Forum Moderators: phranque
"Toxic dust" found on computer processors and monitors contains chemicals linked to reproductive and neurological disorders, according to a new study by several environmental groups....The most toxic piece of equipment discovered by the researchers was a new flat-screen monitor in a university in New York, implying that newer equipment isn't necessarily cleaner.
Comcast Story [comcast.net]
Drink green tea and take time out to do something relaxing like fishing. Dont eat the fish though - they are full of toxins!
No seriously, that's a good story and I haven't thought about it either. I know about radiation off the monitor and that computer production is environmentally costly (Santa Clara county, aka Silicon Valley has one of the highest concentration of superfund sites in the country). It's also a major user of clean water.
I often think about that when thinking about upgrading. What I didn't think about is that all those millions of gallons spent rinsing the stuff into superfund sites don't mean they aren't still toxic inside. Maybe I'm glad my house is so drafty!
I think one shouldn't get carried away:
"The levels in the dust are enough to raise a red flag, but not enough to create a crisis," said Dr. Gina Solomon, senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council
It's not like the NRDC are flacks for the chemical industry after all.
Tom
I think one shouldn't get carried away:
Yes the key line in the story is according to a new study by several environmental groups. I wouldnt put much stock in a study done by any group that has an agenda.
What matters is not the agenda, but the study design and access to their raw data (as in an academic setting). With a general press article you can never tell what the quality of the information is, regardless of the agenda of the group.
The reason I'm not too worried is that the NRDC *is* an environmental group and their scientists don't seem terrified, just that it's something to keep an eye on.
I wouldnt put much stock in a study done by any group that has an agenda.
I'd have to add to this, and which profits from the subject under study, which very few environmental groups do, they are actually trying to help you, unlike most other groups out there.
What I wouldn't put much stock in is a study by the industry in question that says that such a study is nonsense, since they do have this vested interest in the results.
I worked on a legal case a while ago, dealing with a chip fab site, and believe me, the levels of toxins involved in creating the box you are working on are far beyond your wildest dreams. That's why they pay third world people pennies a day to recycle these things, they are too toxic for our own people to deal with.
What I wouldn't put much stock in is a study by the industry in question
Oh come on with spouting the conspiracy theories. A respected industry like the computer industry, the asbestos industry or the tobacco industry would never lie to us. ;-)
Electronics companies began using polybrominated diphenyl (PBDEs) and other flame retardants in the 1970s, arguing that the toxins prevent fires and cannot escape from plastic casings.
...
Penta- and octa-brominated diphenyl will be taken off the market by the end of the year. Environmental groups are demanding legislation that would ban deca-brominated diphenyl, too.
It should be noted that the plastics manufacturers are the ones who 'sold' this idea to the consumer electronics industry, and they are also the ones who are voluntarily removing these compounds from their products, as well. Science News had an article on this fairly recently.
A point not emphasized in the AP article is that *all* consumer electronics devices which use plastic cases and are line-powered (mains-powered) contain these chemicals, whose purpose is to make the plastic cases much less flammable. The environmental study probably went after the computer industry because it makes a better story. But your clock-radio, your TV, and even some new toasters use the same kind of plastic compounds in their cases.
I'd be happy with a return of the metal-cased computer chassis, but other than that, umm, yawn... Sitting in rush-hour traffic with the windows down or driving through the smoke from a burning building is much more dangerous -- as is burning to death in your sleep if your computer's power supply fails during the night.
Jim
[Edit: btw, my machine chassis AND case are metal - NOT homebuilt this time (kind of a bad thing, but anyway....) but straight out of a Systemax by TigerDirect box....]
A respected industry like the computer industry, the asbestos industry or the tobacco industry would never lie to us.
of course you're right, I don't know what I was thinking... they're here to make the world a better place, I have to remember that... now that I think of it, I can't recall any major industry ever lying about their activities, polluting until forced to stop, releasing toxins and carcinogens until forced to stop, or 'volunteering' to stop to avoid lawsuites and fines, they've generally been model citizens, neat, dependable, and, above all, trustworthy..
You do NOT mess with that stuff.
Environmentalists are such wonderful folks. They love nature but seem to not give a hoot for the critter called man. Where are the practical tips
1. The pratical tips are obvious - good ventilation, maybe a respirator if you're going to actually saw holes in a case and create particulate matter.
2. Their main focus is on protecting manufacturing workers and residents who live near hi-tech fabs and ultimately landfills since these are the people who have the truly high levels of exposure to these toxins.
3. The premise of the environmental movement is that man needs a place to live that is not toxic. The group in question is focussed on protecting the Silicon Valley which has over a million people, not much wild "nature" and hardly any protected species. This is entirely about protecting a critter called man.
