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

171–180 of 423 posts

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#171

Post by nwienert »

runnerup wrote: post #46
DoreenMichele wrote: post #36

3M has been facing a raft of litigation that has prompted the move Generally speaking, toxic substances are only "cheap" due to externalizing many of the costs involved, like increased healthcare costs and lost productivity. If you do a thorough analysis of the costs of using such chemicals, they aren't cheap at all. Maybe someday humans will get that.

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.

Japan

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#172

Post by hashhar »

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.

Tom Scott did a video about bottled-water, tap-water and mineral-water regarding this - see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD79NZroV88

It's interesting because the correct answer is that each country/region has different expectations from bottled water, mineral water.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#174

Post by VBprogrammer »

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…

I had a similar discussion with friends who said they were going to stop flying completely. To me all you are really doing there is reducing the cost at the margin by reducing the demand by a tiny amount.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#175

Post by oblio »

stuaxo wrote: post #139
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.

We should remember that the original tragedy of the commons didn't happen, the idea was based on false assumptions around how greedy people are. We could start by looking at how people managed systems sustainably including the original commons. https://aeon.co/essays/the-tragedy-of-the-commons-is-a-false...

Your article doesn't say what you're saying.

Your article says that the tragedy of the commons does not have to happen, but we don't really have the numbers. Those examples could be cherry picking, and everyone's personal experience kind of says that the opposite is more common (commons mismanagement). That's why the original article was so influential: it gave a name to something we've always seen.

It's great that we can assume tragedy of the commons is not as immutable as some law of physics, but it still looks like a powerful social force unless proven otherwise.

And I imagine, like any social study, it's going to be very hard to get actual numbers for the tragedy of the commons versus comedy of the commons scenarios.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#176

Post by awestroke »

legitster wrote: post #42

"Forever chemicals" is clearly a scary term devoid of context. Please help me ground it. Is this a health or environmental risk? Is it potential or realized? What's the nearest comparison?

Forever chemicals, also known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), are a group of man-made chemicals that are used in a variety of products because of their ability to repel oil, water, and stains. They are called "forever chemicals" because they do not break down in the environment and can accumulate in the body over time.

There are a number of dangers associated with exposure to forever chemicals. Some of the potential health effects of PFAS include:

- Increased risk of cancer: Some studies have suggested that exposure to PFAS may increase the risk of certain types of cancer, including testicular, kidney, and pancreatic cancer.

- Harm to the immune system: PFAS have been shown to impair the immune system and interfere with the body's ability to produce antibodies.

- Developmental and reproductive problems: PFAS have been linked to developmental problems in infants and children, including low birth weight and reduced fertility in women.

- Thyroid hormone disruption: PFAS have been shown to disrupt the normal functioning of the thyroid gland, which can lead to problems with metabolism and energy levels.

- Other health effects: Other potential health effects of PFAS exposure include liver damage, high cholesterol, and decreased effectiveness of vaccines.

It is important to note that the extent of the health risks associated with PFAS exposure is still being studied, and more research is needed to understand the full range of potential effects on human health.

My personal prediction is that this will be like leaded gasoline all over again, but much much worse. We're already seeing these chemicals in drinking water all over the globel, in concentrations above limits deemed "safe".

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#177

Post by sitkack »

worldsayshi wrote: post #109
adrianN wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calculate the hidden cost. Tell the companies that you'll either vote for a tax or accept a lucrative post in their board of directors after your term is over. Profit! Calculate the hidden cost. Spend half of the cost on a marketing campaign to sway public opinion against a tax. Profit!

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.

You used to be able to trust the GAO and NIST to calculate these things.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#178

Post by quickthrower2 »

2000UltraDeluxe wrote: post #167
quickthrower2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look out mother mature in general. It is brutal. Can we socially evolve like the Vulcans?

Evolving into a culture of totalitarian rationalism like the Vulcan, would require irrational parties to be at an evolutionary disadvantage. That rules out any modern democracy from ever doing it, since discriminating anyone acting on instinct or feelings won't ever get a majority vote. Totalitarian regimes might succeed, though.

I wonder if we are "beyond the basics of evolution and selfish genes" now in terms of human intelligence, technology, society and soon: AI. For example once a species can edit it's own genes, you get to a point where maybe the genes "competing" and "being selfish" becomes meaningless, and some other defining "replication force" takes over as the dominate shaping of future life.

We might get to "the selfish data"? Genes being a special case.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#179

Post by bushbaba »

smilekzs wrote: post #94
Reason077 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "This frequently means I’ll be extremely thirst throughout some days" Why not carry a reusable water bottle? I have a great double-wall steel bottle (Hydro Flask), which is much better than a plastic bottle because it keeps water cold all day long and is basically indestructible. In most places I travel to it's not difficult to find sources of clean, cold water to refill it. Worst case, I will buy a large bottle of…

For me, there's always a metallic residual taste in my water whenever I use a stainless steel bottle. Got tired and returned to using normal mugs.

Many of the metal water bottles come with a plastic liner to avoid the metallic taste

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#180

Post by KptMarchewa »

wongarsu wrote: post #160
jonasdegendt wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

This varies by market. In the US, they just bottle tap water. In Europe this is really unusual, bottled water uses their own wells with different requirements and regulations. For example a stable mineral concentration and taste is very important for mineral water, but of secondary concern for tap water. Also tap water might come from surface water (rivers etc) while mineral water doesn't.

In Poland, there's "mineral water" where it needs to fulfill those requirements, and "spring water" that is basically bottled tap water. The first one costs like 0,5$ for 1,5L , while second one can be bought for as low as 0,2$.
Post reply on HN