101–104 of 104 posts
Asbestos is amazing and has undoubtedly saved many lives. But thanks to technology we can do even better, we don't live like Kings, we live better than Kings. (Those of us in the 1%, aka West)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It would be in your Ove Glove, not in your floor tiles Would people buy oven gloves that had to be treated as hazardous waste? You’d likely have to build cost of eventual disposal into the sale price, a la WEEE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_Electrical_and_Electroni... > Same goes for lead paint Where would you see this being used?
>Would people buy oven gloves that had to be treated as hazardous waste? You kind of answered your own question with the reference to e-waste. If the product confers some benefit and isn't hazardous in the form in which the users will use it then people will have no problem buying it. >Where would you see this being used? Things that very cost sensitive and aren't gonna see much human contact and will almost certainl…
> Things that very cost sensitive and aren't gonna see much human contact and will almost certainly enter a recycling stream before the paint wears off. 55gal drums come to mind.
People work around those all day. And lead wasn't added to paint to make it cheap, it was added mostly to increase durability. So you probably don't really want it for short-lived products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_re_metallica was published in 1556, but there do seem to be words missing from that sentence somewhere.
Or punctuation: De re Metallica (1500s), on the other hand, mentions [the] dangers to workers and environmental harm that mining caused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or punctuation: De re Metallica (1500s), on the other hand, mentions [the] dangers to workers and environmental harm that mining caused.
Thank you, being unfamiliar with that work, I couldn't parse that sentence.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38015/38015-h/38015-h.htm
Scroll down to page 9 and you find:
"But besides this, the strongest argument of the detractors is that the fields are devastated by mining operations, for which reason formerly Italians were warned by law that no one should dig the earth for metals and so injure their very fertile fields, their vineyards, and their olive groves. Also they argue that the woods and groves are cut down, for there is need of an endless amount of wood for timbers, machines, and the smelting of metals. And when the woods and groves are felled, then are exterminated the beasts and birds, very many of which furnish a pleasant and agreeable food for man. Further, when the ores are washed, the water which has been used poisons the brooks and streams, and either destroys the fish or drives them away."