Re: Warmer tones

Richard Sullivan (richsul@roadrunner.com)
Sun, 04 May 1997 15:23:08 -0600

>Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 15:23:07 -0400 (EDT)
>From: CHPalmer@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Warmer tones
>To: ALT-PHOTO-PROCESS-L@skyway.usask.ca
>Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"

>Here is what the package says:
>
>"The active ingredient is categorized as 'slightly hazardous.' It is a skin,
>eye, and respiratory irritant and should not be ingested." Sure doesn't
>sound like the warning that a mercury salt deserves. And, after using the
>stuff for six years I'm not yet mad as a hatter!
>
>Charlie Palmer

It very well be mercuric chloride. There is a provison in the regulations,
and I can't locate it at this moment, that exempts compounds less than 1
part per 1000 from all of the hazardous regulations, though if I'm not
mistaken the offending compound has to be listed. There is a stuff sold in
Pep Boys Auto stores that is called Eagle Mag Wheel Cleaner. It lists
hydrofluoric acid as an ingredient! That with an "f" folks. Hydrofuoric
acid is one of the nasty nasties of the chemical trade but they can put it
into a consumer product. My son says he's used it and he says if you inhale
the spray, it's awful. I think it would make a dandy clearing agent for
pt/pd prints btw.

I'll check out on the Net and see if I can find more info on this regulation.

I also have never heard of the designation "slightly hazardous" being used,
seems about as meaningul as being "slightly pregnant." If it was one part
per 1000 of mercuric chloride someone could conceive of it in this way.

Dick
Bostick & Sullivan
PO Box 16639, Santa Fe
NM 87506
505-474-0890 FAX 505-474-2857