The Global Cost of Corrosion • Hacker News Board

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#61

Post by ElectricalUnion » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

bliteben wrote: post #18

countvonbalzac wrote: post #3

Why aren't bridges and ships made out of stainless steel? Is it too expensive, or not as strong as regular steel?

Almost all metals oxidize. You could build something out of gold or maybe platinum and avoid oxidation, but it would obviously be expensive. The U.S. navy does have some very large aluminum ships such as the Independence Class[1]. These ships are apparently having some teething issues, but it is quite the feat to have a 414 ft long aluminum ship that can go upwards of 50 knots. [1] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ind…

> Almost all metals oxidize.

> The U.S. navy does have some very large aluminum ships

Unfortunately aluminum also rusts, it just happens to be a chemically stable and resistant rusting - but not in a stable enough manner to be mechanically/abrasive resistant, that's why you don't see them deployed in widespread use at stressing conditions like internal combustion engine blocks or fast ship hulls.

From said cited Wikipedia article:

> In February 2020 it was announced that the Navy plans to retire the first four LCS ships. On 20 June 2020, the US Navy announced that all four would be taken out of commission in March 2021, and will be placed in inactive reserve, because it would be too expensive to upgrade them to match the later ships in the class.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#62

Post by wbsss4412 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:38 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #45

wbsss4412 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Volvo is owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. Edit: absurd typo, it is owned by a Chinese company.

> Volvo is not owned by a Chinese parent company, but their operations are still based in the same places as before. You are welcome to use your own definition of the word 'owned' but I'll just stick to the dictionary one. > Using the definition implied by your comment, they were previously and “American” car manufacturer as they were sold to geeley by ford. https://www.industryweek.com/finance/software-systems/artic…

Apologies, that was a typo.

The risks of posting on a phone…

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#63

Post by ajkjk » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:38 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #27

hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

>This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Reduce, reuse, recycle. In that order

Well perhaps "retain" should be added. Making something last longer isn't quite "reduce" or "reuse".

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#64

Post by wizee » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:38 PM UTC

mlyle wrote: post #43

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by using better paints and making sure cars and car parts are painted more thoroughly. This is baseless fanboyism. The European carmakers lead the way with various degrees of zinc plating and dipped c…

> The European carmakers lead the way with various degrees of zinc plating and dipped coatings being widely implemented on their products in the 70s and 80s. Ford developed e-coat in the 50's. Everyone took up this to varying extents during the mid-to-late 70's. > whereas the Europeans tend to put quite a bit more effort in. I'm sorry, this just doesn't match my experience looking at mid-80's Japanese, American, and…

Porsche 944s and 928s are far more rust resistant than most American or Japanese cars of the 80s or even 90s. Likewise with Volvos. The classic 911 was an old design that went through iterative improvements, and the 964 is better rust-proofed than most American or Japanese cars of the late 80s or 90s. Old Audis tend to have minimal rust, and old Mercedes-Benzes like the W126, W124, and W201, while they certainly can and do rust, their bodies tend to far outlast Japanese and American cars of the same era driven in similar conditions. Old W124s still soldier on as daily drivers and winter beaters in the cold and salty environments of post-Soviet states with mostly OK bodies, whereas Japanese cars of the 1980s almost all rotted away beyond repair being worthwhile more than a decade ago.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#65

Post by MichaelCollins » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:39 PM UTC

bilsbie wrote: post #6

This is why I get scared when I see articles about people developing plastic eating bacteria. Sure it is great for reducing waste but it’s a dangerous game to be playing for sure.

It doesn't seem like a problem to me. Wood rots, but wood furniture and even buildings can easily last for centuries if cared for.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#66

Post by mlyle » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:40 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #59

bradfa wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So everybody smartened up and now things are much better, to the point that there hardly are cars made that have serious rust issues. I find this entertaining. Come to upstate NY, USA where we liberally salt our roads in the winter. Definitely not "everybody" smartened up as it's still very common to find vehicles here that after 10 years should be declared unsafe to operate due to rust-through of critical structural…

Interesting, any particular brands or is that across the board? Here we liberally salt our roads as well in winter and in the past cars would not last a decade before falling apart. Now you really have to look to figure out which cars are new, 10 or 20 years old. Rust is - as far as I can see - a solved problem. Not many US cars on the road here though.

A big part, I think, is differing European attitudes towards maintenance. If there's a bit of coating damage and a rust spot somewhere detected by a mechanic in the US, everyone involved is likely to shrug and not bother with any remediation. The customer doesn't want to pay to prevent a problem that will manifest in years, and there's more lucrative work the mechanic could be doing.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#67

Post by hadlock » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

Porsche started galvanizing their bodies in the 1970s, VW started in the 1980s, Japan only started galvanizing their bodies in export markets, in response to the germans, and only recently (last 15 years) have been galvanizing all their bodies domestic and import.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#68

Post by throwaway0x7E6 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

that's a poor example of "modern". I've seen tools/parts that have been lying around wrapped in oiled paper since the 1930s, without a hint of rust.

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#69

Post by Forgeties79 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

petre wrote: post #54

jacquesm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may well be so, Japanese cars had an absolutely terrible reputation for being rustbuckets in the 70's so they had to do something about it. Given the number of them that were manufactured the fact that they are so rare today is as far as I know uniquely due to the rust problem.

Mazdas are still rustbuckets today.

Isn't the Mazda 3 a really, really popular and pretty well-regarded car?

Re: The Global Cost of Corrosion

#70

Post by intrasight » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 6:41 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #14

hristov wrote: post #8

This is an important issue. People keep talking about recycling, but much more important than recycling is just being able to use a thing for longer before you are even thinking about recycling it. Japanese automakers did the world a great favor when in the 80s and 90s they made much longer lasting cars and made longevity and resale value an important consideration in the purchasing decision. They did this mostly by…

Volvo led the way in this long before Japan got even close to figuring this out. That's why you still see ancient Volvo's drive around in numbers that are just way higher than any other brand.

Funny that you mention Volvo and I'm reading this today, since this weekend I was commenting to a friend that my 2004 XC70 had not a bit of rust even though it has spent all its time in the NE. I see so many much newer cars driving around that are very rusty.