[tinwhiskers] Re: the leachability study in the EPA article as it affects HR 2420 (the USA RoHS bill now in Congress)
- From: "Gordon Davy" <gordondavy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <tinwhiskers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 19:26:58 -0700
Bob,
In answer to your questions, the Army substituted tungsten for lead in its
bullets, at a 16X price premium and with unforeseen environmental consequences
(see info below from
http://gizmodo.com/5221787/army-stops-making-eco+friendly-tungsten-bullets-because-they-cause-cancer).
People are supposed to do an environmental impact assessment before making
changes, but changes made in response to environmental activist pressure are in
effect exempt from this requirement.
RoHS only applies to electronics, not ammunition. (WEEE has an exemption for
military equipment that has been widely interpreted as applying to RoHS as
well.)
Gordon Davy
Peoria, AZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Stops Making 'Eco-Friendly' Tungsten Bullets Because They Cause Cancer
Matt Buchanan, Tue Apr 21 2009
The Army's tungsten-based bullets were designed to be more eco-friendly, but
research showing tungsten increases cancer risk pushed them to pull the plug.
The problem, Danger Room points out, is that tungsten munitions are everywhere.
The Army began using tungsten in its weapons to replace depleted uranium, which
is also allegedly (but notoriously) nasty stuff. Tungsten is used in missiles
carried by drones, the Phalanx anti-missile gatling gun, anti-tank rounds and a
lot more. What's crazy is that even as the Army stops using tungsten in
training ammo, it's still looking at tungsten as a depleted uranium in other
stuff.
On the other hand, it's not like bullets and other weapons, though they might
be more advanced technological terrors, aren't designed to horrible things to
human beings in the first place.
Other related posts:
