Edition No. 7

Why Go Lead-Free?

Lead is “one of the most technologically developed chemicals in the world,” but it is also “a cumulative general poison with carcinogenic potential that can cause damage to the central and nervous systems, the blood system and the kidneys,” according to the position paper “Growing Green Leaves in the Electronic Garden, the Quest for Lead-free Electronics by 2006,” put out by electronic manufacturing services (EMS) provider Celestica Inc.

“In addition, because lead accumulates it poses toxic effects to the environment. When lead within items such as discarded electrical and electronic equipment is discarded into landfills, it has the potential to leach into the soil, and by extension, contaminate drinking water supplies.” The paper cites studies showing that in the United Kingdom, approximately six million electronic products are dumped in landfills each year, and Americans will discard about 130 million cell phones a year over the next three years.

Also in this Issue...

Making the Decision to Outsource

Ergonomics Spotlight: Healthcare Facilities

Getting the lead-free designation is a good marketing tool for OEMs, the paper adds. “While research and manufacturing retooling may increase costs initially, the long-term advantage for customers – apart from the obvious environmental benefits – in being able to apply a green leaf to their products can be substantial. For Panasonic, the green leaf has been attributed to an 11 percent increase in market share for its lead-free minidisk player. If consumers are given a choice, many will choose the more environmentally-friendly option.”

Not everyone agrees on the environmental friendliness of lead-free electronics, however. Many argue that silver and other elements embraced as lead-replacements might be just as bad for the environment, or worse. “Silver is more toxic than lead, and more soluble. In landfills, it kills micro-organisms,” said Harvey Miller, data base creator and principal of Fabfile Online. “There’s no stopping lead-free electronics, but it will hurt reliability,” he added.

The extra energy consumed because of the higher heat requirements of lead-free is also a negative for the environment, many contend. Many also point out that the amount of lead use in electronics is infinitesimal compared to other applications, such as batteries, although little of the lead in electronics is recycled.

It is also easy to demonize lead. “There is a universal perception that lead is dangerous,” said Wayne Johnson, Ginn professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Auburn University, Auburn, Ala. “It is easy to convince people lead is bad. On the other hand, silver has a positive image from such things as silverware and jewelry.” Nevertheless, he indicated the transition is underway. “Lead-free is happening. We are seeing it in some consumer products.”

Critics of lead-free electronics note that while leaded gasoline is dangerous when lead emissions enter the air, and lead in paint is dangerous because the paint can chip and children might eat the paint chips, there are no lead emissions from electronic products, and it is unlikely anyone is going to eat a cell phone.

“Lead in electronics is different from lead in paint and gasoline,” said Joe Fjelstad of Silicon Pipe. “No evidence has ever been presented of harm to humans from lead in electronics. People say lead in landfills can leach into the soil, but no one has ever presented definitive data.”

And lead has many positives in electronics. “For over 50 years,” according to the Celestica paper, “lead solder has been used as the electrical and mechanical connection path between a component and respective circuit card in the manufacture of electrical and electronic equipment. It has a proven track record for reliability, and its properties are well known.”

While some still think the lead-free movement can be reversed, the consensus today seems to be that the matter is decided. “The momentum has gone too far to turn it around at this point,” said Thilo Sack, advisory engineer, Celestica corporate technology, Toronto. “You might say you hope it goes away, but I don’t think that will happen. The legislation has gone past the point it can be retracted.”

And “it is a waste issue, not a direct public health issue,” points out Carol Handwerker, chief, Metallurgy division, at the Commerce department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Still, some doubts linger. “I’m personally against the conversion in interconnect,” said Ken Fleck, founder of Fleck Research. “Less than one percent of lead being mined is used for electronic solder. Over 80 percent is used in batteries. For there to be political and legislative movement to lead-free electronics is puzzling to many within the industry. Many people say there is no good scientific reason to ban lead. There is a groundswell of resentment in the U.S. toward lead-free electronics.”

Nevertheless, Fleck noted that market and legislative forces are driving lead-free, so the U.S. will likely follow suit. “Lead-free is almost here. It does appear Japan and Europe have moved towards lead-free. Now the challenge for connectors and the electronics industry is getting the lead out. Does there come a point, however, if people have to pay more, will they go back to the old product? It’s fine to pass lead-free legislation, but when it comes to implementing it, will customers be willing to pay a higher price? That is the unknown today.”

But calculating costs can be tricky. “Investing additional resources and funding during a struggling economy to produce lead-free electronics is a long-term initiative that many OEMs may wish to put aside right now, choosing instead to focus on the short-term goals of reducing costs and increasing profitability,” the Celestica paper notes. “However, to sell into the European and Japanese markets, U.S.-based OEMs have to be able to supply reliable, lead-free parts and assemblies. Not being able to do so will actually hinder longer-term profitability and market share. OEMs need to be proactive in establishing procedures to reliably assemble and solder components with lead-free finishes, as the changes will undoubtedly have a major impact on production and quality control procedures. If OEMs wait too long to develop lead-free solutions, they will certainly spend more money and resources in the long run in an attempt to catch up, and will also lack the necessary historical data on quality and reliability.”

And, the paper notes, “being at the fore of the lead-free movement provides a significant advantage to suppliers as OEMs and EMS manufacturers choose to buy from those who are capable of providing lead-free components.”

— Bernard Levine

"Why Go Lead Free?" is excerpted with permission from an article entitled, "Facing a Lead-Free Future," written by Bernard Levine and published in the September 2003 issue of Semiconductor Manufacturing Magazine (SMM).

To subscribe to Semiconductor Manufacturing Magazine, go to: http://www.semimfg.com

More Information: