufacturing
processes and materials, which are injurious to both people, and the planet
in general, but there are degrees to which it's practical, and levels of
risk, and I really honestly believe that lead in solder is such a low risk
issue - particularly in view of the fact that additional legislation has
been put in place to deal with that risk - that the problems its removal is
causing to the electronics manufacturing and repair industries, far outweigh
any short or long term advantages.

It seems to me that the words " horse ", " stable door " and " bolted "
should be applied. If there is an issue with lead from solder getting into
the eco system, then it's already happened / happening, and landfills that
are full of junked electronics, need digging back up to remove that problem.
If end of life electronic equipment is now going to be properly recycled
under control of law, then there is no need to replace a valid, mature, and
above all reliable technology, with one that has disastrous potential ...

Arfa

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Arfa Daily" wrote in
:


"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined
lead, over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery
industry have managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so
are allowed to carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention
that there is no suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE
directive shortly, end of life electronic equipment will have to be
safely recycled in much the same way, so where's the difference ? If
the car battery people can do it, I'm sure that the electronic people
can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First to Jim two posts above. You are missing the point. The
electronic waste will no longer sit in landfill, because the new WEEE
directive, in Europe at least, will make sure that the equipment is
recycled, and any lead content removed. Electronic equipment in
landfill will soon become a thing of the past. Anyway, just how
soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure, but I expect some clever
chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water was delivered to
all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older properties,
it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead pipework.
I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead poisoning,
or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced brain
damage. In fact, since lead piping has been being removed here, the
kids have been getting progressively thicker ... !! I have heard
people say that delivering water via lead pipes is of no consequence,
because the pipes quickly get an internal coating of limescale, that
insulates the water from the lead, but some areas of the country have
very soft water, with little or no calcium content, so I'm not sure
that this argument " holds water " ( ouch !! ).

Even if lead is soluble in water, I can't imagine that it is extremely
so, and I would have thought that water treatment plants would have
removed any in their raw input, or could be made to do so fairly
easily. Of much more concern, I would have thought, must be the
organic fertilizers and such that get into the water supply. I don't
know what the situation is your side of the pond ( I'm assuming you
are US based ) regarding landfill. All we ever hear over here, is that
your glorious leader is not a very eco-friendly guy, but I'm sure from
what I've seen on my frequent visits, that isn't the case amongst the
general population.

To Franc. I'm not sure what the percentage of lead is in the
lead-glass that is used for CRT faceplates, but as far as I am aware,
it's another technology that has been deemed not to have a viable
alternative, so has been granted an exemption from the RoHS directive.
Total recycling of this glass should be possible, with no
lead-to-environment contamination. As well as the faceplate glass, I
seem to recall that there is some issue also, with getting a
vacuum-proof seal between the CRT pins and the glass, that involves
possibly some other hazardous substance covered by the directive.
Interesting stuff. If anyone has any strong objections on the grounds
of this being off-topic, say so, and I'll stop raising new points ...

Arfa




I believe the lead in CRT glass does not leach out.
It's probably the monitor electronics is where the lead is coming from.
Also,it's not just the faceplate the lead-glass is used,as the lead is
intended to attenuate X-rays which I believe scatter BACK from the target.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Now I come to think back to my college theory days ( blimey, that was a long
time ago ! ) I seem to recall that the x-ray emissions from a monochrome
tube are barely detectable, and those from a colour tube, only fall into the
weak and soft category, due to there only being around 25kV available for
acceleration, and that the electron beam is not streamed directly onto a
target anode. Indeed, the beam doesn't impact on a physical anode as such,
at all, but requires a DC path for the spent electrons to return to the
power supply, and that seems to ring distant bells in the cobweb-y recesses
of my brain, as being the reason that lead doped glass is used for the
faceplate ie to make it sufficiently conductive that it forms a high
impedance return path back to ground via the rimband.

On the other hand, going back to the early days of colour television, when a
GY501 HV rectifier and a PD500 shunt stabilizer were used, these two
thermionic devices *did* produce significant x-radiation due to the
electrons impinging on a genuine tungsten anode, hence the reason that if
you were working on the HOP stage with the cage removed, you needed to put a
lead glass shield around the shunt stabilizer tube, but if you were just
working on the set in general, no such protection for your nuts from CRT
x-radiation was required. Must've worked tho' as I've got three kids ...

I also seem to recall that in order for *useful* hard x-rays to be produced,
a proper x-ray tube runs with 90kV + ??

Arfa

"Jim Land" wrote in message
. 3.44...
"ian field" wrote in
:

One thing I have been trying to find out if anyone knows, is how much
lead the petroleum industry procured annually for TEL additives before
leaded petrol was discontinued, the figures I read somewhere (can't
remember where, or how much!) were huge - thousands of tons of lead
converted into exhaust particulates to be inhaled, washed onto
agricultural land and into the water table, I suspect that lead in
solder is insignificant compared to previous usage of TEL!

Yes, but the lead coming out of tailpipes was widely distributed in the
air, whereas electronics that wind up in landfill dumps just sit there
for a long time and continuously leach their chemicals into the nearby
ground, whence it flows down into water tables and gets into drinking
water. I'd prefer my drinking water lead-free, thank you.

Sorry - aint gonna happen! Remember where lead came from in the first place?

Better to use it up into a stable corrosion resistant alloy that effectively
removes it from the environment!

If you really feel that strongly about lead in the water table, maybe you'd
better invest in a ground penetrating radar set and seek out all the
abandoned lead pipes.

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
news
"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"mc" wrote in message
.. .
Given that it's desirable to do repairs with the same type of solder
as was used originally, in order to avoid alloy mixing or partial
melting problems...

(1) How do I recognize lead-free solder when I see it?

(2) What temperature should I set my iron to, when working with SnSb
or SnAg solder?

Thanks!


