XO-1.5's sudden death - oven resurrected!

[Yioryos Asprobounitis]

--- On Tue, 10/16/12, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:

> From: James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org>
> Subject: Re: XO-1.5's sudden death - oven resurrected!
> To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "OLPC Devel" <devel at lists.laptop.org>, "Chris Leonard" <cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 12:26 AM
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 09:09:07PM
> -0700, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote:
> > Having said that, in cases like the XO boards I think
> that we could
> > and *should* know, at least the chemicals involved
> 
> Means that for each assembly, down to component level, the
> materials
> would have to be determined, along with the expected outgas,
> and then
> compared against a food safety standard.  We might have
> to start
> several new production processes for components in order to
> meet
> standards for edibility and kitchen equipment safety.
> 
> I estimate the cost per laptop would rise by a factor of
> 1000 or so.
> 
> I'm sorry, but we cannot afford this kind of ideal.


Sure! 
If you have no intention to provide the *names* of the "chemicals involved"...

Seriously though, looking at the RoHS it would appear the known toxic chemicals are bellow 0.1% (1000ppm) on the original material. Considering volatility and standards, I would say pretty safe!
Standard floor dast wipes in a city home or outdoors soil for example, give ~200ppm for lead, and in the wilderness soil lead is still 50ppm.
Cadmium is also pretty safe given that its limit in *food colors* is 15ppm.
This would be true for the rest of the chemicals in the list. But I'm interested on what is not in the list (Not its level necessarily).

Disclosure: I'm a chemist by training :-)


> 
> -- 
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.linux.org.au/
>