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

PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

cyclingnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 397 posts

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#11

Post by DoingIsLearning »

downvotetruth wrote: post #5

> Gore is committing to a "goal for being free of PFCs of Environmental Concern." That doesn't affect the ePTFE membrane though because, according to the brand, ePTFE "is inert, insoluble in water, extremely stable and not biodegradable. Therefore, it does not degrade to become a source of PFCs of Environmental Concern." Gore continuation: biodegradable:degradeable ::(->) unbiodegradable:undegradeable

It's more of a case that they as a business have no way of making money without this pollutant not that the pollutant itself is not an issue.

I have worn plenty of boots with Gore-Tex reinforced regions and they most definitely break down and become frail and brittle given enough kilometers of trekking.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#12

Post by mnky9800n »

nwah1 wrote: post #9
TrispusAttucks wrote: post #2

I am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

We are in the middle of a biotech revolution. Figuring out how to scale up bioengineered materials is a likely source of impressive materials. Nature is full of stuff like spider silk, chitin, bone, phosphorescent materials, sponges,etc.

Scaling things always seems to be the thing that takes from the environment.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#13

Post by wyre »

For anyone not familiar with what makes Shakedry so revolutionary is its ability to be waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight. Its weight and breathability make it incredible for active sports like cycling or running. These jackets weigh around 100-150g depending on features and size and can pack into the pocket of a cycling Jersey, all while being waterproof and preventing the athlete from overheating.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#14

Post by elric »

ck2 wrote: post #4

Maybe we can mimic some of the effects found in nature without chemicals and make hydrophobic surfaces based on their nano-level properties? Or like ducks use preen oil, something closer to that.

For most regular activities, old fashioned things like wool coats, oiled leather, or waxed cotton work remarkably well. Waterproofing imo is only a major issue if you're having to save on weight/space (and cost, I guess). It's hard to run 10k in a wool greatcoat in the rain.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#15

Post by elric »

nwah1 wrote: post #9
TrispusAttucks wrote: post #2

I am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

We are in the middle of a biotech revolution. Figuring out how to scale up bioengineered materials is a likely source of impressive materials. Nature is full of stuff like spider silk, chitin, bone, phosphorescent materials, sponges,etc.

I remember reading something about the trillions of chiken bones we discard annually are something of a problem. "The dose makes the poison" seems to apply to the environment as much as it does to the individual.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#17

Post by mc32 »

coffeebeqn wrote: post #10
mc32 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is already an XVIII century technology and WWII popularized option called millerain. But it requires some maintenance and isn’t “light” as preferred by cyclists and runners.

Yeah wax was used to make tents waterproof as well. But it’s quite a bit heavier than plastic thread

Yep. People will have to put more work into things. But it’s that or these toxic options as of now.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#19

Post by CydeWeys »

elric wrote: post #15
nwah1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are in the middle of a biotech revolution. Figuring out how to scale up bioengineered materials is a likely source of impressive materials. Nature is full of stuff like spider silk, chitin, bone, phosphorescent materials, sponges,etc.

I remember reading something about the trillions of chiken bones we discard annually are something of a problem. "The dose makes the poison" seems to apply to the environment as much as it does to the individual.

Curious what the problem is? Animals with bones have existed for hundreds of millions of years. The environment knows what to do with them. PFCs by contrast do not exist naturally in the world and they act as a toxin in the environment.

Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments

#20

Post by bowsamic »

nwah1 wrote: post #9
TrispusAttucks wrote: post #2

I am not optimistic about the future of sustainable specialized materials. It seems very likely that the same structures that give modern high tech materials their unique abilities are the same ones that make them so environmentally unfriendly.

We are in the middle of a biotech revolution. Figuring out how to scale up bioengineered materials is a likely source of impressive materials. Nature is full of stuff like spider silk, chitin, bone, phosphorescent materials, sponges,etc.

Natural things usually decay quickly though. Often they involve some kind of biological factory that continuously grows new biomaterial
Post reply on HN