Lead free solder - exposed in a UK national newspaper

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann"
"Phil Allison"
( delete drivel)

The metal CRT shadow mask is fairly impervious to x-rays.

** Nonsense - the x-ray attenuation factor of thin Fe-Ni alloy is small.

What
electrons go through the holes in the shadow mask to light up the
phosphor dots, do not produce x-rays.

** Wiki disagrees.

You got a cite for that ?

Most travel backwards (reflected) which is why the funnel of the CRT
has much more lead in it than the screen.

** Maybe so, but the face glass is way thicker.

See appendix B at:
<http://www.eiae.org/chemicals/files/EIA_CRT_5-01.pdf>

** You must be desperate to use survey crapology as evidence.

The shadow mask is made from Invar for mechanical stability.

** Irrelevant to the point - fool.

When I was young (and stupid),

** When ???

It ain't changed.



...... Phil

 

[N_Cook]

I don't think that I would say that it has been done out of "sheer
stupidity" - more out of misinformed madness. My feeling is that once lead
had been determined to be a potential health hazard, as it probably was when
lead compounds were added to petrol as anti-knock agents, then all uses of
the material became automatically 'demonised', irrespective of whether any
threat from them was real, or imagined. The ecobollocks that I have referred
to elsewhere in this thread, has reached the point of unjustified hysteria
amongst both the politicos and, worryingly, the scientific establishment,
who should know better.

Governments rely heavily on so-called scientific advisors, but it seems to
me that many of these are receiving commercial grants from government, and
will tell them whatever they want to hear. Much of the current ecohysteria
that is reported in the press, is based on very dubious science, that in my
day, would have been thrown out of school for poor methodology. I, and most
others in the electronic service industry, simply do not believe that lead
in solder represents any threat to health, or the environment at all, and I
personally have seen no persuasive evidence from any quarter to convince me
otherwise.

I think that lead based solder is just an unfortunate victim of someone's
over-enthusiastic approach to anything containing lead, and the whole RoHS
thing has just swept it along with itself, without those who caused it in
the first place, understanding the full implications of just what they've
done. Apart from anything else, just consider how much extra power is being
used every day world wide, to run all of the production solder baths and
hand soldering tools, 30 or 40 degrees hotter than was needed for lead-based
solder ... Eco-friendly, or what ...?

Arfa

I recently went to a lecture by Jim Thurston, Medical Engineering and
Physics, King's College Hospital, London; mainly about hormesis and
background to the polonium murder of Litvinenko in London.

But at the end I asked for an explanation of something that has always
evaded me. Why some incinerator plants are licensed to incinerate low level
radioactive waste , as it gives the impression that you can rid radioactive
material be incineration, compared to landfill.

The answer, from that government scientific advisor, was along the lines
that a lot of it is for the purpose of incinerating biological hazard
material that is also radioctive.
Then it is a matter of distributing the plume of radioctive outfall , from
the smoke/gases, over as wide an area as possible, of adjascent
communnities.
It is some sort of ststistical exercise. Too much radiation per Kg then it
cannot be allowed to be dumped but if the radioctive component from that Kg
is distributed over some (unspecified) large area of land surface then that
is permitted.

 

[Arfa Daily]

I recently went to a lecture by Jim Thurston, Medical Engineering and
Physics, King's College Hospital, London; mainly about hormesis and
background to the polonium murder of Litvinenko in London.

But at the end I asked for an explanation of something that has always
evaded me. Why some incinerator plants are licensed to incinerate low
level
radioactive waste , as it gives the impression that you can rid
radioactive
material be incineration, compared to landfill.

The answer, from that government scientific advisor, was along the lines
that a lot of it is for the purpose of incinerating biological hazard
material that is also radioctive.
Then it is a matter of distributing the plume of radioctive outfall , from
the smoke/gases, over as wide an area as possible, of adjascent
communnities.
It is some sort of ststistical exercise. Too much radiation per Kg then it
cannot be allowed to be dumped but if the radioctive component from that
Kg
is distributed over some (unspecified) large area of land surface then
that
is permitted.

So that about says it, doesn't it ? 'Official' government advice from
someone that you would expect better of, based on what you would have to say
was at best, 'dubious science' !! It defies belief, but goes a long way
towards explaining to 'eco-believers' why things such as lead-free solder,
are actually nonsense ...

Arfa

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

---
In my opinion, this brouhaha about the elimination of lead in solder
has been brought about by Europe's (led by the UK, of course) trying
to bend everyone to their will, once again, (empire dies hard) with
the UK leading the charge by claiming that all lead based solders are
evil.

Idiots die hard.

JF

You clearly know nothing at all of Europe or its politics. If you seriously
believe that the UK is responsible for bringing about ANY Europe-wide
legislation, you are very seriously deluded. All Eurobollocks is driven by
the likes of France and Germany, and our emasculated government just roll
over at every opportunity, and follow like sheep. Do you actually know
anything of the British Empire's history ? It was not about bending people's
political will. It was about having a world united in friendship and trade.
Admittedly, it was about ensuring that the trade was to our global
advantage, but overall, the world was a better and more peaceful place back
in those days. Now, we have 'superpowers' like the US, who want every
country in the world to become another US state, with the same language,
political views, religion, consumer and oil driven economies and so on. And
you accuse US of trying to bend wills ? Sheesh.

Arfa

 

[Hattori Hanzo]

I assume you're being hyperbolic for humorous effect. But there is only a
tiny amount of mercury in a fluorescent tube.

Not only that, but it is pure metallic form Mercury, not some dangerous
compound(s).

A very small amount.... In the big, long tubes. An even smaller
amount in a desktop CFL.

 

[krw]

Yes, you retarded fuckhead.

First off, how fast is an electron moving when it is in free air or a
vacuum?

You said "whenever", Dimbulb. As always, you're AlwaysWrong.

If the return for a "source" of an electron or stream of electrons is
metallic, something those of us in the industry refer to as a target,
when said electron strikes that return point, it WILL emit X-rays.

If "it", no matter what the energy of the electron? Dimmie, you're
a prize!

An X-ray emitter tube for X-ray machines works on that very principle!

A beam of electrons strikes a Palladium return point or target, and
X-ray flux emission off the face of the target is one of the resultant
effects of said electron beam's entry into said return point.

The differences are in power level, and also different mediums exhibit
X_rays better than others.

The fact still remains, however,that ALL metals DO exhibit SOME amount
of X-rays when struck by an electron or electron beam.

ALL? No matter what the energy of the electrons?

So Shut The **** Up, KeithTard!

Dimbulb, you need to look in a mirror, if you can find one that
won't shatter!

 

[Rich Webb]

[snip...snip...]

The answer, from that government scientific advisor, was along the lines
that a lot of it is for the purpose of incinerating biological hazard
material that is also radioctive.
Then it is a matter of distributing the plume of radioctive outfall , from
the smoke/gases, over as wide an area as possible, of adjascent
communnities.

Brings to mind the old saying: The solution to pollution is dilution.
Thus, we now have oceanic dead zones off the coasts.

 

[Arfa Daily]

I assume you're being hyperbolic for humorous effect. But there is only a
tiny amount of mercury in a fluorescent tube.

You assume correctly. However, it is a serious point, because there is more
mercury in there than the official maximum limit for disposal in regular
household garbage in Europe (apparently). At my local dump, there is a
special bin for 'regular' fluorescent tubes, but no mention of CFLs, which
I'm sure that many people don't realise, also employ the same basic
technology. Incidentally, in an effort to promote these hateful lights, my
local supermarket is 'giving them away' for 1 penny each. Another one was
giving them free with a certain amount of shopping a few weeks ago. So I
wonder how that equates with the proposals to 'build in' the cost of
disposal of electronic waste, to the retail price ...?

Arfa

 

[Baron]

Incidentally, in an effort to promote these
hateful lights, my local supermarket is 'giving them away' for 1 penny
each.

Arfa

I got some of those ! 11 watt rated.

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann Rabid Nut Case "
"Phil Allison"

The x-rays are produced by the electron beam hitting the metal. One
characteristic of metals is that they have loosely bound outer
electrons........... ad nauseam.

** Just like YOU have loosely bound thoughts.

Loose a a goose.

Got a reference page from whatever Wiki you were reading that says
phosphors emit x-rays when pounded on by electrons?

** Same Wiki page you cited - fuckwit.

I don't do any extra work for anyone spewing vague denunciations
without substantiation.

** The onus of proof is on you to provide evidence - fuckwit.

Shame you have no idea what that is.

I do have one simple question.....

** You do have one simple brain.

Simply fucked.

Piss off, nut case.



...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann Rabid Fucking NUTTER "

I cited two articles:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_tube>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray_tube>
Where does it say that electrons excite phosphors to emit x-rays?

Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray_tube#Ionizing_radiation

The first line says it.

" CRTs can emit a small amount of X-ray radiation as a result of the
electron beam's bombardment of the shadow mask/aperture grille and
phosphors. "

Also, monochrome CRTs ( which have no shadow mask ) emit x-rays as a result
of phosphor bombardment. Becomes significant with accelerating voltages
above 20KV, just as with colour TVs.

Game over - pal.


Listen up - YOU are nothing but another PITA

STEAMING GREAT BULLSHIT ARTIST !!!

SO GO DROP DEAD !!




........ Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Jeff Liebermann Rabid Fucking NUTTER "

I cited two articles:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_tube>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray_tube>
Where does it say that electrons excite phosphors to emit x-rays?

Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathode_ray_tube#Ionizing_radiation

The first line says it.

" CRTs can emit a small amount of X-ray radiation as a result of the
electron beam's bombardment of the shadow mask/aperture grille and
phosphors. "

Also, monochrome CRTs ( which have no shadow mask ) emit x-rays as a result
of phosphor bombardment. Becomes significant with accelerating voltages
above 20KV, just as with colour TVs.

Game over - pal.


Listen up - YOU are nothing but another PITA

STEAMING GREAT BULLSHIT ARTIST !!!

SO GO DROP DEAD !!




