A new study sheds light on a frightening environmental horror.

We see on a daily basis comments about Pb-free flying around on various e-mail lists. They are generally negative: Witness the plethora of conference opportunities springing up globally on Pb-free reliability. But a few weeks ago, I posted a tangential note to one forum about a disastrous environmental fact – that 5,000 children die every day from water-related issues. In return, the chairman of a large European trade group (who works for a large metals company) slammed me, claiming that posting such stuff was a “matter of conscience.”

Curiously enough, all the environmental issues and challenges impacting electronics and other industries are just that: a matter of conscience. Here are the top two definitions (Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006):

1. The inner sense of what is right or wrong in one’s conduct or motives, impelling one toward right action: to follow the dictates of conscience.

2. The complex of ethical and moral principles that controls or inhibits the actions or thoughts of an individual.

So in formulating environmental laws, we are in fact legislating the general consensus opinion of lawmakers on what they perceive to be right and wrong for the environment.

When something is counterintuitive – such as removing lead in solders – and when due diligence through authoritative technical investigation is not carried out, it is relatively easy to see how the collective legislative conscience could be led to vote the wrong direction, in this case, by dictating lead’s removal from solders, thus necessitating replacement materials that trigger a far greater environmental impact.

Through the good work of organizations such as Greenpeace, global awareness (and thus global conscience) of such environmental issues is constantly being raised. Legislators, though, to ensure that demands to remove, replace or substitute materials are founded on fact; not driven by counterintuitive opinion or commercial angles.

Make no mistake, take the lead out of electronics and somewhere a mountain of money will be made – be it with via substitute materials, new equipment, new conferences, and so on.

Legislators, take note. On environmental issues, you are the means by which the global conscience is enacted. Treat this duty with care and respect. If requirements are counterintuitive, have the guts to budget for the science team to prove or disprove the requirements – and the guts to publish the results.

Through RoHS, lead in solder legislation is turning rapidly into a global environmental virus. Europe didn’t perform due diligence, ratified the law, and ignored all attempts (until recently) to provide reasoned input to the issue. What the EU obviously has not passed to governments mimicking the legislation is  that strong scientific evidence concludes that the laws are erroneous. This has got to stop. I trust that the activities of RoHSUSA PushBack have, at the least, cast a large question mark over unresearched, far-reaching environmental laws.

I’m just a small fish in a big pond. Lately, a much bigger fish has entered the fray. Greenpeace International in February published a report called Cutting Edge Contamination (greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/cutting-edge-contamination-a.pdf). The report itself is not about RoHS, but it does make interesting reading on environmental contamination found near some big electronics factories: in particular, the presence of high levels of contaminants such as PBDEs and chlorinated VOCs in water tables.

In the report, which followed a study of 18 PWB and electronics assemblers in Southeast Asia and Mexico, Greenpeace claims: “In addition to the chemicals identified in wastewater networks, contamination of groundwater aquifers with chlorinated chemicals and some heavy metals (e.g., nickel) was evident at some sites. Many of these chemicals have known uses in the facilities located at the sites where they were found. Groundwater contamination is of particular concern as local communities use this resource for drinking water in many places.”

This inevitably brings me back to where I started – being slammed on that European trade association link. My response: Anyone (or corporate officer) who thinks that issues with people dying from water-related issues are just a “matter of conscience” are advised to do a couple things:

•    Look up the word “conscience.”
•    Look in your bank account.
•    Look in the mirror.

Then decide whether groundwater contamination is a concern for electronics.

In my opinion, of course, it is, was and always will be a concern, and should be highlighted through organizations such as Greenpeace until the corporate conscience is synchronized with the needs of this planet’s environment and those who occupy it.

Finally, I hope Greenpeace is looking at other industries and is not just distracted by electronics because of its high global political profile.

John Burke is founder of RoHSUSA (rohsusa.com) and an advocate against the RoHS Directive; john@rohsusa.com. His column appears monthly.

• Prev
• Next