LED TV and LCD TV (newbie)

tom66

Joined May 9, 2009
2,595
One of the things I think ecologists have gone a bit overboard on is this RoHS thing. Lead free solder is apparently pretty bad, though I've only used the lead free stuff so I can't compare it. I'm going to be doing some SMT work soon so I may well have to get myself the leaded stuff at extra cost.

Interesting info about the mercury. I heard a similar thing about CFL light bulbs. Using a CFL bulb with mercury in it is much better for the environment than an incandescent bulb, because less mercury is released by burning coal. Or something like that.

Either way, I would like to see LEDs being the next big thing next to CFLs. You can still go into a store in the UK and buy 5 CFL bulbs for £1 or so. I have about 20 stored away... heck I'll never need another bulb again if they meet their 15,000 hour lifetime.

How toxic are those batteries anyway? I know they are extremely volatile if overcharged, overheated, damaged or malfunctioning (take your pick) but I thought lithium wasn't a major environmental issue? What do I know, I only got a B in Chemistry (a major part of that is "social and environmental issues.")
 

marshallf3

Joined Jul 26, 2010
2,358
One of the things I think ecologists have gone a bit overboard on is this RoHS thing. Lead free solder is apparently pretty bad, though I've only used the lead free stuff so I can't compare it. I'm going to be doing some SMT work soon so I may well have to get myself the leaded stuff at extra cost.
Im not a fan of it either but just as with regular solder some brands are a lot better than others. I used some Kester once that was fairly good but it was also thinner (0.020 vs 0.031) that I usually use. It's also causing a lot of problems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_whiskers

Interesting info about the mercury. I heard a similar thing about CFL light bulbs. Using a CFL bulb with mercury in it is much better for the environment than an incandescent bulb, because less mercury is released by burning coal. Or something like that.
It's true, or at least let's say the explanation from scientists vs climatologists makes a lot more sense. Current fluorescent lamps are using an incredibly smaller amount of mercury than they used to anyway.

Either way, I would like to see LEDs being the next big thing next to CFLs. You can still go into a store in the UK and buy 5 CFL bulbs for £1 or so. I have about 20 stored away... heck I'll never need another bulb again if they meet their 15,000 hour lifetime.
They have their places, then there are places I'd far rather have an incandescent lamp. Fluorescents emit a distinct group of wavelengths of light based upon the phosphor combination used and their additive effect defines the supposed color temperature. Some things just don't look right under fluorescents and cameras can't compensate for the exact phosphor combinations. One manufacturer may combine a+b+c to get 5,000*K, another may combine x+y+z.

How toxic are those batteries anyway? I know they are extremely volatile if overcharged, overheated, damaged or malfunctioning (take your pick) but I thought lithium wasn't a major environmental issue? What do I know, I only got a B in Chemistry (a major part of that is "social and environmental issues.")
All depends on the type of battery and if it's properly recycled as some aren't economical to bother with. Any containing Cadmium are perhaps the worst as far as just throwing in the trash and they probably constitute the majority of what has and is still being disposed of. Cadmium is a poisonous heavy metal and stands a good chance of making it into groundwater, lithium is fairly reactive so it usually bonds itself to something and converts to a far more inert form. NiMH batteries are safer as a battery but the mining involved to get the elements to produce them is in question now as a major contributor.

Yea, we've gummed up the earth a bit by being here and some of the things we've created that nature wouldn't have on its own but the earth is pretty darn resilient, as with anything in physics it eventually seeks an equilibrium just as it will with the CO2 level. Problem here is nothing changes overnight and decades from now a lot of people are going to be laughing about the CO2 level scare.

Quite personally I think our major problems come from not leaving enough "nature" around for the earth to work with. Those rainforests didn't grow so well for no reason, take them away and something else is going to have to take over their job.
 
Top