It has been recommended by the creators of the half-arsed RoHS
directive, that manufacturers mark their boards with the alloy that
has been used. To date, I think I have probably seen about 2 or 3. In
general, boards made with lead-free, look as though every joint is bad
( and often, this is pretty much the case !! ). Instead of the joints
having a shiny appearance, and being domed or meniscus-shaped, they
are dull and grey, decidedly 'crystalline' looking, and tend to be
volcano-shaped, with straight sides.

snip

Any chance the half-arsed RoHS directive was thought up by the stuck up
gits who pepper the countryside with 12bore lead shot?

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway, the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined lead,
over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery industry have
managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so are allowed to
carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention that there is no
suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE directive shortly, end
of life electronic equipment will have to be safely recycled in much the
same way, so where's the difference ? If the car battery people can do
it, I'm sure that the electronic people can also do it with less than
1/80th the volume.

The point about the RoHS directive as it stands with regard to leaded
solder, is that it is forcing a changeover from a mature, tried and
tested technology, which had reached the point of almost perfect
reliability, to a less than satisfactory alternative, with at best,
woolly reasoning to try to justify it. This is well understood by such
people as the US military, who refuse to use the stuff, the avionics
industry, who have obtained exemptions, and the medical instrument
industry, likewise. Any ecological advantage from the poisoning angle,
will probably be outweighed in the long run by the additional energy
budget worldwide to run all those solder production lines and hand
soldering irons 50 degrees hotter, and all the extra recycling brought
about by electronic equipment being junked earlier due to owners getting
fed up with all the intermittent problems from bad joints ...

Just keep your fingers crossed that avionics are not finally forced down
that route, coz that'll be the day that I stop flying.

Arfa


Some good points there, I didn't know lead was no longer used for 12bore
shot - any idea what they use instead?

Regardless of the WEEE directive, lead was originally mined out of the
ground and one way or another it will eventually end up back there, also
I had always held the opinion that the common solder alloys were
substantially less toxic than lead on its own, if this is true then the
manufacture of lead/tin solder actually reduces the availability of lead
wherever it ends up at end of life.


I have a friend who owns a clay range. A few years back, there was a big
thing locally about shot from his range ending up in a wheat field behind.
This also lead to complaints on the noise issue. As far as I recall, they
changed over to a different cartridge, that has a non-lead shot content,
and a lower velocity powder charge, which cuts down on the noise, making
more of a soft whumph noise than the previous sharp bangs. I haven't seen
him for a while, nor been to the range, so I don't know what the effects
of this have been on the sport, but I will try to find out, if you like.

I think that the issue with ' out of the ground / back to the ground '
that's usually quoted, is that it came out of the ground as a naturally
occuring ore, but goes back as refined lead. But I'm still not convinced
that this whole thing is not just an eco smokescreen, keeping beaurocrats
in a job. I'm sure that there are much more hazardous substances getting
into the eco system, than lead from solder.

Arfa

Arfa


If you can find out that would be great - I thought I overheard somewhere
that they merely coated the lead shot with bismuth.

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Arfa Daily" wrote in
:


"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined
lead, over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery
industry have managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so
are allowed to carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention
that there is no suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE
directive shortly, end of life electronic equipment will have to be
safely recycled in much the same way, so where's the difference ? If
the car battery people can do it, I'm sure that the electronic people
can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First to Jim two posts above. You are missing the point. The
electronic waste will no longer sit in landfill, because the new WEEE
directive, in Europe at least, will make sure that the equipment is
recycled, and any lead content removed. Electronic equipment in
landfill will soon become a thing of the past. Anyway, just how
soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure, but I expect some clever
chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water was delivered to
all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older properties,
it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead pipework.
I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead poisoning,
or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced brain
damage. In fact, since lead piping has been being removed here, the
kids have been getting progressively thicker ... !! I have heard
people say that delivering water via lead pipes is of no consequence,
because the pipes quickly get an internal coating of limescale, that
insulates the water from the lead, but some areas of the country have
very soft water, with little or no calcium content, so I'm not sure
that this argument " holds water " ( ouch !! ).

Even if lead is soluble in water, I can't imagine that it is extremely
so, and I would have thought that water treatment plants would have
removed any in their raw input, or could be made to do so fairly
easily. Of much more concern, I would have thought, must be the
organic fertilizers and such that get into the water supply. I don't
know what the situation is your side of the pond ( I'm assuming you
are US based ) regarding landfill. All we ever hear over here, is that
your glorious leader is not a very eco-friendly guy, but I'm sure from
what I've seen on my frequent visits, that isn't the case amongst the
general population.

To Franc. I'm not sure what the percentage of lead is in the
lead-glass that is used for CRT faceplates, but as far as I am aware,
it's another technology that has been deemed not to have a viable
alternative, so has been granted an exemption from the RoHS directive.
Total recycling of this glass should be possible, with no
lead-to-environment contamination. As well as the faceplate glass, I
seem to recall that there is some issue also, with getting a
vacuum-proof seal between the CRT pins and the glass, that involves
possibly some other hazardous substance covered by the directive.
Interesting stuff. If anyone has any strong objections on the grounds
of this being off-topic, say so, and I'll stop raising new points ...

Arfa




I believe the lead in CRT glass does not leach out.
It's probably the monitor electronics is where the lead is coming from.
Also,it's not just the faceplate the lead-glass is used,as the lead is
intended to attenuate X-rays which I believe scatter BACK from the target.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Lead glass is widely used in decorative table glassware - but then the
Romans used to eat off pewter plates which is pretty much solder by another
name!!!

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
.. .
"Arfa Daily" wrote in
:


"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
news On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:48:02 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Most shot used in clay shooting is no longer lead, I seem to recall.
Anyway,
the point is that if it is, it is not recycled, so remains lying
where it is. Solder accounts for less than 1% of the world's mined
lead, over 80% going to car battery manufacture. The car battery
industry have managed to organise virtually 100% safe recycling, so
are allowed to carry on using lead on this basis, and the contention
that there is no suitable alternative. With the coming of the WEEE
directive shortly, end of life electronic equipment will have to be
safely recycled in much the same way, so where's the difference ? If
the car battery people can do it, I'm sure that the electronic people
can also do it with less than 1/80th the volume.

I wonder how much lead is in a typical CRT? BTW, I googled for "lead
free CRT" but got very few hits.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

First to Jim two posts above. You are missing the point. The
electronic waste will no longer sit in landfill, because the new WEEE
directive, in Europe at least, will make sure that the equipment is
recycled, and any lead content removed. Electronic equipment in
landfill will soon become a thing of the past. Anyway, just how
soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure, but I expect some clever
chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water was delivered to
all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older properties,
it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead pipework.
I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead poisoning,
or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced brain
damage. In fact, since lead piping has been being removed here, the
kids have been getting progressively thicker ... !! I have heard
people say that delivering water via lead pipes is of no consequence,
because the pipes quickly get an internal coating of limescale, that
insulates the water from the lead, but some areas of the country have
very soft water, with little or no calcium content, so I'm not sure
that this argument " holds water " ( ouch !! ).

Even if lead is soluble in water, I can't imagine that it is extremely
so, and I would have thought that water treatment plants would have
removed any in their raw input, or could be made to do so fairly
easily. Of much more concern, I would have thought, must be the
organic fertilizers and such that get into the water supply. I don't
know what the situation is your side of the pond ( I'm assuming you
are US based ) regarding landfill. All we ever hear over here, is that
your glorious leader is not a very eco-friendly guy, but I'm sure from
what I've seen on my frequent visits, that isn't the case amongst the
general population.

To Franc. I'm not sure what the percentage of lead is in the
lead-glass that is used for CRT faceplates, but as far as I am aware,
it's another technology that has been deemed not to have a viable
alternative, so has been granted an exemption from the RoHS directive.
Total recycling of this glass should be possible, with no
lead-to-environment contamination. As well as the faceplate glass, I
seem to recall that there is some issue also, with getting a
vacuum-proof seal between the CRT pins and the glass, that involves
possibly some other hazardous substance covered by the directive.
Interesting stuff. If anyone has any strong objections on the grounds
of this being off-topic, say so, and I'll stop raising new points ...

Arfa




I believe the lead in CRT glass does not leach out.
It's probably the monitor electronics is where the lead is coming from.
Also,it's not just the faceplate the lead-glass is used,as the lead is
intended to attenuate X-rays which I believe scatter BACK from the
target.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Now I come to think back to my college theory days ( blimey, that was a
long time ago ! ) I seem to recall that the x-ray emissions from a
monochrome tube are barely detectable, and those from a colour tube, only
fall into the weak and soft category, due to there only being around 25kV
available for acceleration, and that the electron beam is not streamed
directly onto a target anode. Indeed, the beam doesn't impact on a
physical anode as such, at all, but requires a DC path for the spent
electrons to return to the power supply, and that seems to ring distant
bells in the cobweb-y recesses of my brain, as being the reason that lead
doped glass is used for the faceplate ie to make it sufficiently
conductive that it forms a high impedance return path back to ground via
the rimband.

On the other hand, going back to the early days of colour television, when
a GY501 HV rectifier and a PD500 shunt stabilizer were used, these two
thermionic devices *did* produce significant x-radiation due to the
electrons impinging on a genuine tungsten anode, hence the reason that if
you were working on the HOP stage with the cage removed, you needed to put
a lead glass shield around the shunt stabilizer tube, but if you were just
working on the set in general, no such protection for your nuts from CRT
x-radiation was required. Must've worked tho' as I've got three kids ...

I also seem to recall that in order for *useful* hard x-rays to be
produced, a proper x-ray tube runs with 90kV + ??

Arfa


Those were hatefull sets to work on - I held onto my day job until the
setmakers started to introduce designs with (non shunt) regulated EHT!

On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:53:42 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

See:
http://www.floridacenter.org/publica...ility_99-5.pdf
The proceedure is to test for leaching using moderately acidic water
(Ph = 5.0) and to literally pulverize the glass to accellerate the
leaching (See Method Phase I). As expected this yielded the worst
case results at about 3 times the US limits.

I didn't realise that it had got as
far as trying to ban lead glass over there.

We have a substantial number of "environmental activists" that
actively persue their agendas in the courts and the legislatures. I'm
somewhat on the fence as to their motives and effectiveness. In most
cases, they genuinely believe that what they're doing is saving the
world or preventing some disaster. The problem is that I see as much
environmental abuse by companies and manufactories, as I see abuse by
environmental activists. It's a miserable way to achieve a workable
compromise, but it's all we have.

The issue over lead testing is a marginal example of abuse on both
sides. The environmentalists want to remove lead from just about
everything on the grounds that it's lowering their own IQ. At the
present time, something like 90 to 95% of all lead acid batteries are
properly recycled. Using that as an indication of success, the
environmental activists expanded the program to other uses for lead.
However, unlike batteries, there's no positive financial incentive to
recycle CRT's or circuit boards. So, they provide a negative
incentive. In California, we pay a tax on CRT's, in advance, to pay
for recycling. What's hillarious is that it also includes LCD panels
with have almost no lead in them. Since this is revenue for the
state, the politicians are all for it. The vendors don't care because
they just pass the cost on to the consumer.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Electronics/

In effect, what the money had done is pre-pay the waste disposal
charges. The county would previously charge $10 per monitor to accept
it at the municipal dump. Now, it's just part of the usual handling
fee (currently $8 per pickup truck load). The monitors are seperated
and handled as hazardous waste.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Electronics/.../Retailer/Fee/
http://www.boe.ca.gov/sptaxprog/ewaste.htm

Some photos of the pile. The older photos show computers, printers,
and hi-fi's, which are no longer recycled along with the CRT's.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/e-waste/index.html

Also, not everyone believes the lead recycling figures:
http://www.things.org/~jym/greenpeac...recycling.html
Also, we tend to export our recycling to 3rd world countries with
limited environmental regulations. These countries method of
recycling the lead tends to be rather disgusting, such as building a
big bon-fire, and collecting the melted solder or lead.

