China RoHS

What's an "escape goat"? Sounds exciting. Like something you ride off on if your farm accidentally hits an iceberg.

"Everyone please move calmly to your nearest emergency escape goat!"

please excuse my poor grammar:

It should have read... 'scapegoat'

or next time we run into trouble we can blame it on the domestic goat running through the field as if it were singing 'Free Willie~!'

Let china adopt safety standards, it is better for trade. With stricter safety standards they will be less able to undercut the markets for products, since they must produce under stricter safety protocol. This is something I hear a lot from farmers in Caifornia with the NAFTA, since the pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer restrictions are not applicable outside the US, and we only test a small percent of the incoming produce. Surprisingly, Mexico and China are the biggest violators of food safety when they get tested. Keep in mind that the banned pesticides in the US are legal outside the US. So you ban them here because you wanted safe food, but then to get cheaper produce and labor you ship them in from outside where the "poisons" are still used regularly and with less care than they were before in the US. I am of the position that you can not supply the products we want that meet the standards we set forth, then don't bother us with your junk. As an engineer, I would not accept substandard construction in the US that were not adequately protective of human health and safety, why should i accept it in an import. That would be tantamount to stating US workers have to produce higher quality goods at their expense to compete in the market.

I completely agree that free trade should be restricted to countries that uphold to accepted standards and guidelines. Why would any country announce their own policy to differ in any way from an accepted practice? Is it RoHS compliant, well it is CHINA RoHS compliant.... what does that mean?

The following was published from the source listed, "RoHS-International, http://www.rohs-international.com/china-rohs/"

China RoHS Maximum Concentration values are the same as the EU but with no Hexavalent Chromium at all being able to be used for Metal passivation as well as none of the other metals being able to be used for surface coatings. Also components that are smaller than 4mm3 can be treated as homogeneous items under some circumstances.

The more stringent requirements allows Chinese diplomats to describe EU products as hazardous and harmful. It is quite spiteful to take such a stance. They further state that more revisions are planned for later implementation. Some one should apologize for announcing that they use lead paint as it was the same concentration that was used in the 70's and work together with the UN to standardize this mark so that trade is facilitated and markets would flourish rather than compete and destroy each other.

"I am of the position that you can not supply the products we want that meet the standards we set forth, then don't bother us with your junk. As an engineer, I would not accept substandard construction in the US that were not adequately protective of human health and safety, why should i accept it in an import."

I agreed 100%, but lets remember that it is the US manufacturers that are shipping the jobs/products overseas. I believe that it is necessary to require that products shipped into the US meet all quality and safety regulations (and require the importers to guarantee the quality). Quality stds were in place on products before they were shipped overseas for manufacture. It has long been said that US manufacturer sent the pollution and jobs overseas to reduce their costs and deal with environmental problems.

So...let me summarize your 'logic'.

Damn them if they use hazardous substances.

Damn them if they don't.

So what exactly do you want them to do???

Smells of paranoia to me.

And while I'm at it the expression is 'scapegoat'.

Del

Now come on Del, I think there is a point to this. There is an accepted industry standard which was to improve the safety of the end user of a product in and after it's foreseable life.

China has been accused of not looking after the safety of those end users and now suddenly comes up with a rule that could see your product banned from their markets.

Yes there is paranoia here but with reasonably good reason. Why not just adopt the industry standard? If that proves good enough you do not need to "improve" on that.

I have not looked into the china standard but I will, as we use rohs components throughout our products and I think quite a few will come from China.

Suddenly comes up with a rule that could see your product banned from their markets.

<Gasps and falls off cat cushion>

So that would be just the same as the protectionism that most western countries have been doing to eachother for years?... I shalln't come up with example else I'll be accused of being anti this that or the other....

Steel industry, food industry are just a couple where we have been regularly stitched up in the past...

Maybe we'd still have some heavy industry if we'd played on a level playing field, or if our government had sloped it in our favour like some others.

GM Corn or Rice anyone? Yum Yum

Del

Fair point as well. I have never cared much for protectionism but it is being done left right and center.

Hope you did not hurt yourself falling of that cushion.

It has to be said though that we would like to keep on selling there as it is a rather large market.

