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

221–230 of 423 posts

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#221

Post by itsoktocry »

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.

>Maybe someday humans will get that.

We do get it. Sometimes the costs aren't known in advance, and you can't include every potential future issue in the cost/benefit calculus.

Isn't that literally what the article is pointing at? Shareholders put pressure on the company to stop this, and they are. Sounds like a success story.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#222

Post by elevaet »

dmd wrote: post #213
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…

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

That's in the range of 10x the CO2 an average human will produce in their lifetime. If you could find a way to get 20 people to cut their emissions in half, or 200 people to reduce it by 5%, or 1000 people by 1%, you could balance out your CO2 ledger :)

Or, if you still work in the industry and can find a way to make the shipping routes more efficient, or prevent future mistakes like that, you could make it into the green and achieve CO2 karmic heaven!

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#223

Post by Eisenstein »

feet wrote: post #195
smilekzs wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Glass is an option

Glass with a silicone sleeve over it is surprisingly resilient. I have had a few glass bottles with silicone covers that I carry around (not all at once...) and have dropped them more times than I can recall and they always just bounce. Of course they can break, especially if you do something like put it in your shopping cart and drop something heavy on it (whoops).

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#224

Post by vouaobrasil »

themitigating wrote: post #14
vouaobrasil wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the prisoner's dilemma situation. Everyone would benefit more from a reduction, but if only one company does it, they benefit (in the short term) even more. I think the signalling is also valuable -- humans have a remarkable tendency to adopt attitudes over time, and I think every contribution towards the attitude that we should not harm the environment is a good one. I for one currently support and will cont…

Just to chime in about your use of the word "signaling" and when others use "virtue signaling". I believe the traditional term is "setting a good example" and even if the motivation is selfish there's a positive outcome. "Virtue signaling" was invented to demonize this behavior by focusing on (the assumed) motive as selfish.

Good point. Yes, "setting a good example" is a better term, so it's not confused with virtue signalling.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#225

Post by Eisenstein »

overtonwhy wrote: post #131
jraby3 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What about the benefits of high levels of hydration?

What are the benefits of high levels of hydration?

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#226

Post by frgtpsswrdlame »

itsoktocry wrote: post #221
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.

> Maybe someday humans will get that. We do get it. Sometimes the costs aren't known in advance, and you can't include every potential future issue in the cost/benefit calculus. Isn't that literally what the article is pointing at? Shareholders put pressure on the company to stop this, and they are. Sounds like a success story.

I don't think it's a success story when a chemical company is pressured to stop producing something because of it's health effects after that chemical has made it into the blood of nearly every individual on the planet.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#227

Post by opan »

Reason077 wrote: post #85
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…

> "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…

>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.

They actually dent quite easily. I have a 40oz Hydro Flask with a couple dents from an incident with a spider a couple years ago. I had my bottle on the counter top while I was eating and suddenly a spider was on it. In an attempt to kill the spider, I knocked over the bottle on to the wooden floor (trying to squish it). It dented the bottle near the top and on the bottom. I looked up some videos and it's definitely not just me. Found one where it looked like a whole family dented theirs and they used a trick with dry ice and a hair dryer to fix them. I don't know if it gets harder to fix the longer you wait. Mine still works okay, so I haven't done anything about it.

I'm pretty sure the outside is aluminum, fyi, unless they make multiple types. The inside part is probably steel.

I love my Hydro Flask and have drank more water because of it. My only complaint is that the straw lid gets a lot of crap building up in the small gaps and it seems impossible to adequately clean. Maybe an ultrasonic cleaner could do it.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#228

Post by missedthecue »

pigsty wrote: post #170
missedthecue wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean pans are only one thing. PFAS are used in many products. Yes you can make inferior substitutions but again this reduces standard of living. This is not to mention its widespread use in military applications. There is already concern about China's lock on the global supply of rare earths and other raw materials like silicon and magnesium (80%+ market share). What happens when the US can't make fighter jets beca…

Generally, matters of national security are exempt from consumer goods safety regulations. A typical company also can’t easily handle, say, plutonium, but if the military needs it, an exemption is granted. The typical consumer gets by without lead, asbestos, and so on. The consumer market will adapt.

But it doesn't look like a market of the government banning 3M from making it, they are exiting the market out of their own volition

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#229

Post by saint_fiasco »

dmd wrote: post #213
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…

About 20 years ago, I made a mistake at work which I later calculated put an extra 8500 metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. (It had to do with the delay/routing of a cargo ship.) There is literally nothing I could possibly do that could come even close to making up for that...

You just have to keep working and do a better job from that point on.

If you make fewer mistakes than the person who replaced you if you quit, you will make up for your mistake eventually.

Re: 3M to end 'forever chemicals' output

#230

Post by bilsbie »

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 would try not to worry too much though.

It becomes a sickness at some point. Check out Scott Adam’s law of slow moving disasters if you want some optimism.

Post reply on HN