From: Dan Blunk <blunk**At_Symbol_Here**UCSC.EDU>
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Marketing the Conversion to Non-Hg Thermometers
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 11:45:46 -0800
Reply-To: DCHAS-L <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**MED.CORNELL.EDU>
Message-ID: 18a001ceea16$efdbe9b0$cf93bd10$**At_Symbol_Here**ucsc.edu


Colleagues,

 

I’m looking for comparison data / recommendations I might use to assuage academic researcher anxiety with respect to swapping their mercury thermometers for spirit thermometers.

 

Reluctance to give up Hg thermometers is often rationalized by claiming spirit thermometers aren’t as accurate or aren’t appropriate for as many applications as a mercury-filled thermometer.

 

I would appreciate suggestions on where I might find performance-based support for spirit-filled thermometers.

 

I have information regarding comparisons of potential exposure health risk, spill clean-up expense and environmental contamination.

 

Thanks for your help in finding performance-based support for using spirit filled thermometers rather than mercury filled thermometers,

 

Dan

---------------------------------

Dan Blunk  PhD, REA  831.459.3541 

Environmental Programs Manager

Environmental Health & Safety Office

University of California Santa Cruz

 

 

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post



The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to secretary@dchas.org.
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.