Following a review of 29 exemptions, Okö Institute and Fraunhofer IZM have recommended seven not be continued: lead in linear incandescent lamps (Exemption 16); lead as activator in the fluorescent power of discharge lamps (Exemption 18); lead with PbBiSn-Hg and PbBiSn-Hg in specific compositions (Exemption 19); lead in oxide glass used for bonding front and rear substrates of flat fluorescent lamps used for LCDs (Exemption 20); lead oxide in the glass envelope of black light blue; lead alloys as solder for tranducers used in high-powered loudspeakers (Exemption 27), and hexavalent chromium in corrosion preventive coatings (Exemption 28).

The consultants were hired by the European Commission, which charged them with providing clearer wording of existing exemptions. The proposed new wording can be in the executive summary of the firm's report.

Okö also evaluated five requests for new exemptions: 1) lead in solders for the connection of very thin enameled wires with a terminal; 2) lead and cadmium as components of the glazes and color used to glaze or decorate lamp bases, lamp carriers or clocks; 3) lead in solders in a third-party component of cortex family equipment; 4) cadmium for use in solid-state illumination and display systems; 5) lead in solders for the connection of very thin (<100 µm) enameled copper wires and for the connection of enameled clad aluminum wires with a copper layer smaller than 20 µm.

The firms recommended granting number 4, refusing number 3, and were unable to make recommendations regarding numbers 1, 2 and 5.

Specific applications that do not have technically feasible alternatives, or cannot be foreseen within the next five to ten years, have been given an expiration date of July 31, 2014, which is when the next revision cycle will occur.

The EC will review the recommendations but have not set a timeline for release of its conclusions.

WASHINGTON, DC – The National Association of Manufacturers issued a curt response to a Chinese official’s view that countries consuming manufactured goods should be responsible for the emissions caused by their manufacture. 

The unnamed official said the onus for emissions should be on consumers, not the countries that actually produced them. 

In response, NAM executive vice president Jay Timmons said, in a statement, “It’s called ‘global warming,’ not ‘American warming,’ for a reason. Clearly, the producers of the emissions are the only ones that can take the steps and apply the technologies that will actually result in emissions reductions.  

“The global environment and economy will not benefit if major stakeholder countries take pollution-reducing actions that drive up their costs while others do not. Such a situation risks merely reducing production in the countries taking action and shifting to higher-pollution production in countries that take little or no action, a scenario that results in economic harm to the US and no reduction in emissions.”  

NAM supports the rules-based trading system, and welcomes that the recently released Obama Administration trade policy affirms this, Timmons said. The US “should take no actions that would violate its international obligations or trigger a debilitating trade war. Others need to affirm the same.  “Any measures to address global climate change must involve the US and China working together for a realistic solution that does not threaten our national security and impose unbearable economic costs.”