I don't blame China for any of the products shipped to any where in the world that that has what we consider hazardous materials. I believe the the blame should go to the companies that contracted to have them made. That imported them and retailed them. These companies have moved the manufacturing out from the eyes of those that inspect the products for safety. i was done for profit. Profit that was hard to make with the government looking over their shoulder. They I feel are at fault because they in contacting the goods did not insure that they met the safety standards. Nor did the inspect the goods. If a government set down safety standards for products that manufactures in that country have to abide by. Why then should the importer not be compelled to abide by them and inspect these goods.

I agree with this position. It is common knowledge that companies go abroad to cut labor costs. The cost reduction is so large that it is still profitable to ship tons of goods half way round the globe instead of domestically. The labor costs go up and down the supply chain all the way to the docks.

There is a great disparity in this country. There really seems to be no incentive for responsible corporate governance.

The responsibility lies in the lap of the company that makes the goods. Absorb the cost of doing whatever it takes to ensure to the fullest of your abilities to provide a product that complies with domestic laws and regs while wholeheartedly trying to surpass your customers expectations rather than dumb down their expectations.

Meanwhile, is there not a consumer rating database? A consumer reports type forum where anyone can provide info as to their first hand experience regarding satisfaction or dissatisfaction of a product?

cr3

"There is a great disparity in this country. There really seems to be no incentive for responsible corporate governance."

Now that is the understatement of the year.

I applaud the responses that this discussion has received. As I stated above were we wrong to use China as a scapegoat? Is it the republicans dream to shadow their mistake of ignoring an industry standard before it came to life and selling off their inventory of substandard products that were contract manufactured in China. Furthermore are the democrats of our society that are looking out for our well being pointing the finger at China? It is always so painful to see disconnect between world trade and political parties. Can I blame this one on the world trade organization?

Shawn, Shawn, Shawn.

I think you do not fully understand the issue. However, how convenient to use partial facts to blast at political parties of choice and exalt a party of one's favor.

First, your use of the RoHS standard is incorrectly applied. The RoHS Directive stands for "the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment". This predominantly means the use of lead based solder in electronics. It was initiated by Europe as a means to clean our landfills of evil lead.

Strangely, nobody seems to acknowledge where lead originally comes from. However Democratic rumor has it that lead actually comes from Republicans' extravagant campaign fundraising parties where BIG oil and BIG pharmaceutical and Blackwater USA security (along with Halliburton, of course) produce this as a by-product in their posh lavatories after consuming copious amounts of fermented beverages and after dinner mints.

This lead is then extracted from the lavatories by illegal aliens and shipped secretly to China and poured into cans of Krylon paint. So lead does not come from the ground after all.

You may also be interested in noting that the Democrats, in a wonderful attempt to save human kind have given us electronics that now have an accelerated failure life. Lead free solder has a wonderful attribute where it grows whiskers and quickly shorts out ICs and other closely spaced PC traces in a matter of years.

So, while Europe enjoys lead free landfills, ironically, the rate of equipment making its way to landfills will accelerate when your pricy RoHS compatible electronics dies in a few years. Maybe we will solve this nagging problem someday, but meanwhile you pay the price with electronics that have a shorter life.

The good news is that medical, aircraft, and military electronics are exempt, so your pace maker will not fail or your next flight will not drop out of the sky unexpectedly.

Europe is starting to reverse its direction on RoHS because it didn't fully research the ramifications of their move. In other words, bleeding hearts meant well, but they used emotions instead of fact based decisions to rule.

However, RoHS does not have anything to do with lead based paints, something the US has outlawed a long time ago, but China does not have the same will to play by the rules. In fact, China is happy to cut every corner they can while they try to become a world economic power. Eventually, they will meet the world standards. However, as long as people are willing to buy cheap they will get what they pay for, at best.

Who's to blame? You may not like it, but it's your fault. Did you really think that 10 cents would buy you the same quality that $1 buys in the rest of the world? Shame on you.

I firmly believe that the consumer should be educated. If you believe that its someone else's responsibility to look after your well being you are going to be disappointed in the results.

One of the requirements to achieve China RoHS is that the certification has to be done by an approved agency that is approved by a China based authority and probably needs to be in China itself. You may see that only China based organisations have a look in to be certified.

Have a look and see how many China based compliances are being introduced, there is a common point, play by their rules - only.

So they make the rules and you have to play by them

It makes a change from the usual assumption that we must all play the tune of the Star Spangled Banner!