But very weak anyway, certainly nothing like as low a
ph as 5, I wouldn't have thought. Of course, there is genuine acid rain,

It's not the acid rain. It's the water leachate from the landfill
that's fairly acidic. The local landfill uses a clay sealer to reduce
water incursion into the landfill. Despite such efforts, acidic water
found in a nearby creek requires treatment to prevent killing
everything alive.

created by pollution in the atmosphere, but I would have thought that if it
was reaching anywhere near 5, every piece of exposed metal would be rotting
away every 2 years, and that there were serious and more pressing problems
with the legislation regarding reducing and removing atmospheric emmissions
from factories.

It doesn't get anywhere near PH=5 from acid rain. However, the use of
such acidic water is part of the test because in some parts of the
country, it is possible to have such an acidic runnoff due to minerals
in the soil, industrial runoff, or previous pollution. Same with
pulverizing the glass. The EPA tests for the worst case senario. I
don't approve of this, but I suspect that nobody wanted to deal with
regional testing variations.

risk, and I really honestly believe that lead in solder is such a low risk
issue - particularly in view of the fact that additional legislation has
been put in place to deal with that risk

http://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/a...001/4-lead.htm
http://www.mcsba.org/ed_news/lead.html
http://www.who.int/docstore/peh/burd...ethodan6-6.htm
http://www.unhp.org/lead.html

I think the efforts are justified. What else could explain the lack
of intelligent thinking currently epidemic in the US government?

that the problems its removal is
causing to the electronics manufacturing and repair industries, far outweigh
any short or long term advantages.

Lead poisoning is apparently cumulative. If we project the current
increased levels found in the environment, we are approaching
concentrations which will be difficult to avoid much less remove from
the environment. Better to get rid of the stuff while we can. I
don't like the methods and rationalizations by the environmental
activists, but the cause is justified.

If end of life electronic equipment is now going to be properly recycled
under control of law, then there is no need to replace a valid, mature, and
above all reliable technology, with one that has disastrous potential ...

Nope. Just CRT's. We'll get to electronics eventually.

Incidentally, I once obtained a large pile of NiCad AA cells from a
volume user. It seems it was cheaper to just give me the batteries
than to deal with the handling and paperwork of proper disposal. I
recently also picked up a large pile of fairly good UPS gel-cell
batteries for the same reason. I *LIKE* such laws.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 08:53:42 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:

See:
http://www.floridacenter.org/publica...ility_99-5.pdf
The proceedure is to test for leaching using moderately acidic water
(Ph = 5.0) and to literally pulverize the glass to accellerate the
leaching (See Method Phase I). As expected this yielded the worst
case results at about 3 times the US limits.

I didn't realise that it had got as
far as trying to ban lead glass over there.

We have a substantial number of "environmental activists" that
actively persue their agendas in the courts and the legislatures. I'm
somewhat on the fence as to their motives and effectiveness. In most
cases, they genuinely believe that what they're doing is saving the
world or preventing some disaster. The problem is that I see as much
environmental abuse by companies and manufactories, as I see abuse by
environmental activists. It's a miserable way to achieve a workable
compromise, but it's all we have.

The issue over lead testing is a marginal example of abuse on both
sides. The environmentalists want to remove lead from just about
everything on the grounds that it's lowering their own IQ. At the
present time, something like 90 to 95% of all lead acid batteries are
properly recycled. Using that as an indication of success, the
environmental activists expanded the program to other uses for lead.
However, unlike batteries, there's no positive financial incentive to
recycle CRT's or circuit boards. So, they provide a negative
incentive. In California, we pay a tax on CRT's, in advance, to pay
for recycling. What's hillarious is that it also includes LCD panels
with have almost no lead in them. Since this is revenue for the
state, the politicians are all for it. The vendors don't care because
they just pass the cost on to the consumer.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Electronics/

In effect, what the money had done is pre-pay the waste disposal
charges. The county would previously charge $10 per monitor to accept
it at the municipal dump. Now, it's just part of the usual handling
fee (currently $8 per pickup truck load). The monitors are seperated
and handled as hazardous waste.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Electronics/.../Retailer/Fee/
http://www.boe.ca.gov/sptaxprog/ewaste.htm

Some photos of the pile. The older photos show computers, printers,
and hi-fi's, which are no longer recycled along with the CRT's.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/e-waste/index.html

Also, not everyone believes the lead recycling figures:
http://www.things.org/~jym/greenpeac...recycling.html
Also, we tend to export our recycling to 3rd world countries with
limited environmental regulations. These countries method of
recycling the lead tends to be rather disgusting, such as building a
big bon-fire, and collecting the melted solder or lead.

But very weak anyway, certainly nothing like as low a
ph as 5, I wouldn't have thought. Of course, there is genuine acid rain,

It's not the acid rain. It's the water leachate from the landfill
that's fairly acidic. The local landfill uses a clay sealer to reduce
water incursion into the landfill. Despite such efforts, acidic water
found in a nearby creek requires treatment to prevent killing
everything alive.

created by pollution in the atmosphere, but I would have thought that if
it
was reaching anywhere near 5, every piece of exposed metal would be
rotting
away every 2 years, and that there were serious and more pressing problems
with the legislation regarding reducing and removing atmospheric
emmissions
from factories.

