RE: [Leica] Re: Battery adapter wanted (became a long story)

["Bergman, Mark A." <mabergm@nppd.com>]

Fluorescent lights do contain mercury and are controlled as hazardous waste.
Users in the US, such as factories or other large facilities, are required
to dispose of them as hazardous.  The law doesn't apply to small quantify
generators (such as home users).  It will in time though

- -----Original Message-----
From: Jem Kime [mailto:jem.kime@cwcom.net]
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 10:53 AM
To: 'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
Subject: RE: [Leica] Re: Battery adapter wanted (became a long story)


Dan,
Might you be going into the mercury battery business soon? ;-)
Jem

- -----Original Message-----
From:	Dan Cardish [SMTP:dcardish@microtec.net]
Sent:	08 September 2000 16:24
To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject:	Re: [Leica] Re: Battery adapter wanted (became a long story)

Don't tell anyone, but I have about 5 1/2 pounds of the stuff lying around
my apartment (safely sealed, mind you, just in case you DO tell someone!)

Dan C.

At 10:20 AM 08-09-00 -0400, khmiska wrote:
>John,
>The idiocy of banning mercury has reached new heights in Ann Arbor,
Michigan.
>After a small mercury spill in a nearby school, the Ann Arbor city council
passed
>a resolution banning mercury thermometers. Owners of mercury fever
thermometers
>may trade theirs in for a non-Hg version at no charge. The idocy of it
boggles the
>mond.
>Kurt
>Ann Arbor
>
>John Coan wrote:
>
>> There are other sources of mercury that were NOT banned, many with much
larger
>> quantities than tiny photo batteries.  Take for instance fluorescent
lights.
>> Or, as a personal example, I recently purchased a sphygmomanometer .  It
>> contains about an ounce of pure elemental mercury.  How come that wasn't
>> banned?  I think banning the batteries was a symbolic gesture and we
>> photographers were sacrificed on the enviroalter.
>>
>> Buzz Hausner wrote:
>>
>> > Trust me, Hans-Peter, mercury is one very nasty environmental
contaminant,
>> > it is extremely toxic in even small doses and it may be both ingested
in its
>> > liquid form and inhaled as a vapor.  EU and US regulators were
unusually
>> > wise in banning the production of mercury batteries.  They were not
being
>> > capriciously mean to devotees of old photographic equipment.
>> >
>> >         Buzz Hausner
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Hans-Peter.Lammerich@t-online.de
>> > [mailto:Hans-Peter.Lammerich@t-online.de]
>> > Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 4:43 PM
>> > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>> > Subject: [Leica] Re: Battery adapter wanted (became a long story)
>> >
>> > After all I find it stupid that EU and US legislators banned mercury
>> > batteries instead of just requiring that new cameras, hearing aids etc.
>> > shall work with mercury free batteries. Mercury cells in my cameras
seem
>> > to last for years instead of the 4 to 6 weeks quoted for zinc-air
cells.
>> > Are 30 to 60 zinc-air cells that I would need to purchase over five
>> > years better for the environment than a single mercury cell, even
>> > without recycling? Where is the proper environmental impact assessment
>> > to prove that zinc-air is better? Why legislators are bashing the
>> > minority of classic camera users, but not owners of 3 ton, 400 hp
"sport
>> > utilitiy vehicles"? Zinc-air is probably ok for hearing aids which suck
>> > any battery in 4 weeks, for occasional use and low current applications
>> > like photoelectric meters mercury is hard to beat. I am not really
>> > willing to accept the limited life of the . Because the battery is
>> > hidden inside the Rollei 35 and Leica CL, you can replace it only in
the
>> > dark or when you change the film.
>
>
>