4 ms·

Sounds like a R&D problem. Why the dig at the EU?

by mulmen 2y ago

mschuster91 2y ago
I'm European, I actually support RoHS - it was just the original cause because everyone up to it getting in force was accustomed to classic, decades-proven leaded solder.
- hot_gril 2y ago
  Did they need to have a longer transition period? Looks like it went into enforcement only 2 or 3 years after it was approved.
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    No, the issue didn't affect the IBM CPU in the 360 or Intel products because they did the R&D work. TSMC and their packaging partners were just lazy.
  - nolok 2y ago
    It was not so much a "not enough time to transition" and more like "there is no consequences yet so why bother OH DAMN WE NEED TO MAKE IT TODAY IT GOES INTO FORCE". Many had no issues, but a few companies didn't bother to do their homework, problem would have been the same if the period was twice as long.
gjsman-1000 2y ago
Why not blame the EU? It is just a well known fact that non-leaded soldier has inferior properties to leaded soldier, which require careful engineering to work around, and still remain somewhat unresolved. At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused.
- tecleandor 2y ago
  You should remember the bioaccumulative properties of lead. Lead: The most extensively spread toxic environmental contaminant (2024): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780323904001000069 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B97803... The Urban Lead (Pb) Burden in Humans, Animals and the Natural Environment (2022): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8812512/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8812512/
- mulmen 2y ago
  > At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused. “May” is doing a lot of work there. Can you substantiate the claim that the risk of lead is lower than the switching cost?
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused. The problem is where the e-waste ends up - some ditch or desert in Africa. From there it ends up leeching in the environment due to corrosion or, worse, as widespread aerosols when the people there burn the waste to get to the copper.

Sounds like a R&D problem. Why the dig at the EU?

by mulmen 2y ago

Sounds like a R&D problem. Why the dig at the EU?

I'm European, I actually support RoHS - it was just the original cause because everyone up to it getting in force was accustomed to classic, decades-proven leaded solder.

hot_gril 2y ago
Did they need to have a longer transition period? Looks like it went into enforcement only 2 or 3 years after it was approved.
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  No, the issue didn't affect the IBM CPU in the 360 or Intel products because they did the R&D work. TSMC and their packaging partners were just lazy.
- nolok 2y ago
  It was not so much a "not enough time to transition" and more like "there is no consequences yet so why bother OH DAMN WE NEED TO MAKE IT TODAY IT GOES INTO FORCE". Many had no issues, but a few companies didn't bother to do their homework, problem would have been the same if the period was twice as long.

gjsman-1000 2y ago

Why not blame the EU? It is just a well known fact that non-leaded soldier has inferior properties to leaded soldier, which require careful engineering to work around, and still remain somewhat unresolved. At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused.

tecleandor 2y ago
You should remember the bioaccumulative properties of lead. Lead: The most extensively spread toxic environmental contaminant (2024): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780323904001000069 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B97803... The Urban Lead (Pb) Burden in Humans, Animals and the Natural Environment (2022): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8812512/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8812512/
mulmen 2y ago
> At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused. “May” is doing a lot of work there. Can you substantiate the claim that the risk of lead is lower than the switching cost?
mschuster91 2y ago
> At this point, the directive may have caused more e-waste and environmental damage from part failures than the damage the original leaded soldier would have caused. The problem is where the e-waste ends up - some ditch or desert in Africa. From there it ends up leeching in the environment due to corrosion or, worse, as widespread aerosols when the people there burn the waste to get to the copper.