It doesn't get anywhere near PH=5 from acid rain. However, the use of
such acidic water is part of the test because in some parts of the
country, it is possible to have such an acidic runnoff due to minerals
in the soil, industrial runoff, or previous pollution. Same with
pulverizing the glass. The EPA tests for the worst case senario. I
don't approve of this, but I suspect that nobody wanted to deal with
regional testing variations.

risk, and I really honestly believe that lead in solder is such a low risk
issue - particularly in view of the fact that additional legislation has
been put in place to deal with that risk

http://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/a...001/4-lead.htm
http://www.mcsba.org/ed_news/lead.html
http://www.who.int/docstore/peh/burd...ethodan6-6.htm
http://www.unhp.org/lead.html

I think the efforts are justified. What else could explain the lack
of intelligent thinking currently epidemic in the US government?

that the problems its removal is
causing to the electronics manufacturing and repair industries, far
outweigh
any short or long term advantages.

Lead poisoning is apparently cumulative. If we project the current
increased levels found in the environment, we are approaching
concentrations which will be difficult to avoid much less remove from
the environment. Better to get rid of the stuff while we can. I
don't like the methods and rationalizations by the environmental
activists, but the cause is justified.

If end of life electronic equipment is now going to be properly recycled
under control of law, then there is no need to replace a valid, mature,
and
above all reliable technology, with one that has disastrous potential ...

Nope. Just CRT's. We'll get to electronics eventually.

Incidentally, I once obtained a large pile of NiCad AA cells from a
volume user. It seems it was cheaper to just give me the batteries
than to deal with the handling and paperwork of proper disposal. I
recently also picked up a large pile of fairly good UPS gel-cell
batteries for the same reason. I *LIKE* such laws.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Jeff

I see all the same arguments regarding children's IQ and lead over here, but
the figures don't seem to add up. When I was a kid, all water was delivered
to houses in lead pipes - and yes, I know all the stuff about the insides of
the pipes coating up with calcium - and all soldered joints on copper pipes
were done with a traditional lead solder. All vehicle petrol ( gasoline )
contained lead for its anti-knock properties. This lead content, for the
most part, went straight out of the cars' tailpipes, and either straight
into our bodies through breathing, or into the eco system by way of
settlement and rain washing. This *must* have resulted in *much* higher
concentrations than we now have, since lead has been removed from petrol.

On this basis, our generation should be the peak of decline in lead-induced
IQ poorness. But look around you. Would you honestly believe that to be so ?
I would consider myself to be of probably a bit above average intelligence
for my generation. I went to a Grammar School, where I neither shone, nor
failed - I was an average kid at that type of school. Now, compared to those
who go to the top schools that we have, I'm a bloody genius. So why are kids
now so thick ? Our illustrious leader Blair, who you couldn't trust to give
you info or figures that weren't covered in massage oil anyway, insists that
kids are getting more and more intelligent by the year. Something ridiculous
like 95% of them now pass their final exams with A or A* grades. Presumably,
apart from his wonderful ( ha! ) education system, lack of lead in their
brains is the reason for this - but wait ! They are actually, in general,
THICK now compared to a couple of generations ago, when there was a lot more
lead around. They manage to get these grades because they are not now taught
the knowledge required to pass any exam on the subject, but the knowledge to
pass the specific one that they are going to get ... I used to talk to a lot
of my own kids' friends, and we see plenty on the TV, and I can't believe
just how far down the toilet, intelligence has gone.

But it's nothing to do with lead in the eco system. It's a social issue.
It's all about attitudes, and half-arsed new teaching methods, and having
classroom assistants who are not qualified or sufficiently intelligent
themselves, to be interacting with our kids. I know a latter-day teacher,
who still doesn't know the difference between the words "bought" and
"brought", so there's another generation of kids on the slippery slope.

If taking lead out of petrol, which when it was in, was by far the best way
of getting pure lead into people, has not reversed this trend, then messing
about removing lead that's locked up chemically in glass and solder, sure as
hell isn't going to have any significant effect. As far as poor recycling
methods in third world countries goes, that cannot be used as an excuse for
not doing it, or saying that the process of recycling is dangerous to
humans. It need not be, if it is carried out correctly.

I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other nasty
stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter of degree.
Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do they need to be on
dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we will always have to endure
some, if we want to carry on living the sorts of consumer-based lives that
we do. You can't protect everybody against everything, and I think that lead
in solder ( and CRTs ) is just one such example where the eco-warriors have
gotten their teeth into something that sounds bad, with apparent tangible
negative effects, and run with it to the point of introducing needless
legislation that costs billions to implement worldwide, has negative effects
on reliability, has already been taken care of with ( acceptable ) recycling
legislation, and results in a worldwide increase in energy budget - with all
that's known of the genuine negative eco effects from that - to implement
use of lead-free solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it has now
been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be " where is it
really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they would have a hard time
proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa

snip


I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other
nasty stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter of
degree. Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do they need
to be on dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we will always
have to endure some, if we want to carry on living the sorts of
consumer-based lives that we do. You can't protect everybody against
everything, and I think that lead in solder ( and CRTs ) is just one such
example where the eco-warriors have gotten their teeth into something that
sounds bad, with apparent tangible negative effects, and run with it to
the point of introducing needless legislation that costs billions to
implement worldwide, has negative effects on reliability, has already been
taken care of with ( acceptable ) recycling legislation, and results in a
worldwide increase in energy budget - with all that's known of the genuine
negative eco effects from that - to implement use of lead-free solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it has
now been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be " where
is it really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they would have a
hard time proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa


Maybe do a search on lead procurement in general - find out where its going
now, it may be possible to queer the eco-warriors pitch by extending the
campaign to even more ridiculous extremes.

It could be there's some use for lead that the legislators who pass this
crap can't do without!

