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

581–590 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#581

Post by gamblor956 »

terminalshort wrote: post #468
rswail wrote: post #248

This is whining from someone that doesn't want to be responsible for the externality of pollution that these manufacturing facilities generate. The regulations are to stop the pollution, if you can manufacture without polluting, then you'll comply and be able to manufacture. The problem is that there are other regulatory environments where the people aren't protected from pollution. What would fix that is enforcing t…

China has reduced its pollution massively since the 90s while aggressively expanding its industrial output. And they have done it without excessive bureaucracy and delays in construction. In the US environmental laws are not about the environment at all. They are there to enrich lawyers who profit from multi year permitting processes and lawsuits.

It really helps when the government can just disappear someone when they don't play along with government edicts.

Re: Banned in California

#582

Post by djha-skin »

Animats wrote: post #574

Plating operations are a huge headache. They have corrosive plating baths. They have to do some chemical processing on site to neutralize the corrosive chemicals and get them down to a neutral pH. Some years ago, a plating company in San Jose dumped a plating bath into the sewer system. This was so toxic that it killed the bacteria that reduce organic sludge at the sewerage plant. This knocked the whole plant offline…

[flagged]

Re: Banned in California

#583

Post by forgotaccount3 »

overfeed wrote: post #578
eldavido wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I think there are two problems First: we may have gone too far toward anti-pollution. China has more naval vessels than the US. Everything changes when peace isn't a foregone conclusion, as it has been for the past 30? 50? years. Second: it's not the regulations per se, but the difficulty of dealing with the bureaucracy, particularly (a) long delays and (b) uncertainty. I run an electrical contractor, so this is…

> It's a collateral damage of all the (even well-intentioned, good) regulation that drives business away. I keep hearing this, but it never happens. Despite attempts to get jurisdictions to race to the bottom, businesses simply follow the money/markets: I can bet you a hefty sum that Alameda will never go without electrical contractors.

> I can bet you a hefty sum that Alameda will never go without electrical contractors.

You *really* don't understand the issue then because no one is saying that there will be 0 electrical contractors.

Electrical contractors will continue to exist because demand will continue to exist, but the wait time to get the work done will increase due to not enough electrical contractors.

Or the work will be left undone because the owner doesn't have enough money to pay the few electrical contractors that remain.

Or the work will occur but will avoid all regulations because the cost of complying relative to the odds of being caught don't justify paying it.

Re: Banned in California

#584

Post by gamblor956 »

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…

There is a lot of manufacturing in California. There are a lot of new factories in California. California manufactures almost as much as most of the Southeast combined. (Note that CA manufacturing is spread across dozens of industries.)

The difference is that successful businesses in California just do. They don't whine about problems caused by their own incompetence.

Re: Banned in California

#585

Post by tonymet »

epistasis wrote: post #488

There's an important distinction here, between "banned" and "has far cheaper alternatives". Things can appear banned even when they aren't merely because there is a new technology that's better and cheaper and it's a big investment so people go with the cheaper option. Nobody is building new coal in the US because it's so expensive, not because there's an outright ban. Now, part of the reason it's more expensive than…

if you own a factory and the legislators make your factory illegal, that's a ban. "well you can just upgrade" is no consolation. one day your factory is allowed, the next day it's not.

Why mince words?

Re: Banned in California

#586

Post by tonymet »

i hear that's why Tesla paint is so soft, and why it's so popular for Tesla buyers to apply expensive protective film to their paint. I didn't believe anyone when they told me, and now i have more scratches after 1 year than my mazda did after 5+ years

Re: Banned in California

#587

Post by djha-skin »

rswail wrote: post #248

This is whining from someone that doesn't want to be responsible for the externality of pollution that these manufacturing facilities generate. The regulations are to stop the pollution, if you can manufacture without polluting, then you'll comply and be able to manufacture. The problem is that there are other regulatory environments where the people aren't protected from pollution. What would fix that is enforcing t…

> What would fix that is enforcing the regulations nation wide, then applying tariffs on imported products that don't enforce the same regulations.

This is the biggest lie we are told, and the most heinous. The only thing that will fix it is when people like you (and me!) stop purchasing things which were made in those regulatory environments. If you continue to purchase them under the premise that "I have no choice, I have to participate in this fallen world," so does the state of California. Banning these activities when there are alternative regulatory environments just pushes the problem to someone else.

A great example of this is the Obama-era fuel efficiency laws. No one actually wanted a more efficient truck, so to get around the laws, the manufacturers just made larger trucks, which caused more problems than they solved.

Outlawing something, then doing nothing to stop demand for that thing, that's just irresponsible.

Re: Banned in California

#588

Post by djha-skin »

rob74 wrote: post #402
rswail wrote: post #248

This is whining from someone that doesn't want to be responsible for the externality of pollution that these manufacturing facilities generate. The regulations are to stop the pollution, if you can manufacture without polluting, then you'll comply and be able to manufacture. The problem is that there are other regulatory environments where the people aren't protected from pollution. What would fix that is enforcing t…

Thanks for confirming my suspicion! When I read phrases like "Battery cells require electrode coating with toxic solvents (NMP), electrolyte handling, and formation cycling. This is exactly why Tesla's Gigafactory went to Reno." I (as someone not very familiar with the subject) thought it's strange that California should regulate what kind of chemicals can be used in an industrial process. Of course, they don't - but…

...because dumping stuff into the middle of what is already a barren wasteland isn't actually a problem.

Re: Banned in California

#589

Post by overfeed »

forgotaccount3 wrote: post #583
overfeed wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a collateral damage of all the (even well-intentioned, good) regulation that drives business away. I keep hearing this, but it never happens. Despite attempts to get jurisdictions to race to the bottom, businesses simply follow the money/markets: I can bet you a hefty sum that Alameda will never go without electrical contractors.

> I can bet you a hefty sum that Alameda will never go without electrical contractors. You *really* don't understand the issue then because no one is saying that there will be 0 electrical contractors. Electrical contractors will continue to exist because demand will continue to exist, but the wait time to get the work done will increase due to not enough electrical contractors. Or the work will be left undone becaus…

That's a lot of words to say business won't be driven away by regulations.

Re: Banned in California

#590

Post by baggachipz »

gamblor956 wrote: post #581
terminalshort wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has reduced its pollution massively since the 90s while aggressively expanding its industrial output. And they have done it without excessive bureaucracy and delays in construction. In the US environmental laws are not about the environment at all. They are there to enrich lawyers who profit from multi year permitting processes and lawsuits.

It really helps when the government can just disappear someone when they don't play along with government edicts.

Don't worry, we in the US will get to enjoy that soon enough.
Post reply on HN