[SATLUG] Laser printers can pollute more than tobacco smoke

[Ernest de Leon]

It's funny that you mention that because in California just about every
place of business you go has a sign that states that  something in the
vicinity has chemicals that are known to cause cancer.  It's to the point
that people ignore it most of the time there.  When I first saw a sign that
said that, I approached the Maitre d' and asked about it, he half-heartedly
said that there was no concern.  Apparently, they must place that sign if
any chemical (even cleaning solvents etc) that resides on the premises is
known to cause cancer.  Now I see those sign all over the place in Cali and
I think nothing of it.  That's almost as bad as having no signs because they
have desensitized people to the risk.

Ernest

On 8/2/07, David Kowis <dkowis at shlrm.org> wrote:
>
> M K Ramadoss wrote:
> > In a recent study, it was found that some of the laser printers are
> > polluting worse than tobacco smoke. Here are the results: For the full
> > article, just Google.
> > ==================================
> > Printer tests showed levels of ultra-fine particle pollution:
> > High-level emitters
> > HP Color LaserJet 4650dn
> > HP Color LaserJet 5550dtn
> > HP Color LaserJet 8550N
> > HP LaserJet 1320N
> > HP LaserJet 1320n
> > HP LaserJet 2420dn
> > *HP LaserJet 4200dtn
> > HP LaserJet 4250n (old cartridge)
> > HP LaserJet 4250n (new cartridge)
> > HP LaserJet 5(a) (further study needed)
> > *HP LaserJet 8000DN
> > HP LaserJet 8150N
> > Toshiba Studio 450
> > Mid-level emitters
> > HP LaserJet 1020
> > HP LaserJet 4200dtn
> > Low-level emitters
> > Canon IRC6800
> > HP LaserJet 5M
> > HP LaserJet 9000dn
> > Ricoh CL3000DN
>
> These printers contain chemicals known to the state of California to
> cause cancer.
>
>
> David
> --
> _______________________________________________
> SATLUG mailing list
> SATLUG at satlug.org
> http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug to unsubscribe
> Powered by Rackspace (www.rackspace.com)
>