"ian field" wrote in message
...

snip


I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other
nasty stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter of
degree. Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do they
need to be on dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we will
always have to endure some, if we want to carry on living the sorts of
consumer-based lives that we do. You can't protect everybody against
everything, and I think that lead in solder ( and CRTs ) is just one such
example where the eco-warriors have gotten their teeth into something
that sounds bad, with apparent tangible negative effects, and run with it
to the point of introducing needless legislation that costs billions to
implement worldwide, has negative effects on reliability, has already
been taken care of with ( acceptable ) recycling legislation, and results
in a worldwide increase in energy budget - with all that's known of the
genuine negative eco effects from that - to implement use of lead-free
solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it has
now been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be "
where is it really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they would
have a hard time proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa


Maybe do a search on lead procurement in general - find out where its
going now, it may be possible to queer the eco-warriors pitch by extending
the campaign to even more ridiculous extremes.

It could be there's some use for lead that the legislators who pass this
crap can't do without!

I've just been having a look to see where it all goes, and the bulk still
seems to be to the auto battery manufacturers. Other major uses are paint,
although now only used for specials such as are used to paint bridges, lead
crystal glass, and roofing materials ( how long I wonder before lead
flashing on roofs gets banned, in favour of some other useles material that
doesn't seal as well, and needs to be replaced every 5 years ? ). Some of
the stuff relating to lead and its poisonous qualities, makes interesting
reading. For instance, it was chosen for making pipes for carrying water,
because of its extreme resistance to corrosion, by water. For "corrosion",
read chemical decomposition and release into the water ?? I also found
statements that once lead had found its way into the ground, from
particulate settlement of leaded gasoline exhaust fumes etc, it would remain
there forever. Hmmm. So how then, in that case, does it get transformed into
any kind of pollutant, that can get into us, and cause problems. Same goes
for lead locked up in solder, in landfills.

Also, looking at material on the dangers of lead ingestion, it seems to be a
predominantly child based issue, and the word " chronic " seems to keep
cropping up in all of the different articles. In this context, " chronic "
seems to indicate extremely high levels of lead ingestion, and even then, it
says that this only *may* lead to reduced IQ. It also says that symptoms of
lead poisoning are non specific and non unique, whatever that may mean.

Again, I accept that lead poisoning is very possibly an issue with certain
groups of children, but it surely must be asked where they are getting these
high concentrations of lead in their bloodstreams from ? I'm sure that it's
not from lead in solder, or solder that's found its way into landfill.

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
...

snip


I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other
nasty stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter of
degree. Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do they
need to be on dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we will
always have to endure some, if we want to carry on living the sorts of
consumer-based lives that we do. You can't protect everybody against
everything, and I think that lead in solder ( and CRTs ) is just one
such example where the eco-warriors have gotten their teeth into
something that sounds bad, with apparent tangible negative effects, and
run with it to the point of introducing needless legislation that costs
billions to implement worldwide, has negative effects on reliability,
has already been taken care of with ( acceptable ) recycling
legislation, and results in a worldwide increase in energy budget - with
all that's known of the genuine negative eco effects from that - to
implement use of lead-free solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it has
now been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be "
where is it really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they would
have a hard time proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa


Maybe do a search on lead procurement in general - find out where its
going now, it may be possible to queer the eco-warriors pitch by
extending the campaign to even more ridiculous extremes.

It could be there's some use for lead that the legislators who pass this
crap can't do without!

I've just been having a look to see where it all goes, and the bulk still
seems to be to the auto battery manufacturers. Other major uses are paint,
although now only used for specials such as are used to paint bridges,
lead crystal glass, and roofing materials ( how long I wonder before lead
flashing on roofs gets banned, in favour of some other useles material
that doesn't seal as well, and needs to be replaced every 5 years ? ).
Some of the stuff relating to lead and its poisonous qualities, makes
interesting reading. For instance, it was chosen for making pipes for
carrying water, because of its extreme resistance to corrosion, by water.
For "corrosion", read chemical decomposition and release into the water ??
I also found statements that once lead had found its way into the ground,
from particulate settlement of leaded gasoline exhaust fumes etc, it would
remain there forever. Hmmm. So how then, in that case, does it get
transformed into any kind of pollutant, that can get into us, and cause
problems. Same goes for lead locked up in solder, in landfills.

Also, looking at material on the dangers of lead ingestion, it seems to be
a predominantly child based issue, and the word " chronic " seems to keep
cropping up in all of the different articles. In this context, " chronic
" seems to indicate extremely high levels of lead ingestion, and even
then, it says that this only *may* lead to reduced IQ. It also says that
symptoms of lead poisoning are non specific and non unique, whatever that
may mean.

Again, I accept that lead poisoning is very possibly an issue with certain
groups of children, but it surely must be asked where they are getting
these high concentrations of lead in their bloodstreams from ? I'm sure
that it's not from lead in solder, or solder that's found its way into
landfill.

Arfa


RoHS is a complete load of old bull**** and needs to be exposed as such!!!

"ian field" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
...

snip


I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other
nasty stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter
of degree. Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do
they need to be on dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we
will always have to endure some, if we want to carry on living the
sorts of consumer-based lives that we do. You can't protect everybody
against everything, and I think that lead in solder ( and CRTs ) is
just one such example where the eco-warriors have gotten their teeth
into something that sounds bad, with apparent tangible negative
effects, and run with it to the point of introducing needless
legislation that costs billions to implement worldwide, has negative
effects on reliability, has already been taken care of with (
acceptable ) recycling legislation, and results in a worldwide increase
in energy budget - with all that's known of the genuine negative eco
effects from that - to implement use of lead-free solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it has
now been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be "
where is it really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they would
have a hard time proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa


Maybe do a search on lead procurement in general - find out where its
going now, it may be possible to queer the eco-warriors pitch by
extending the campaign to even more ridiculous extremes.

It could be there's some use for lead that the legislators who pass this
crap can't do without!

