121–130 of 542 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. Or more precisely, ban the net effect (putting the dust into the air), and then people can find the best alternative given that constraint, whether it's a better manufacturing/installation process that doesn't put the dust into the air, or a product that doesn't produce the dust in the first place.
This was considered but the problem is it’s very difficult to enforce in practice The product is generally installed onsite in a fast paced building industry that doesn’t have time/room to do it properly and often no supervision (1-2 often independent trades doing the installs) to ensure the appropriate measures are actually taken. The risk has already been known for a while and in practice still lots of “YOLO” onsit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Granite countertops are cheaper, more durable and have better thermal resistance than artificial stone ones.
It is a little more mixed than that. Granite is generally cheaper and has better heat resistance. Granite is porous, so it stains and needs sealing every year or two. Quartz/artificial takes less maintenance, is a little stronger, so it is more scratch resistant.
I don't understand how banning it does anything to address the underlying problem of people wilfully ignoring PPE/safe working practices. One of the "Suggested safer alternatives" is Granite which can have silica content up to 45% (Engineered stone being 95%+) So instead of 2 years to develop silicosis it will instead take 4 years of working with the "safe alternatives"? All the people who were cutting engineered sto…
Seems like you should ban the manufacturing methods, not the end product. Like, if I invent a way to safely manufacture and do on-site adjustments of engineered stone, shouldn't I be rewarded by the market for it? The material itself is not harmful, just breathing the dust of it is, which can be said of a lot of things in a common household.
Asbestos and lead are also minimal risk undamaged in-situ. Both are now banned, and for good reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Asbestos and lead are also minimal risk undamaged in-situ. Both are now banned, and for good reason.
One difference is that stone countertops are not a danger to homeowners or people doing future basic renovation.
I don't understand how banning it does anything to address the underlying problem of people wilfully ignoring PPE/safe working practices. One of the "Suggested safer alternatives" is Granite which can have silica content up to 45% (Engineered stone being 95%+) So instead of 2 years to develop silicosis it will instead take 4 years of working with the "safe alternatives"? All the people who were cutting engineered sto…
But I imagine there's a method of safely working with this material. And, there's ALWAYS going to be hazardous materials - you can't ban them all. You raise the standard of the people working with materials. This feels like - oh melting steel is too hot and can be dangerous - we'll ban melting steel.
NOW, if it's like asbestos and the end consumer can get affected then I 100% agree with this ruling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PPE is the wrong solution here. Tools that don’t produce dust are the right solution. Wet tile saws and waterjets can cut stone (and engineered stone) with essentially no dust. An angle grinder with a dust shroud and HEPA filtered extractor (total cost starts around $400) can do the same thing a regular angle grinder does but with a lot less dust. And one really can work all day in a pouch-style N95 mask. They don’t…
> PPE is the wrong solution here. Tools that don’t produce dust are the right solution. "Essentially no dust" is not "no dust". There are no safe levels of silica that can be introduced to your lungs. > And one really can work all day in a pouch-style N95 mask N95 is basically the bare minimum in terms of filters. In my shop I have a shop vac with a tornado tumbler that attaches to tools for fine wood dust and a full…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think that folks will install it on site without cutting it?
Even if they did cut on site, is that any worse than cutting natural stone?
"Safe Work found that while silicosis cases could emerge in several industries, the numbers were "disproportionate" among engineered stone workers. Engineered stone workers also suffered a faster disease progression and were more likely to die from it, the report said."