........ Phil

 

[Martin Griffith]

If you've ever seen the size of a fluorescent backlight for an LCD
you'd realise that scrapping even a few hundred of them produces three
fifths of seven sixteenths of bugger all mercury.

Yes, something about mercury here

http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=284&ArticleID=3204&l=en


martin

 

[Doug Miller]

"Jeff Liebermann Rabid Fucking NUTTER "

Pot ... kettle ... black ... <PLONK>

 

[Rich Grise]

 See ya.

Heavens no. I don't fight. I just try to state facts to the best of my
knowledge with as little embellishment as I can. I don't know about
your soldering tools but we now use only Metcal soldering stations at
work besides my personal one at home. Point is a Metcal has a very
well defined temperature not likely to vaporize solder - though what
tool would?

Apparently, a VERY HOT iron would:
http://www.bmed.mcgill.ca/REKLAB/manual/MSDS/MaterialsList/Multicore_370_solder.pdf
"...BOILING RANGE
Flux chars above 250°C. The vapor pressure of lead may be significant
above 500°C."

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Arfa Daily]

Pot ... kettle ... black ... <PLONK>

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Whose tea is that then ??

Arfa

 

[Arfa Daily]

If you've ever seen the size of a fluorescent backlight for an LCD
you'd realise that scrapping even a few hundred of them produces three
fifths of seven sixteenths of bugger all mercury.


--

Which is, in turn, about the same level of threat to the environment, as
lead in solder ... d;~}

Arfa

 

[Hattori Hanzo]

Apparently, a VERY HOT iron would:
http://www.bmed.mcgill.ca/REKLAB/manual/MSDS/MaterialsList/Multicore_370_solder.pdf
"...BOILING RANGE
Flux chars above 250°C. The vapor pressure of lead may be significant
above 500°C."

Cheers!
Rich

Invalid link.

Long before "flux chars" (and no, not all fluxes would be the same),
it would liquefy (change phase) and volatize (evaporate in our
atmosphere).

Other fluxes would behave differently as well.

The vapor pressure of a vat of lead at 500 C would certainly have a
specific vapor pressure.

Are you sure that the Lead / Tin alloy that solder is would have the
same vapor pressure?

Also, there are no irons for the electronics industry I am aware of
that operate at 932F.

 

[JosephKK]

By this I meant that if it's deeper than groundwater, there's
a nearly zero chance of it getting into the water, or being a
problem in any other way.

Also, I had run into some information about lead toxicity several
years ago that said that naturally-occurring lead compounds are
not as much a problem as artificial (industrial) ones, because
living beings are evolved to handle the "organic" (I think it
was orthophosphate, but am not sure) form of lead, and can more
easily flush it out of the body, preventing bioaccumulation.
I tried just now to find that info again, but couldn't.


Lead is an element, it is a toxic element, and it can react chemcially
to make toxic compounds. It can corrode when exposed to water,
and the corrosion by-products are soluble enough that lead found
in drinking water comes mostly from the lead in pipes and solder
used to hold the pipes together.

References:
http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/pollairpolead.html
http://www.epa.gov/lead/
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/hlthef/lead.html
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/t-ioc/lead.html

I went to the EPA site and did a search on "lead" because it
became clear to me from previous discussion here that I really
didn't know enough about lead toxicity to write at my usual
level of knowledge. As I've said, I know more about other,
more toxic, heavy metals, and lead has not been of big concern
to me.

What I read at the EPA's site confirmed that there isn't much
cause for concern with regards to the lead in solder. They
say that although there is cause for concern, lead doesn't
have as great a bioaccumulation factor as other heavy metals.
And they didn't say anything at all about electronic solder
or people who work with it, so it looks like those who said
they got blood tests that showed no problem are justified
to feel they are ok. (If it were me, and maybe it is, I'd
still get the test done that uses a hair sample, just to
make sure.)

Most of the fuss in the past was about lead-based paint and
lead from car exhaust. Both of those have been phased out.
(Although recently there have been problems with lead paint
being used on toys made in China.)

The EPA hardly mentioned solder at all. As far as I could
find, only with regards to water pipe and tin cans (where
it is also no longer used).

Looks like I was right about the lead smelting operations,
though. And wouldn't you know it, most of that is done in
the general region of the planet in which I live (SW USA).
By far, most of the lead in use is for car batteries,
so I don't see any need to give up leaded solder just
for that.

In the Wikipedia article for "solder", it is said that
smoke from solder flux can contain a little lead oxide,
and that the flux smoke itself can be toxic. So I'll be
a little more careful to have good ventilation while
soldering. Pretty simple!

Although the EPA noted that metallic lead does corrode,
resulting in toxic soluble compounds, they didn't say anywhere
(at least that I could find) that lead in landfills is
considered a significant problem, and there was no mention
of danger from tossing used electronics in the trash.

Jay Ts

The search engine string "lead toxicology" should help find the rest
if the interesting information.

 

[Smitty Two]

these are great, they look fantastic, unity power factor, dimmable, and
last 50,000 hours.

Yeah, and they're only $145 each:

http://www.lampsplus.com/products/s_lr6/