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

Banned in California

bannedincalifornia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#171

Post by CamperBob2 »

dangus wrote: post #155
mjamil wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I agree. Unless you believe there needs to be a plan for CA to secede in the future and thus it needs to be self-sufficient, why does manufacturing need to be in CA? As you stated, the Impulse stove makes heavy use of outsourced manufacturing to other parties; as long as those parties are within the US (which I'm not claiming they are, but there are states like TX that are far less concerned about enviro…

I am sure the 5th largest economy in the world is truly suffering under their draconian regulations. Everyone in California making the 5th highest median income in the country wishes they were working at a local oil refinery. To your last point, I am somewhat doubtful that this website is being honest about automotive paint shops being banned in California. Am I to believe that the 3,000 auto body shops in Southern C…

If this website’s author is correct I’m supposed to believe that no paint gets applied to cars in Canada.

Existing shops get grandfathered.

Re: Banned in California

#172

Post by culi »

daedrdev wrote: post #38

Listen y’all, it’s not just that we aren't letting companies spew chemicals into the air. The permitting and regulatory process is so extremely hostile that even when you want to and are able to do so safely and without emissions, it’s impossible. Instead you have to ship things from out of state and other countries, which generates emissions and pollution itself that might actually be more than local production. Its…

Here's a map of superfund sites in the US. https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/EPA::superfund-national-prio...

Using this I see that within 10 miles of me are

- a microprocessor testing facility that contaminated soil and groundwater with 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, Freon 113, 1,1-dichloroethane, and tetrachloroethane which affects 300k nearby residents

- a semiconductor manufacturer that led to "trichloroethylene, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, trichlorofluoroethane, and 1,1-dichloroethylene, in soils on the site and in ground water on and off the site."

- a 5-acre drum recycling plant that contaminated wells within 3 miles with trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, 1,1-dichloroethylene, and tetrachloroethylene. Affecting the drinking water of 250k residents.

- about 10-15 other sites I'm not gonna cover in detail but the contaminants include asbestos-laden dust, PCBs, dichlorobenzene, trichloroethylene, trichloroethane, chloroform, vinyl chloride, xylene, and many many more

Re: Banned in California

#173

Post by CamperBob2 »

WD-42 wrote: post #157
ashdksnndck wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many cases, California’s environmental regulations don’t make an earnest attempt to permit safe ways to do things.

And in all cases, those industries make no earnest attempt to develop safe ways to do things instead of simply doing it where it doesn't matter.

[Citation needed]

Re: Banned in California

#174

Post by akoboldfrying »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #95
akoboldfrying wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you okay with not using products that have an oil refinery in their supply chain?

I do not care to try to make things ethically fair for oil refineries. Call me a hypocrite, I do not care, as these companies similarly do not care. "Ya got me!", yup, moving on, I am still glad oil refineries are effectively banned.

My point wasn't about fairness towards oil refinery companies, it was that supporting a ban on refineries in your local area while still benefiting from the downstream outputs of oil refineries is hypocritical nimbyism.

If oil refineries are bad in California, they're bad everywhere, and if they're bad everywhere, we ought to stop using them altogether, which will make for some unwelcome lifestyle changes.

Re: Banned in California

#175

Post by CamperBob2 »

WD-42 wrote: post #124
encoderer wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a self fulfilling profecy. For a long time, it was jobs and the promise of a better future for your family. By killing that all we have is weather.

All we have is the weather? California is the largest agricultural producer of any state, and it's not even close. Plants like growing here for the same reason people do.

Because they get all the water that can possibly be piped in from somewhere else.

Re: Banned in California

#177

Post by culi »

crawshaw wrote: post #34
beachtaxidriver wrote: post #6

As a resident who likes to breathe clean air and drink clean water, none of that seems all that bad. I guess there should be an ability to do this farther from the population centers though.

But you also want smart phones, electric cars, and a navy. There needs to be a path towards doing things other than foisting them on people who are out of sight.

Most of the complaints from this website aren't about things being outright banned. It's mostly stuff where the regulation is so strict that's it's "nearly impossible". But the regulation seems fair to me wrt what's actually required to keep TCE, asbestos, Freon, chloroform, etc out of our soil and water.

Companies that are complaining are complaining that they can't treat the environment as an economic externality anymore in California. Therefore the price of all of these goods are being subsidized with our health and our ecosystems' health.

I hope more of the world follows California's lead and we eventually have a price of these goods that represents what it actually takes to manufacture them in a fair way

Re: Banned in California

#178

Post by culi »

runjake wrote: post #37
reliabilityguy wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not ship your externality creating activities elsewhere? Like where?

Like the places where people welcome deregulation and jobs? Not trying to sound like a jerk but there’s plenty of places in the US where people welcome stuff like coal mines and polluting factories. If the factories have to be somewhere and they consent, then why not there?

corporations taking hold of small local governments and passing laws that benefit them, unbeknownst to the locals living there, is hardly "consent"

Re: Banned in California

#179

Post by _2d30 »

burkaman wrote: post #160
_2d30 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you that your two articles that intended to refute the semiconductor fabrication stuff fail to do so. Both sites were existing facilities and would therefore fall under the granfathered in point in the site.

That's true they are not new buildings. Here's one that is: https://www.appliedmaterials.com/us/en/semiconductor/epic-pl... The Infinera one is described as a "new fab" though ( https://www.nist.gov/chips/infinera-california-san-jose ) and the Bosch one is adding a new type of fabrication to an existing site. If you can do all that without getting new permits then that makes California sound like a pretty lenient pla…

> Here's one that is: https://www.appliedmaterials.com/us/en/semiconductor/epic-pl...

This might be a refutation but it's not super clear. It's definitely not a commercial semiconductor fab but it might do all of or some subset of what a commercial fab does at R&D scale. Hard to know for sure how this jives with the claim in the main website.

> If you can do all that without getting new permits then that makes California sound like a pretty lenient place to do business.

Being able to retool under original zoning/permitting is specifically lenient? That's extremely basic. If you're a co-Californian with me, though, it does help to understand that many people think that anyone doing anything without a permit is "lenient".

> I'm assuming they did have to get new permits though.

Well, that makes it really easy to be "right". I should try this more.

Re: Banned in California

#180

Post by jjmarr »

themaninthedark wrote: post #163
jjmarr wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I took a machining course, the instructor sat in the corner and showed us YouTube videos in Mandarin with English subtitles to teach us the equipment. We are never going to catch up.

What a myopic attitude. 3 to 4 decades ago anything from China was poor quality and US manufacturing was tight tolerance. When we outsourced, we did the training to get them where they are today and stopped investing in our skills at home. There are still skilled people here who can train and the knowledge is not some sort of eldritch incantation. The main issues with learning is lack of jobs and lack of opportunity…

I had to pay an instructor to show me YouTube videos because the college wouldn't admit to being unable to find domestic talent.

> There are still skilled people here who can train

If you don't acknowledge you're losing the race, you will never catch up.

Post reply on HN