I've just been having a look to see where it all goes, and the bulk still
seems to be to the auto battery manufacturers. Other major uses are
paint, although now only used for specials such as are used to paint
bridges, lead crystal glass, and roofing materials ( how long I wonder
before lead flashing on roofs gets banned, in favour of some other useles
material that doesn't seal as well, and needs to be replaced every 5
years ? ). Some of the stuff relating to lead and its poisonous
qualities, makes interesting reading. For instance, it was chosen for
making pipes for carrying water, because of its extreme resistance to
corrosion, by water. For "corrosion", read chemical decomposition and
release into the water ?? I also found statements that once lead had
found its way into the ground, from particulate settlement of leaded
gasoline exhaust fumes etc, it would remain there forever. Hmmm. So how
then, in that case, does it get transformed into any kind of pollutant,
that can get into us, and cause problems. Same goes for lead locked up in
solder, in landfills.

Also, looking at material on the dangers of lead ingestion, it seems to
be a predominantly child based issue, and the word " chronic " seems to
keep cropping up in all of the different articles. In this context, "
chronic " seems to indicate extremely high levels of lead ingestion, and
even then, it says that this only *may* lead to reduced IQ. It also says
that symptoms of lead poisoning are non specific and non unique, whatever
that may mean.

Again, I accept that lead poisoning is very possibly an issue with
certain groups of children, but it surely must be asked where they are
getting these high concentrations of lead in their bloodstreams from ?
I'm sure that it's not from lead in solder, or solder that's found its
way into landfill.

Arfa


RoHS is a complete load of old bull**** and needs to be exposed as such!!!

Amen to that Ian, but I fear that if the manufacturers haven't managed to
stand up to the powers that be, the chances of us being able to be heard,
are slim to zero ...

Just gotta live with it I fear, and moan and bitch for the fun of it, and
having it make us feel better about it all. I take it you are UK based, and
involved in the trade ??

Arfa

On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:41:32 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Anyway, just how soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure,
but I expect some clever chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past, water
was delivered to all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of older
properties, it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead
pipework. I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead
poisoning, or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced
brain damage.

Here's an interesting case of lead poisoning:

http://www.lead.org.au/lanv4n3/lanv4n3-19.html

"According to the Medical Journal of Australia, in 1995 an Australian
man and his wife were lead poisoned by drinking non-alcoholic
carbonated beverages from a pewter mug purchased 10 years previously
in Malaysia. [Ref: Scarlett et al, MJA Vol 163 4/18 December 1995 p
589-590]"

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

On 17 Jun 2006 00:04:15 GMT, Jim Yanik put finger
to keyboard and composed:

I believe the lead in CRT glass does not leach out.
It's probably the monitor electronics is where the lead is coming from.
Also,it's not just the faceplate the lead-glass is used,as the lead is
intended to attenuate X-rays which I believe scatter BACK from the target.

According to this article, the majority of the lead is in the funnel
and neck:

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/...ing/index.html

The same article has this to say about the leaching of lead into the
water table:

"Akatiff says that even with tens of thousands of CRTs buried in his
landfill, about 80 percent of the monitoring wells surrounding the
facility show no evidence of lead. A few show trace amounts, he says,
levels that have also been also been detected in other California
landfills."

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
...

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...

"ian field" wrote in message
...

snip


I agree that efforts to control poisons and hormones and all the other
nasty stuff that gets into our lives, are laudable, but it's a matter
of degree. Some pollutants can never be practically removed, nor do
they need to be on dubious eco-grounds. It is a fact of life that we
will always have to endure some, if we want to carry on living the
sorts of consumer-based lives that we do. You can't protect everybody
against everything, and I think that lead in solder ( and CRTs ) is
just one such example where the eco-warriors have gotten their teeth
into something that sounds bad, with apparent tangible negative
effects, and run with it to the point of introducing needless
legislation that costs billions to implement worldwide, has negative
effects on reliability, has already been taken care of with (
acceptable ) recycling legislation, and results in a worldwide
increase in energy budget - with all that's known of the genuine
negative eco effects from that - to implement use of lead-free solder.

If lead in the environment is really still going up, even though it
has now been removed from petrol, the most pressing question should be
" where is it really coming from ? " I'm willing to bet that they
would have a hard time proving it was from either solder or CRTs ...

Arfa


Maybe do a search on lead procurement in general - find out where its
going now, it may be possible to queer the eco-warriors pitch by
extending the campaign to even more ridiculous extremes.

It could be there's some use for lead that the legislators who pass
this crap can't do without!

I've just been having a look to see where it all goes, and the bulk
still seems to be to the auto battery manufacturers. Other major uses
are paint, although now only used for specials such as are used to paint
bridges, lead crystal glass, and roofing materials ( how long I wonder
before lead flashing on roofs gets banned, in favour of some other
useles material that doesn't seal as well, and needs to be replaced
every 5 years ? ). Some of the stuff relating to lead and its poisonous
qualities, makes interesting reading. For instance, it was chosen for
making pipes for carrying water, because of its extreme resistance to
corrosion, by water. For "corrosion", read chemical decomposition and
release into the water ?? I also found statements that once lead had
found its way into the ground, from particulate settlement of leaded
gasoline exhaust fumes etc, it would remain there forever. Hmmm. So how
then, in that case, does it get transformed into any kind of pollutant,
that can get into us, and cause problems. Same goes for lead locked up
in solder, in landfills.

Also, looking at material on the dangers of lead ingestion, it seems to
be a predominantly child based issue, and the word " chronic " seems to
keep cropping up in all of the different articles. In this context, "
chronic " seems to indicate extremely high levels of lead ingestion, and
even then, it says that this only *may* lead to reduced IQ. It also says
that symptoms of lead poisoning are non specific and non unique,
whatever that may mean.

Again, I accept that lead poisoning is very possibly an issue with
certain groups of children, but it surely must be asked where they are
getting these high concentrations of lead in their bloodstreams from ?
I'm sure that it's not from lead in solder, or solder that's found its
way into landfill.

Arfa


RoHS is a complete load of old bull**** and needs to be exposed as
such!!!

Amen to that Ian, but I fear that if the manufacturers haven't managed to
stand up to the powers that be, the chances of us being able to be heard,
are slim to zero ...

