Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there are no humans around does life on earth have any value? It’s just another planet among billions.
counter-question : do you only place value on things that are human-centric? there is a lot about Earth that makes it unique outside of humanity.
PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
351–360 of 397 posts
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's night and day different with other waterproof tech. Goretex publishes all the specs you want like hydrostatic head rating (how many mm of water pressure it can withstand), breathability, etc. Shakedry was better and lighter than anything else we've ever seen. The only con against it is that in high abrasion situations (like shoulder areas of jackets when wearing a heavy backpack) it can wear out. People in the o…
Interesting. I have a fair amount of older ultralight stuff and while it definitely did the job I certainly felt that there was a sharp knuckle in the price curve where the extra cost wasn’t worth it. Durability is a big factor now though since I’m primarily bike commuting where it’s about daily use & weight is less important.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
> waterproof, highly breathable, and incredibly lightweight This is basically the way most outdoors products have been marketed since the previous century so I’m not sure how much we’re actually talking about here. What I was hoping to see in that article was something more quantitative — does “heavy and doesn't breathe as well” mean something is 20% heavier or 200%, etc.?
It's night and day different with other waterproof tech. Goretex publishes all the specs you want like hydrostatic head rating (how many mm of water pressure it can withstand), breathability, etc. Shakedry was better and lighter than anything else we've ever seen. The only con against it is that in high abrasion situations (like shoulder areas of jackets when wearing a heavy backpack) it can wear out. People in the o…
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rain when it's 40F out hits different. It's not 70 and raining. It makes you much colder.
I get this — but in the Lakes district (England) or anyplace in Scotland, rain at 40F is still common yet folks are unperturbed and continue their daily outdoor activities.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
If humanity up and disappeared tomorrow, most of the environmental damage from cars, overpopulation, etc. would sort itself out in a couple of hundred years. PFAS, however, are extremely chemically stable and some of them will still be around in 1,000+ years time. They also bioaccumulate, and biomagnification occurs in predators (similar to mercury). It is a massive problem and the repercussions will be with us for a…
If there are no humans around does life on earth have any value? It’s just another planet among billions.
Given that multiple species can evolve to fill the same niche, I would expect that as long as life of some kind survives on the planet another species would evolve to replace us.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#356I must be a weirdo.... I just wear lots of wool, and a thin windproof/rainproof jacket with armpit zips. I get sweaty but I stay warm (as long as I'm moving)
I would love to see a return of waxed canvas as an outer shell material.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shakedry is just a bare goretex membrane, as far as I know…aka without the outer shell fabric. Not sure it’s revolutionary. You reduce weight and bulk by eliminating the outer fabric but at the expense of abrasion resistance. Why it works for road cycling but not much else.
| Why it works for road cycling but not much else. My guess is that road cyclists have a tendency to buy new gear on a shockingly frequent basis, so if your jacket only lasts a year it's not really a problem.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#358I must be a weirdo.... I just wear lots of wool, and a thin windproof/rainproof jacket with armpit zips. I get sweaty but I stay warm (as long as I'm moving)
You get the warmth from something else underneath use the very thin Shakedry shell to keep the rain and wind out. Except that with a breathable fabric you won't get (as) sweaty[1].
If you pair it with arm and leg warmers you can cover a really big temperature range, like you might encounter on a multi-day cycling tour without taking up much space or weight.
Despite the marketing you can still get a bit sweaty with Shakedry if it's hot weather.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why is there even a market for potentially harmful cookware? Was it driven by marketing or am I mistaken, and my pans aren’t any good? Eggs. There's a reason almost all professional chefs, despite knowing more than anyone about how to season metal-based pans, use nonstick pans for eggs. (And sometimes fish.)
What am I missing out on? Something must make teflon/nonstick better than cast iron here, but I have never had any problems with eggs or fish in my heavy pans.
Re: PFC bans are going to change waterproof garments
#360Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there are no humans around does life on earth have any value? It’s just another planet among billions.
Life on Earth is what's special, not us. We're just animals, nothing more. Given that multiple species can evolve to fill the same niche, I would expect that as long as life of some kind survives on the planet another species would evolve to replace us.