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

US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

dropbox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 331 posts

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#291

Post by Infinity315 »

PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #285
Infinity315 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I give very little if any credence to anything she's said, especially if it's unsupported by evidence. Notice I'm not relying on anything she's said. Even if she is mentally ill, it's not reasonable to always assume the opposite of everything she asserts; that's called being a reactionary. Fact of the matter is, EPA reported that Apple was under accounting their waste streams leaving open the possibilit…

The EPA said that Apple may have been under accounting the types of waste because they were treating it without the permits the EPA requires, it said in the document they had things labeled as "California Waste Only" that should be under EPA jurisdiction. I didn't see anywhere that they weren't changing the filters enough, only Ashley said she figured that out from public records requests. I don't trust her to unders…

> I didn't see anywhere that they weren't changing the filters enough.

I don't think you've read observation #11 or my comment.

From observation #11:

> Apple does not appear to have included all the solvent waste streams when calculating the breakthrough times for the "Activated Carbon" boxes to ensure no VOCs are released into the atmosphere onsite.

Breakthrough times are a function of how much VOCs you are putting through them. If you under account for the amount of VOCs you will overestimate the "true" breakthrough time.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#292

Post by shotnothing »

p4ul wrote: post #260
AdamN wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inside industrial settings I would presume stuff like this happens all the time. In fact, people even die sometimes. Even when a refinery blew up in Texas a few years back it barely made the news. On a side note, Fluorine is bad stuff but I believe it doesn't have a long lifespan so any impact would be immediate or not at all

This is correct, sadly. I've done some work with the public data from the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA does a great job of making detailed data on inspections and accidents public. If memory serves me correctly, it turns out there are about two deaths per day from work-related causes in the US...

just two? given how massive the US and its industrial capacity is, I'd expect it to be way more

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#293

Post by shotnothing »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #290
PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

19 potential violations, most of which were mislabeled and unlabeled things or poor storage habits and addressed (meaning they aren't violations). The rest of it was things being managed under state/local rules that should have been managed under federal rules which Apple still has time to fix and make them not violations.

I do not think it is fair/honest to focus on the mundane findings, then use that to debase the entire report.

but it's a strong indictor

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#294

Post by shotnothing »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #249
PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the EPA report doesn't say what she says it does. 1. Apple doesn't do chip fab at Scott Blvd. They did R&D for Titan and microLED screens and were part of the layoffs in April. 2. The EPA says that they didn't have permits WITH THE EPA, but were permitted with California and Santa Clara County/City. 3. She says the carbon filters weren't changed, not the EPA. 4. She says Apple said materials weren…

Why are you so keen to whitewash potential mishandling of dangerous chemicals and poisoning of the public? You do not appear to have any more understanding of the situation that a layman. Your points to do not sound convincing and do not engage with the issue at all. > How is it this woman was nearly killed, while the employees who WORK in the building are perfectly healthy This is quite ignorant of how this actually…

As you have said, neither you nor the other guy is qualified to make a technical assesment on this and we just have to wait for yhe investigations to play out.

However, what we can assess is the ex-employee's actions and multitude of claims, which while in isolation seems benign, together makes her look more like a vengeful ex-employee than a credible victim

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#295

Post by PROgrammerTHREE »

Infinity315 wrote: post #291
PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EPA said that Apple may have been under accounting the types of waste because they were treating it without the permits the EPA requires, it said in the document they had things labeled as "California Waste Only" that should be under EPA jurisdiction. I didn't see anywhere that they weren't changing the filters enough, only Ashley said she figured that out from public records requests. I don't trust her to unders…

> I didn't see anywhere that they weren't changing the filters enough. I don't think you've read observation #11 or my comment. From observation #11: > Apple does not appear to have included all the solvent waste streams when calculating the breakthrough times for the "Activated Carbon" boxes to ensure no VOCs are released into the atmosphere onsite. Breakthrough times are a function of how much VOCs you are putting…

Got it. Still not worried about my health, though.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#296

Post by PROgrammerTHREE »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #290
PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

19 potential violations, most of which were mislabeled and unlabeled things or poor storage habits and addressed (meaning they aren't violations). The rest of it was things being managed under state/local rules that should have been managed under federal rules which Apple still has time to fix and make them not violations.

I do not think it is fair/honest to focus on the mundane findings, then use that to debase the entire report.

all of the findings are mundane

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#297

Post by PROgrammerTHREE »

Infinity315 wrote: post #287
PROgrammerTHREE wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the EPA report doesn't say what she says it does. 1. Apple doesn't do chip fab at Scott Blvd. They did R&D for Titan and microLED screens and were part of the layoffs in April. 2. The EPA says that they didn't have permits WITH THE EPA, but were permitted with California and Santa Clara County/City. 3. She says the carbon filters weren't changed, not the EPA. 4. She says Apple said materials weren…

With regards to 1 and 2: This is inconsequential to what the EPA reported. It doesn't matter whether they do R&D for plushies or whatever, fact is Apple was under accounting their waste stream. > She says the carbon filters weren't changed, not the EPA. I'm going by what the EPA says and not what she says. > How is it this woman was nearly killed, while the employees who WORK in the building are perfectly healthy, th…

Just for some background, the "nearly killed" thing is new. She said at first she was getting light-headed a lot and over the last 4 years it has become "almost killed."

I don't think that any of this is as serious as even you are making it out to be, though I understand I misunderstood the carbon boxes thing.

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#298

Post by PROgrammerTHREE »

shotnothing wrote: post #294
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you so keen to whitewash potential mishandling of dangerous chemicals and poisoning of the public? You do not appear to have any more understanding of the situation that a layman. Your points to do not sound convincing and do not engage with the issue at all. > How is it this woman was nearly killed, while the employees who WORK in the building are perfectly healthy This is quite ignorant of how this actually…

As you have said, neither you nor the other guy is qualified to make a technical assesment on this and we just have to wait for yhe investigations to play out. However, what we can assess is the ex-employee's actions and multitude of claims, which while in isolation seems benign, together makes her look more like a vengeful ex-employee than a credible victim

And importantly, Ashley's not qualified either. She has a track record of this stuff!!

Re: US EPA Enforcement and Compliance on Apple Fabrication

#300

Post by wewtyflakes »

shotnothing wrote: post #293
wewtyflakes wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not think it is fair/honest to focus on the mundane findings, then use that to debase the entire report.

but it's a strong indictor

I do not think that is reasonable to believe that because a report has some mundane findings that it indicates that the whole report should be dismissed.
Post reply on HN