Just gotta live with it I fear, and moan and bitch for the fun of it, and
having it make us feel better about it all. I take it you are UK based,
and involved in the trade ??

Arfa


My main line was monitor repair (yes - UK) several things made it
unprofitable - resoldering masses of intermittent solder joints was one of
them, almost every single item had faulty soldering so a blanket resolder
was always required and cost a fortune in solder! Frequently the
intermittent joints caused other damage, some times rendering the equipment
beyond economic repair - so all the fresh solder was wasted!

The intermittent nature of lead free solder seems to have given consumers a
perception that once an item develops any kind of fault, it will go on to
give no end of trouble no matter how competently repaired - so they are far
more likely to just bin it and buy a new one!

"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 23:41:32 GMT, "Arfa Daily"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Anyway, just how soluble is lead in water ? I'm not too sure,
but I expect some clever chemistry graduate will tell us. In the past,
water
was delivered to all households in the UK via lead pipes. In a lot of
older
properties, it still is. Certainly, the house that I grew up in had lead
pipework. I am not aware of people of my generation all dying of lead
poisoning, or having suffered intelligence lowering due to lead-induced
brain damage.

Here's an interesting case of lead poisoning:

http://www.lead.org.au/lanv4n3/lanv4n3-19.html

"According to the Medical Journal of Australia, in 1995 an Australian
man and his wife were lead poisoned by drinking non-alcoholic
carbonated beverages from a pewter mug purchased 10 years previously
in Malaysia. [Ref: Scarlett et al, MJA Vol 163 4/18 December 1995 p
589-590]"

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

Interesting reading. Do you set much store by what they say, or is it a case
of another bunch of fanatics who make everything sound right for their cause
?

I'm not sure. Some of the cases cited do seem to have an element of the
fantastic ( as in fantasy ) about them. I must admit that I am always a
little sceptical about organisations that have to make up long involved
names that can then have their initial letters made into an acronym that
reflects their function like in this case " LEAD " and " GLASS " and " PAN
".

The cited case of the six farm workers that became " paralytic after
drinking cider taken to them at harvest work etc " actually tells us nothing
about the effects of glaze in the earthenwear pot, that can be taken as any
kind of proof of lead poisoning. Indeed, lead poisoning is generally taken
to be a long term cumulative affair, and I would be very surprised if that
sort of illness could be brought on by one session of drinking from a
flaggon with lead bearing glaze. Rather, I would suggest, becoming paralytic
was more likely to be an effect of drinking the cider itself. Anyone who
knows this local rough-fermented brew, which is normally known as "scrumpy",
will tell you that it's looney-juice. One pint of the stuff is enough to put
a big guy on his back, if he's not used to it. It's like drinking apple
brandy ...

On the other hand, the case of the pair poisoned by the pewter mug over ten
years, sounds reasonably possible, given that they were drinking some kind
of ( unspecified ) fizzy reactive beverage from it, which if fruit based,
may well have been quite acidic. Although we are told that they are poisoned
over this 10 year period, there is no specific information on what exactly
the symptoms of this poisoning were. Likewise, the guy who was awarded the
large sum for getting lead poisoned in an English pub. I'd like to actually
read that article, as this seems a very large sum for something that would
be as difficult to prove as that would be.

None of this actually makes me any less sceptical about the danger claims of
lead in solder, and CRTs, but it's all interesting stuff. Again, if anyone's
getting fed up with it all as off-topic rambling, please say so, and I'll
knock it on the head.

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

On the other hand, the case of the pair poisoned by the pewter mug over ten
years, sounds reasonably possible, given that they were drinking some kind
of ( unspecified ) fizzy reactive beverage from it, which if fruit based,
may well have been quite acidic.

I dig out my handy Exstik II PH meter and measu
Tap water : 6.7
Western Family Diet Lemon Lime: 4.1
Western Family Lemon Lime : 3.3
Coca Cola : 2.6
Ocean Spray Cramberry Cocktail: 3.5
Lemon Juice (added to tea) : 3.0

Oh, here's a PH table from the UK:
| http://www.britishsoftdrinks.com/htm...cids/acids.htm

Soda pop and fruit juices are sufficiently acidic to leach out the
lead in pipes and drinking cups.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

On the other hand, the case of the pair poisoned by the pewter mug over
ten
years, sounds reasonably possible, given that they were drinking some kind
of ( unspecified ) fizzy reactive beverage from it, which if fruit based,
may well have been quite acidic.

I dig out my handy Exstik II PH meter and measu
Tap water : 6.7
Western Family Diet Lemon Lime: 4.1
Western Family Lemon Lime : 3.3
Coca Cola : 2.6
Ocean Spray Cramberry Cocktail: 3.5
Lemon Juice (added to tea) : 3.0

Oh, here's a PH table from the UK:
|
http://www.britishsoftdrinks.com/htm...cids/acids.htm

Soda pop and fruit juices are sufficiently acidic to leach out the
lead in pipes and drinking cups.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

OK, thanks for that. Looking at some of those figures, no wonder these
drinks rot your teeth away! It's like drinking schoolboy chem lab bench
acids. I seem to recall that some of them weren't much lower ...

Still, that certainly confirms what I thought about the pewter mug case. We
still don't know what the actual effects of this long term exposure was to
these people, or exactly how much they ingested. I don't suppose that you
have a bottle of beer to test the ph of, do you? It used to be very common
over here for regulars in village pubs, to keep their own ( often pewter )
pint mug behinf the bar. In fact giving one of these as an 18th birthday
gift ( legal drinking age here ) was at one time quite a tradition. My next
door neighbour certainly used to take one with him every night to the local
pub, but I don't know if he still does. I'll have to ask him.

Arfa

"Arfa Daily" hath wroth:

I don't suppose that you
have a bottle of beer to test the ph of, do you?

Sorry. No beer here.
Various web sites suggest that a ph of 4.0 to 4.3 is typical.
--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558