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

3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 423 posts

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#121

Post by jraby3 »

wjnc wrote: post #76
jraby3 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

Dehydration is more of a risk to you than the environmental risks you marginally save on others. Still I applaud the effort since the economists view is too restricted. Get a stainless steel container and hydrate for a lifetime.

The risks of dehydration are way overstated imo. And I live in a warm weather country.

Whole being thirsty isn’t optimal the actual risk of something serious happening is negligible. Especially since I monitor my urine color and other signs. It’s more convenience and the habit of convenience we’re all so used to these days.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#122

Post by Gud »

jonasdegendt wrote: post #112
wirrbel wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently mail-ordered rice, and because I wanted to buy two different styles I did not opt for the 3kg (like 6 lbs) bag but 2 packs of 1.8kg. Turns out 1.8kg were packed in 3 bags of 600g, so now I have 6 bags at 600g rice, that on first glance look like they are paper, but its actually plastic coated paper. Its really hard to avoid at times. As for avoiding bags I have two wicker baskets like this https://www.amaz…

Most bottled mineral water is just filtered tap water with some different minerals added to give it flavor.

Tap water is vastly different depending on where it is sourced. In my experience, most countries have pretty bad tap water.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#123

Post by jraby3 »

swarnie wrote: post #75
jraby3 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

I've got to a similar conclusion as you but with a very different outcome. It makes absolutely no difference if i minimise my plastic or diligently sort them for recycling because a Vegas hotel will make all my efforts for naught. Climate change is already here and there is nothing the individual can do about it. The optimum play now is to accept that the group is useless and make individual steps to mitigate the eff…

I think individuals can help but not so much by conservation. More in trying to affect policy change at local or national political agencies.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#124

Post by jraby3 »

Reason077 wrote: post #113
SoftTalker wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stainless steel containers are often lined with plastic, since people don't like the metallic taste that the steel imparts.

In general there is nothing wrong with long-life plastic products. Plastic is a really useful and important material when used appropriately! It's the insane amount waste and environmental pollution that single-use plastic generates that is the problem.

Exactly. What I always tell vendors when I get a strange look after refusing their plastic bag is that we use it for 5 minutes but it stays in the environment for 1000 years.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#125

Post by erosenbe0 »

Jolter wrote: post #81
xvilka wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a chemist I am not sure it's even possible to create matching alternatives. The stronger links inside molecules and outside, the more they are "alien" to life and environment. While reducing their usage is a good strategy, an outright ban strips technology of useful materials.

Can you name one essential application where PFAS is really necessary? Something where society would actually be substantially worse without it. I’m not talking about ski wax here.

Ptfe gaskets, lubricants, and maybe certain dielectric or insulator applications.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#126

Post by worldsayshi »

adrianN wrote: post #117
worldsayshi wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe one way to mitigate is to have a separate branch of the political system dedicated to calculating the costs. Then make the methods for calculating as publicly available as possible so that they can be reproduced by non-profits. We have managed judicial systems. We can manage this too.

I don't see how that helps. For example there are many publications available that calculate the cost of CO2, eg [1] from the German government. Yet global warming is still a problem. [1] https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/14...

Dictatorships are still a problem too. But it's not because we don't know what the alternative looks like.

Figuring out what the alternative should look like is a big challenge but let's not pretend that that is the main issue here.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#127

Post by modo_mario »

themerone wrote: post #5

I'm not sure this is a win for the environment or human health. 3M is gifting sales to it's competition to avoid future liabilities. Chinese companies are ready to pick up the slack. 3M is certainly developing safer alternatives, but until they are as good and as cheap, companies will buy their toxins elsewhere.

Hopefully Chinese people will push back against it and field an outrage just like we had in Belgium

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#128

Post by mrpopo »

jraby3 wrote: post #66
runnerup wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always thought that if our universe is actually a simulation, it's one of countless simulations trying to determine a solution to the Tragedy of the Commons. I suspect it's one of the hardest problems to solve in any universe.

I try really hard not to use single use plastic. Especially plastic bags, plastic bottles, etc. This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days but will wait till I get home or to work to drink filtered water out of the tap. I went to Las Vegas about a year ago on a work trip and realized that the hotel I stayed at uses more plastic bottles in an hour than I would use in my lifetime with no though…

You need to stop thinking about bringing your own footprint ever closer to zero, you must also stop thinking that doing so is a powerful revolutionary act, and join or create organized groups vowing to bring about social change. Be it in your family, your neighbourhood or your municipality.

Forget shorter showers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2TbrtCGbhQ

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#129

Post by erosenbe0 »

adrianN wrote: post #115
Jolter wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name one essential application where PFAS is really necessary? Something where society would actually be substantially worse without it. I’m not talking about ski wax here.

They are great in lubricants.

Yeah, imagine catheters before ptfe

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#130

Post by sammalloy »

jraby3 wrote: post #121
wjnc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dehydration is more of a risk to you than the environmental risks you marginally save on others. Still I applaud the effort since the economists view is too restricted. Get a stainless steel container and hydrate for a lifetime.

The risks of dehydration are way overstated imo. And I live in a warm weather country. Whole being thirsty isn’t optimal the actual risk of something serious happening is negligible. Especially since I monitor my urine color and other signs. It’s more convenience and the habit of convenience we’re all so used to these days.

> The risks of dehydration are way overstated imo

I’m not so sure about that. Some people are more susceptible to it than others. There’s also some weird trait that makes some people drink less water than others. Both my father and myself seem to share this trait. We have to force ourselves to drink water. For whatever reason, I could go an entire day without drinking water. Not sure why it is, but it causes problems. I was on vacation with my father and he collapsed in literally the middle of nowhere because of dehydration. It was pretty scary and he almost didn’t survive.

Post reply on HN