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

["B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net>]

Boy! Don't let the tunas get near it!!:-)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Dan Cardish
> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2000 11:24 AM
> 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.
> >
> >
> >
>