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

181–190 of 366 posts

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#181

Post by nimbius »

RankingMember wrote: post #169
nimbius wrote: post #131

Im seeing a lot of comments on brakes containing asbestos. As an automotive engine mechanic, I started my trade changing out brake pads. As far as im aware, the last generation of asbestos containing brake pads in the US were Ferodo Brake Pads ending around 1994. The pads were phased out for a number of reasons - health, of course. as a mechanic, mesothelioma was your biggest risk changing brakes all day. most shops…

Ha, for some reason it never occurred to me that the "bestos" in "Raybestos" was a reference to asbestos.

oh man, they were legendary for their use of the stuff. The negative association with Asbestos eventaully cost the owner his company in 1998. Raymark filed for Chapter 11.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raybestos#Superfund_site_clean...

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#182

Post by mtw »

nemacol wrote: post #147

Having just lost a father-in-law to mesothelioma (June 2018), this makes me incredibly sad. I understand this is not an actual rule change and blah blah blah. 3,000 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. What a slow and horrific way to go. Slowly losing your breath. Lungs filling with fluid and being rushed off to ER to drain. Endless breathing treatments. Never sleeping more than an hour without waking up…

> Not to mention the hassles of the American healthcare system, doctors, lawyers, bills, and enough paperwork to fill a small office building.

For reference, each new case costs the Canadian healthcare system $1m CAD.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#183

Post by craftyguy »

mirimir wrote: post #177
okket wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nixon created the EPA...

Not only that, but (according to a former senior adviser, who I got to know in the 90s) he was very close to supporting something like national minimum income. To replace welfare. As I recall, it used the income tax system. Below some minimum income, the tax rate became negative, increasingly so as income dropped.

> he was very close to

Then he resigned, or was he always just 'very close to' it but never committed?

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#184

Post by HillaryBriss »

swebs wrote: post #110

>EPA is now allowing asbestos back into manufacturing Wow, misleading headline of the decade. Asbestos was never completely banned from manufacturing in the United States, only for certain items. https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/us-federal-bans-asbestos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos_and_the_law_(United_S...

yes. that's right. it was the proliferation of costly lawsuits in recent decades which diminished the use of asbestos in the US.

companies are still trying to resolve all of these lawsuits.

what kind of incentives would need to be in place for a company to willingly put that lawsuit target on its own back?

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#185

Post by nimbius »

jdietrich wrote: post #173
nimbius wrote: post #131

Im seeing a lot of comments on brakes containing asbestos. As an automotive engine mechanic, I started my trade changing out brake pads. As far as im aware, the last generation of asbestos containing brake pads in the US were Ferodo Brake Pads ending around 1994. The pads were phased out for a number of reasons - health, of course. as a mechanic, mesothelioma was your biggest risk changing brakes all day. most shops…

OEMs have phased out asbestos, but there's a serious risk posed by aftermarket pads, shoes and linings. Because asbestos brake parts are legal, there's nothing stopping a parts distributor from shipping in a bunch of cheap Chinese parts made with asbestos. If you operate on the assumption that modern braking systems are all asbestos free, there's a greater risk of accidental exposure if you do encounter asbestos. In…

Agreed! but they might be easier to spot than you think...

warped pads with low miles or pad material that laps the backplate are all signs of a cheap chinesium aftermarket product. these cheap pads usually have issues with fracturing, which scores the rotor and can cause pistons to seize.

- weird pad discoloration with wear or rotor marking is a sure sign the pads been impregnated with a cheap cyanoacrylate as a bonding measure.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#187

Post by dmix »

nemacol wrote: post #147

Having just lost a father-in-law to mesothelioma (June 2018), this makes me incredibly sad. I understand this is not an actual rule change and blah blah blah. 3,000 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. What a slow and horrific way to go. Slowly losing your breath. Lungs filling with fluid and being rushed off to ER to drain. Endless breathing treatments. Never sleeping more than an hour without waking up…

It does say it's only being approved in special cases. I wouldn't expect the building industry to suddenly start using it again.

How many of those 3000 are a legacy of the previous eras misunderstanding of the chemical? I doubt any company would ignore that risk and produce a product that put people at a direct and unknown risk, especially given the legal liability since we now know the full risks of the chemical and the alternatives the market has long ago developed in every category.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#188

Post by ateesdalejr »

bruinjoe wrote: post #135
hanniabu wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to the US lobbying system, where science, ethics, and morals take a backseat to agendas of those with the deepest pockets.

This is so true. We should just ban lobbying because it is only used by rich corporations and individuals.

Do many technology companies (Facebook, Google, etc.) not use lobbying to fight for tech interests?

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#189

Post by dmix »

mirimir wrote: post #177
okket wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nixon created the EPA...

Not only that, but (according to a former senior adviser, who I got to know in the 90s) he was very close to supporting something like national minimum income. To replace welfare. As I recall, it used the income tax system. Below some minimum income, the tax rate became negative, increasingly so as income dropped.

American politics was very centerist in the past. The toxic partisan nature of it, which both sides are currently doubling down on, is largely a modern invention.

The unending increase in size and scope of government has been largely separate from this, and was a feature of both parties despite rhetoric for much of the last century. Not just in the US but in every western country.

Saying that government has been stripped of power by x party simply doesn't hold up to facts. If anything the power has consistently increased, or at most occasionally plateaued or massively increased in other areas. But most importantly only a few well connected individuals and companies are getting exceptions to that rule, in special circumstances.

Which is exactly what this law change is about: it explicitly says it will only be done in special circumstances. Their power to regulate asbestos has not been diminished at all, they've merely further solidified cronyism and legislation-by-special-favour into law.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#190

Post by mrguyorama »

dmix wrote: post #187
nemacol wrote: post #147

Having just lost a father-in-law to mesothelioma (June 2018), this makes me incredibly sad. I understand this is not an actual rule change and blah blah blah. 3,000 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. What a slow and horrific way to go. Slowly losing your breath. Lungs filling with fluid and being rushed off to ER to drain. Endless breathing treatments. Never sleeping more than an hour without waking up…

It does say it's only being approved in special cases. I wouldn't expect the building industry to suddenly start using it again. How many of those 3000 are a legacy of the previous eras misunderstanding of the chemical? I doubt any company would ignore that risk and produce a product that put people at a direct and unknown risk, especially given the legal liability since we now know the full risks of the chemical and…

>I doubt any company would ignore that risk and produce a product that put people at a direct and unknown risk

Those companies did exactly that! Asbestos companies knew the dangers internally. It's no different than cigarette companies suppressing the science of how smoking is dangerous

Post reply on HN