U.S. RoHS: To be or not to be?

onsite shukla promulgation grand echo foul ganeshpur tahoma orientated pune datacore

There may be uncertain environmental benefits to RoHS initiatives, but the politicians sure end up looking good. Unless industry gets involved and pushes for a reasonable global standard, we'll be stuck with regulators trying to outdo one another without any regard for which policy makes any sense, both for industry and for the environment.

RoHS currently offers some good and bad parts. If the USA does enact some sort of federal law I would hope that they improve upon the existing global legislation instead of just copying it. Specifically, banning things like hexavalent chromium are good for obvious reasons (the real life lawsuit brought against PG&E in California and popularized by the movie Erin Brockovich is a good example), but I would go so far as to say that including Lead for instance is bad and may actually end up doing more damage than good. Why you ask? Because of two reasons: a) the tin solder process creates reliability problems with devices and as someone on this list already pointed out will actually increase the waste going into landfills in the long run due to shorter product lifespans; and b) in a word: energy. Lead-free tin alloys in a nutshell melt at a higher temperature than the traditional lead-based alloys, which means that the ovens on the assembly line need to run hotter, which means they pull more electricity from the grid, which means that more or bigger power plants will need to be built. Since most power plants, in the USA at least, still run on coal the bottom line is that we are in effect trading one type of pollution for another. Frankly I would be more concerned about the air. And let's be real, the electronics industry is responsible for something like 2% of the annual usage of lead, with the vast majority going into things like sintered bearings or leaded glass and the like. While the intent of environmental legislation is admirable, it needs to be tempered with reality.

The industry should push for a global harmonization of environmental standards. EU RoHS has numerous flaws and industry leaders should work aggressively to get ahead of the issue before additional regulatory schemes are forced on them. The longer we wait the more painful it will be. Any US effort should be built around harmonization efforts with the EU, Japan, China and SK. The industry's global leaders have a critical role to play in encouraging different governments to coordinate.

A federal standard is certainly a good idea, to minimize negative impact on productivity. But it would be a mistake to copy the EU regulations, which have caused quality, reliability, cost, and even environmental issues of their own. It would be best to keep politics out, and utilize American expertese to develop standards and initiatives that achieve environmental goals.

Even if the U.S. passed a RoHS type law, there will not be a single worldwide standard for RoHS. Differing approaches by the EU, China and South Korea mean that the industry has to follow many different standards already. Adding a U.S. standard I think would be only add to the difficulty industry faces in complying with these various regulations.

America must face the fact that we have lost leadership in environmental law. Today, the supply chain (which is more important then any legislation) has forced the US and other countries to follow. Americas electronics are already "that way" - the supply chain and the free market ecomony makes the rules... we wanted free global markets, we got it... now we need to decide if we really want to live inside of it.. because EuP, REACH, and other 'green' legislation is approaching us fast -- and if we don't lead -- the supply chain will.

Why is it that you Americans think you should be treated any differently? There are already enough exemptions including one that allow car stereos to be exempt if they are fitted at the manufacture of the vehicle. I accept that there may be needs for certain applications to be exempted - but not the whole lot otherwise it makes it all a waste of time.

A common worldwide approach simplifies production/procurement issues... But, I am wary of the real environmental value. And just as concerned over future reliability of products made with no-lead solder... I have seen tin-wisker growth on failed products returned from the field. Until these issues are addressed, I believe it extremely risky to make all the worlds electronics the same way. I wouldn't recommend all our eggs in one basket... unless the basket has proven itself.

The lead ban is an environmental disaster leading to increased mining of lead, silver, tin, and copper. The unreliability of lead-free alloys will shorten product lives, increasing waste. Over 300 engineers have joined John Burke of in appealing to the EU to exempt electronic equipment from the ban. Why would any thinking person want to copy such an ill-advised measure?

A federal law is a good idea, but is any electronics trade group actively lobbying for that today? Last time I checked, it was pretty low on the industry's lobbying priorities. What's the chance that the U.S. will actually pass such a law in the near term?