| General > General Technical Chat |
| Really RS Components, I am not allowed to order solder anymore?? |
| << < (16/21) > >> |
| Keith956:
--- Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on February 10, 2021, 09:05:09 pm ---Apparently from 1 Mar 2018, sale of lead metal ( excluding roofing sheet, batteries or ammunition) is banned to consumers : https://ila-reach.org/2018/01/new-restrictions-and-labelling-requirements-affect-lead-from-march-1-2018/ --- End quote --- I had no trouble ordering 60/40 solder from RS last week. It's definitely not banned in the UK. |
| penfold:
--- Quote from: tooki on February 15, 2021, 07:46:09 pm ---Again, it's not ONE rule. The entire issue is that two entirely distinct regulations are at work here. Each one IS cohesive within itself. They don't really tie into each other because they each have entirely different goals. See what I wrote early in this thread: --- Quote from: tooki on February 11, 2021, 06:28:54 pm --- --- End quote --- Two regulations are at work: RoHS (which required lead solder to be eliminated from new products) is about environmental protection. REACH (which restricts the sale of lead solder to consumers) is about consumer safety. --- End quote --- I am not questioning whether or not the restriction is triggered by either RoHS or REACH, I am expressing scepticism whether or not the true justification for the ban was that it's deemed an "uncontrolled risk" under RoHS and REACH. Recycling schemes currently exist which are considered adequate risk mitigation for preventing old lead containing electronic equipment entering landfills and evidence linking any cases of lead poisoning to leaded solder is somewhat lacking. If you consider that lead roofing materials are still available, and the replacement of such items is not restricted to professionals and it DOES put the DIYer in direct contact with lead compounds which are readily absorbed by the body, again which electronics soldering does not according to the statement from HSE. It now becomes a question of how one is considered an uncontrolled risk for the general public and not the other. |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: penfold on February 15, 2021, 09:28:11 pm --- --- Quote from: tooki on February 15, 2021, 07:46:09 pm ---Again, it's not ONE rule. The entire issue is that two entirely distinct regulations are at work here. Each one IS cohesive within itself. They don't really tie into each other because they each have entirely different goals. See what I wrote early in this thread: --- Quote from: tooki on February 11, 2021, 06:28:54 pm --- --- End quote --- Two regulations are at work: RoHS (which required lead solder to be eliminated from new products) is about environmental protection. REACH (which restricts the sale of lead solder to consumers) is about consumer safety. --- End quote --- I am not questioning whether or not the restriction is triggered by either RoHS or REACH, I am expressing scepticism whether or not the true justification for the ban was that it's deemed an "uncontrolled risk" under RoHS and REACH. Recycling schemes currently exist which are considered adequate risk mitigation for preventing old lead containing electronic equipment entering landfills and evidence linking any cases of lead poisoning to leaded solder is somewhat lacking. If you consider that lead roofing materials are still available, and the replacement of such items is not restricted to professionals and it DOES put the DIYer in direct contact with lead compounds which are readily absorbed by the body, again which electronics soldering does not according to the statement from HSE. It now becomes a question of how one is considered an uncontrolled risk for the general public and not the other. --- End quote --- As best I can tell, listing under REACH is about inherent human and environmental toxicity of a compound, not about net risk after risk mitigation. I don't know under what justification lead roofing materials could be exempted from REACH. However, what constitutes "restricting purchase by the general public" seems to vary wildly. Anecdotally, it seems that many distributors that cater primarily to professionals will take your word for it that you're a professional, and sell it to you anyway. |
| penfold:
--- Quote from: tooki on February 15, 2021, 10:06:44 pm ---As best I can tell, listing under REACH is about inherent human and environmental toxicity of a compound, not about net risk after risk mitigation. --- End quote --- We might be on crossed wires because to say "...listing under..." is quite different to saying "...restricted as a result of..." which is where risk mitigation comes in |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: penfold on February 15, 2021, 11:28:41 pm --- --- Quote from: tooki on February 15, 2021, 10:06:44 pm ---As best I can tell, listing under REACH is about inherent human and environmental toxicity of a compound, not about net risk after risk mitigation. --- End quote --- We might be on crossed wires because to say "...listing under..." is quite different to saying "...restricted as a result of..." which is where risk mitigation comes in --- End quote --- The relevant part of REACH is Annex XVII, which is the part that actually restricts trade in it. Here's the entry for lead: https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach/-/dislist/details/0b0236e1807e30a6 What's weird is that the draft explanatory document for that made it clear that it was focused on items that babies could mouth. But the Swiss chemical trade association's press release says that the EU lead consortium's guidance on Annex XVII compliance expressly listed lead solder as a product whose reclassification (as a listed material) requires it to be restricted from consumer sale. The other thing is something called Article 33. https://www.tsgconsulting.com/news-detail/lead-on-reach-candidate-list/ But honestly, what a f••king mess of a regulation, in the sense that it seems to me to be a web of various rules. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |