Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

archpaper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 366 posts

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#91

Post by at-fates-hands »

smt88 wrote: post #27
gameswithgo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not unbelievable, it is the stated stance of the GOP to reduce environmental and health regulations, and they are doing it. It is exactly what we voted for.

The majority of us did not vote for this. Without gerrymandering or the electoral college, Congress and the White House would be overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats.

Actually this is the result of a two party system, not some nefarious political conspiracy.

The electoral college is the way we elect presidents for a reason. If we went by population, a huge chunk of the country's vote wouldn't matter and the Democrats would win every election. I'm pretty sure that's exactly the opposite of what the founders of the country envisioned.

If you're not happy about what's going on, get your act together and take back the house and then proceed to do what the Republicans did to Obama after they took back the senate and effectively blocked everything he wanted to do, including a SCOTUS nomination.

You want REAL change? Allow more political parties so that the pendulum doesn't just swing back and forth. There was a time when any president would work with a divided congress and compromise to get stuff done. It would seem those days are long gone and the only way to truly fix the system is to get more than two parties just handing off power back and forth.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#92

Post by leesalminen »

close04 wrote: post #70
mywittyname wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Reagan administration sold the GOP that all government agencies are incompetent.

Whatever the reason, the solution is pretty straight forward: make extensive use of asbestos in every single room of the White House. :)

I had to search around for the flag button as I so rarely use it. I don’t think these kinds of comments are welcome on HN. Save it for reddit.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#93

Post by rescripting »

xienze wrote: post #78
jdietrich wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EPA already allows asbestos to be used in a huge range of products. I simply cannot see what justification could be made for allowing asbestos to continue to be used in cement sheet, floor tile and brake pads. It might pose no immediate hazard when installed, but it could become a serious hazard at any point during its lifespan. Cement sheets crack and crumble, floor tiles become worn and get replaced, brake pads…

The danger of asbestos to regular people is way overstated. Yes, if you work around it every day for years without wearing a mask you'll regret it. If it's in your floor tiles and one breaks, you'll be fine.

"all levels of asbestos exposure studied to date have demonstrated asbestos-related disease ... there is no level of [asbestos] exposure below which clinical effects do not occur"

https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/81-103/pdfs/81-103.pdf

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#94

Post by anonuser123456 »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #85

Aren't there 2 kinds of asbestos? 1 kind is dangerous to humans due to its particle size, and the other is larger and is filtered by your body...?

There are more than 2. Chrysotile is the form most common in building material. Crocidolite is the form found in brake pads.

Crocidolite is much more carcinogenic than chrysotile.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#96

Post by WhompingWindows »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #91
smt88 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of us did not vote for this. Without gerrymandering or the electoral college, Congress and the White House would be overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats.

Actually this is the result of a two party system, not some nefarious political conspiracy. The electoral college is the way we elect presidents for a reason. If we went by population, a huge chunk of the country's vote wouldn't matter and the Democrats would win every election. I'm pretty sure that's exactly the opposite of what the founders of the country envisioned. If you're not happy about what's going on, get y…

A huge chunk of the population's vote already doesn't matter. Any state with a wide margin of victory for either party effectively neutralizes the power of an individuals' vote. For presidential elections specifically, I live in a very blue state. No matter what my vote, it will not change the outcome even if we ground-hog-day repeated the election 1 million times. Whereas, in a state like Ohio or Pennsylvania or Michigan, where thousands of votes separate the winner, each individual's vote is much much more important, as well as the network effects of their political activism/thought patterns onto those around them.

It's disingenuous to say that the two party system is the only problem here. Votes already don't matter for many people, except as a symbolic gesture of rights/freedom.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#97

Post by cimmanom »

mhaymo wrote: post #58
smt88 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of us did not vote for this. Without gerrymandering or the electoral college, Congress and the White House would be overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats.

I think you're massively overstating the effects of gerrymandering. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026137941... > while Republican and Democratic gerrymandering affects the partisan outcomes of Congressional elections in some states, the net effect across the states is modest, creating no more than one new Republican seat in Congress

the issue is more that the country is self-gerrymandered such that despite the majority of total votes going to democrats, the distribution of house and senate seats across the states heavily favors rural areas that tend to vote overwhelmingly republican.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#98

Post by k1ns »

I believe I've found the SNUR in question [0] and it seems to state that the EPA will consider uses of asbestos in construction:

> Any Other Building Materials (other than cement): Examples include insulation, plasters, mastics, textured paints (e.g., simulates stucco), and block filler paints (e.g., for coating masonry).

It looks like they're wanting to open a pathway of discussion between potential manufacturers/importers of asbestos and the EPA for new business opportunities which apparently include new construction, the brake pads that go onto your vehicles, and the floor tiles in your home.

This sounds insane to me. I don't want to live in a world where policymakers with no scientific background get to decide how they personally feel about proven carcinogens in my children's lives. They seem to literally be saying that they want to consider asbestos in construction projects as a significant new use despite the fact that using it in construction was previously proven to be unsafe.

The comment date is quickly closing, please let your voice be heard.

[0] https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0159...

EDIT: If I'm confused and have linked something irrelevant, please let me know and I will redact.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#99

Post by xienze »

rescripting wrote: post #93
xienze wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The danger of asbestos to regular people is way overstated. Yes, if you work around it every day for years without wearing a mask you'll regret it. If it's in your floor tiles and one breaks, you'll be fine.

"all levels of asbestos exposure studied to date have demonstrated asbestos-related disease ... there is no level of [asbestos] exposure below which clinical effects do not occur" https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/81-103/pdfs/81-103.pdf

> However, in general, people who become ill from inhaling asbestos have been regularly exposed in a job where they worked directly with the material.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_impact_of_asbestos

> Asbestos can be found naturally in the air outdoors and in some drinkable water, including water from natural sources. Even nonoccupationally exposed members of the human population have tens to hundreds of thousands of asbestos fibers per gram of dry lung tissue, equivalent to millions of fibers in each lung.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_impact_of_asbestos#Envi...

OMG we're all gonna get mesothelioma from the asbestos that is normally found outdoors, unrelated to man-made activity!

Again, I stand by what I said. The risks of asbestos to ordinary people are way overblown. It has to be loose and you have to be exposed to a lot of it for a long period of time. Regular people are fine.

Edit: ya know people, you could respond to the specific claims instead of pressing the "I disagree" button. Is asbestos a dangerous substance? Yes, in certain circumstances. Are those circumstances something normal people need to be concerned about? No, not unless you work with the substance every day and without proper precautions.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#100

Post by WhompingWindows »

tmaly wrote: post #32

It has good material qualities, but do we really want to trade that for an increase in lung cancer? The stuff is so costly to dispose of, it is not really worth using.

Unless your environmental "protection" agency is not in the business of protecting you. In which case, you don't have to pay the costs to dispose of things properly, because businesses shouldn't ever be fettered by any kind of environmental regulations, at least according to the current philosophy of the "protection" agency.
Post reply on HN