Are regulations made by the wrong people???
Posted: September 2nd, 2013, 10:07 pmThe situation with RoHS and that it bans the use of leaded solder (but oddly, still permits cathode-ray tubes (which are made from leaded glass) and worse, mercury-containing fluorescent lamps) prompted this question: Is the problem that politicians are allowed to work with stuff they don't understand??? After all, you just can't get the same quality with lead-free solder and it seems rather hypocritical to ban SnPb solder (which, even if landfilled...
...doesn't present quite the hazard people seem to think it does) but still allow the same consumers access to lighting that presents a much more serious hazard if landfilled (which people do even if it's illegal). The rise of CFL retrofits (which, to add to the problem, are usually very badly made to minimise the production cost) doesn't help.
Obviously, shortening the life of electronics is anything but green, but the hippies didn't see it.
The real irony, though, is that the now-common SnAgCu solders are extremely energy-intensive to manufacture - and you know what that means.
Of course you're not going to hit the target if you do that.
I've heard that some people try to compare leaded solder to leaded petrol (the familiar example of large-scale lead poisoning), but they aren't even similar. The lead in petrol isn't even metallic lead - it's tetraeythllead, which doesn't have much of anything in common aside from the element being one of its components.
Actually, we already know what that's going to result in:
You could argue that consumer electronics will typically be thrown away before they fail, but that's the consumer's problem, not the manufacturer's. (Okay, you could blame the mega-brands for convincing people to buy more with their advertising campaigns, but the factory workers have no part in that.) Even then, the manufacturing cost of silver would probably negate any "advantage" of removing lead.
I would be all for using less toxic materials if it didn't come at the cost of reliability. But there are times when you just can't do that.
Natural weathering processes usually turn metallic lead and its compounds into compounds which are relatively stable and insoluble.
...doesn't present quite the hazard people seem to think it does) but still allow the same consumers access to lighting that presents a much more serious hazard if landfilled (which people do even if it's illegal). The rise of CFL retrofits (which, to add to the problem, are usually very badly made to minimise the production cost) doesn't help.
Obviously, shortening the life of electronics is anything but green, but the hippies didn't see it.
The real irony, though, is that the now-common SnAgCu solders are extremely energy-intensive to manufacture - and you know what that means.
Ready, Fire, Aim!
Of course you're not going to hit the target if you do that.
I've heard that some people try to compare leaded solder to leaded petrol (the familiar example of large-scale lead poisoning), but they aren't even similar. The lead in petrol isn't even metallic lead - it's tetraeythllead, which doesn't have much of anything in common aside from the element being one of its components.
Automotive electronics must be RoHS compliant in the EU by 2016
Actually, we already know what that's going to result in:
- “A 2005 Toyota Camry was located with a fault that had the potential
to injure, maim, or kill”- Detailed description obtained from the driver
- Pedal position assembly installed it into a Toyota-simulator and
duplicated the fault- The dual-potentiometer (the sensor used in the pedal position
assembly) was disassembled- 240 ohm leakage path between the two "taps" on the dual-pot was
caused by a tin whisker
You could argue that consumer electronics will typically be thrown away before they fail, but that's the consumer's problem, not the manufacturer's. (Okay, you could blame the mega-brands for convincing people to buy more with their advertising campaigns, but the factory workers have no part in that.) Even then, the manufacturing cost of silver would probably negate any "advantage" of removing lead.
I would be all for using less toxic materials if it didn't come at the cost of reliability. But there are times when you just can't do that.
