[tinwhiskers] Re: the leachability study in the EPA article as it affects HR 2420 (the USA RoHS bill now in Congress)
- From: "Dr Mark Vaughan" <mark@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <tinwhiskers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 09:32:41 +0100
I shoot on UK military ranges, including those used by special forces with
special rounds and loads, quite frequently.
From time to time we clean the sand stops, and keep the metal spoils of spent
ammunition, usually for remoulding bullets for black powder.
So far it’s always been a tin lead mix, slightly hard for black powder, but OK
to remix with pure lead, I never seen anything like tungsten, the only things
that don’t melt in the pot are the copper jackets and the odd stripper clip.
We have however wondered for many years re the safety on standard domestic
shooting ranges here. The newer indoor ranges especially those for full bore
calibres are required to have large extraction fans to pull any lead dust away
from the shooter, but many don’t, including most .22 indoor ranges.
As for the health risk, they say lead effects ones mental ability and that of
one’s offspring or ability to conceive.
I have yet to come across a shooter suffering from lead poisoning, and when I
was training for the Olympics before they banned pistols here in the UK I shot
a minimum of 1500 rounds a week for over ten years, some weeks I’d shoot three
times that, I also spent four evenings a week on the range where if I wasn’t
shooting I was training others, so my intake was theoretically high. As far as
I know I am not effected and my children conceived shortly after the ban are
all well and well above average mentality. Not only that but my father started
out as a gas engineer where he spent all day sweating lead joints, that was
before he went on to take 6 degrees, with two out of three children with PhD’s,
I don’t think it affected him either.
Tends to leaves one wondering how big the risk truly is, could be quite
different for women though, or if your setting alight to PCB’s in an old oil
drum.
Regs Mark
Dr. Mark Vaughan Ph'D., B.Eng. M0VAU
Managing Director
Vaughan Industries Ltd., reg in UK no 2561068
Water Care Technology Ltd, reg in UK no 4129351
Addr Unit3, Sydney House, Blackwater, Truro, Cornwall, TR4 8HH UK.
Phone/Fax 44 (0) 1872 561288
RSGB DRM111 (Cornwall)
From: tinwhiskers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:tinwhiskers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gordon Davy
Sent: 26 May 2009 03:27
To: tinwhiskers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [tinwhiskers] Re: the leachability study in the EPA article as it
affects HR 2420 (the USA RoHS bill now in Congress)
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
_____
<http://gizmodo.com/5221787/army-stops-making-eco+friendly-tungsten-bullets-because-they-cause-cancer>
Army Stops Making 'Eco-Friendly' Tungsten Bullets Because They Cause Cancer
M <http://gizmodo.com/people/iceeee/posts/> att Buchanan, Tue Apr 21 2009
The Army's tungsten-based <http://gizmodo.com/tag/bullets/> bullets were
designed to be more eco-friendly, but
<http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/toxic-tungsten.html> research showing
tungsten increases cancer risk pushed them to pull the plug. The problem,
<http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/04/toxic-tungste-1.html> 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)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium> 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:
