Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[thomas malloy]

David Jonsson wrote:

Isn't laser toner specifically chosen for having high or well known 
static characteristics? What is he ability to have static electricity? 
Has it anything to do about paraelectricity?


David

On Dec 4, 2007 2:35 PM, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:


same as any fine dust, rub it against itself. one of those bagless
vacuums would work perfect.  i created 3 inch sparks to my legs
with one of those just using reglular house dust from the static
buildup.


Three inch sparks! stay away from computers.


--- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- 
http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[leaking pen]

its not the toners that are collected, its the toner containers.  thats
becuase they have valuable parts, like the drum, inside them, and it costs
about a buck to refill it with toner as opposed to manufacturing a new one.

its a blend of plastic resins.  not something i want in my lungs.


On 12/4/07, Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There is concern about toner dust.
> It is extremely fine and can lodge deep in the lungs.
>
> Harry
>
> On 4/12/2007 3:51 AM, David Jonsson wrote:
>
> I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> not the case
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner  
>
> The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to generate
> static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it catch fire.
> Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind of
> apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can this
> list offer any advise?
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
That which yields isn't always weak.

RE: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy -

[Rick Monteverde]

Per the Nick Palmer experiments, I wonder if toner carts get lighter when
you shake them up?
 
- R.

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[David Jonsson]

A friend of mine said the same thing but I wonder if the real hazard might
be electrical. Do you know how these health investigations were performed?

Dust has been available to humans for millennia without problem so I doubt
that this is the real hazard. It could be the end hazard (ontologically) and
the electrical effect is what brings the dust to the undesired places in the
lungs.

David

On Dec 4, 2007 5:33 PM, Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  There is concern about toner dust.
> It is extremely fine and can lodge deep in the lungs.
>
> Harry
>
> On 4/12/2007 3:51 AM, David Jonsson wrote:
>
> I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> not the case
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner  
>
> The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to generate
> static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it catch fire.
> Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind of
> apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can this
> list offer any advise?
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
David Jonsson
Interactive Institute AB http://www.tii.se/
Kista, Sweden
phone callto:+46707791731
Contact info: http://www.tii.se/people/david

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[leaking pen]

yes.   the laser on the paper causes static, the toner than sticks to that
static, so that toner only sticks to areas where the laser has excited.  the
heater element then mlets the toner to the page.  the large amount of static
generated is one of the reasons a laser printer running overtime smells like
ozone.

no clue about paraelectricity.


On 12/4/07, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Isn't laser toner specifically chosen for having high or well known static
> characteristics? What is he ability to have static electricity? Has it
> anything to do about paraelectricity?
>
> David
>
> On Dec 4, 2007 2:35 PM, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > same as any fine dust, rub it against itself. one of those bagless
> > vacuums would work perfect.  i created 3 inch sparks to my legs with one of
> > those just using reglular house dust from the static buildup.
> >
> >
> > On Dec 4, 2007 1:51 AM, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> > > collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> > > not the case
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner
> > >
> > > The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to
> > > generate static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it
> > > catch fire. Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what 
> > > kind
> > > of apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can
> > > this list offer any advise?
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > That which yields isn't always weak.
>
>
>
>
> --
> David Jonsson
> Interactive Institute AB http://www.tii.se/
> Kista, Sweden
> phone callto:+46707791731
> Contact info: http://www.tii.se/people/david




-- 
That which yields isn't always weak.

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[Harry Veeder]

There is concern about toner dust.
It is extremely fine and can lodge deep in the lungs.

Harry

On 4/12/2007 3:51 AM, David Jonsson wrote:

I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are collected
and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was not the case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner  

The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to generate
static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it catch fire.
Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind of
apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can this
list offer any advise?

David

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[Terry Blanton]

http://home.howstuffworks.com/photocopier1.htm

On Dec 4, 2007 9:46 AM, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Isn't laser toner specifically chosen for having high or well known static
> characteristics? What is he ability to have static electricity? Has it
> anything to do about paraelectricity?
>
> David
>
>
>
> On Dec 4, 2007 2:35 PM, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > same as any fine dust, rub it against itself. one of those bagless vacuums
> would work perfect.  i created 3 inch sparks to my legs with one of those
> just using reglular house dust from the static buildup.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 4, 2007 1:51 AM, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> not the case
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner
> > >
> > > The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to
> generate static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it
> catch fire. Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind
> of apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can
> this list offer any advise?
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > That which yields isn't always weak.
>
>
>
> --
> David Jonsson
> Interactive Institute AB http://www.tii.se/
> Kista, Sweden
> phone callto:+46707791731
> Contact info: http://www.tii.se/people/david

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[David Jonsson]

Isn't laser toner specifically chosen for having high or well known static
characteristics? What is he ability to have static electricity? Has it
anything to do about paraelectricity?

David

On Dec 4, 2007 2:35 PM, leaking pen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> same as any fine dust, rub it against itself. one of those bagless vacuums
> would work perfect.  i created 3 inch sparks to my legs with one of those
> just using reglular house dust from the static buildup.
>
>
> On Dec 4, 2007 1:51 AM, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> > collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> > not the case
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner
> >
> > The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to
> > generate static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it
> > catch fire. Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind
> > of apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can
> > this list offer any advise?
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> That which yields isn't always weak.




-- 
David Jonsson
Interactive Institute AB http://www.tii.se/
Kista, Sweden
phone callto:+46707791731
Contact info: http://www.tii.se/people/david

Re: [Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[leaking pen]

same as any fine dust, rub it against itself. one of those bagless vacuums
would work perfect.  i created 3 inch sparks to my legs with one of those
just using reglular house dust from the static buildup.

On Dec 4, 2007 1:51 AM, David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are
> collected and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was
> not the case
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner
>
> The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to generate
> static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it catch fire.
> Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind of
> apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can this
> list offer any advise?
>
> David
>
>
>


-- 
That which yields isn't always weak.

[Vo]:Laser toner controversy

[David Jonsson]

I thought that laser toner was dangerous chemically since they are collected
and disposed separately. i investigated and found that this was not the case
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toner

The only health risk associated with it is due to its ability to generate
static electricity. Putting it in a vacuum cleaner can make it catch fire.
Therefore I saved a bag of waste laser toner. I wonder what kind of
apparatus I need to excite the toner to produce static electricity? Can this
list offer any advise?

David