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

91–100 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#91

Post by autoexec »

daedrdev wrote: post #54
devmor wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I obviously mean that you can filter out and properly dispose of and neutralize what would be emissions, so that they are not emitted. I cant see your comment as anything but bad faith, why are you responding like this?

Can you give us a couple of examples of a company that was stopped by the state of California because they weren't producing any harmful emissions whatsoever and/or were disposing their waste in ways that were not harmful? It would be interesting to see exactly what they were doing in violation of the regulations, what regulations they ran into, and where those rules came from.

Re: Banned in California

#92

Post by ixtli »

teaearlgraycold wrote: post #80
richwater wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has an agenda Everyone has an agenda. Is anything on this site false? Is it incorrect information?

I don't think it makes a good case for itself. No automotive paint shops sounds kind of ridiculous. I don't know anything about that industry but there has to be a way to paint cars in a safe way, right?? But lumping that in with semiconductor fabs, which are extremely toxic, makes me wonder how many of these banned industries I don't want in my state. I think if we want to build them in the US maybe don't build them…

It actually makes me wanna move to CA.

Re: Banned in California

#93

Post by ch4s3 »

burkaman wrote: post #63

The Grandfatherd-in section is incredibly misleading. Look at the Semiconductor Fabrication section, for example. The implication is that these are the only fabs in the state, they wouldn't be able to get new permits today, and the red dots indicate that it would be "effectively impossible" to open any other ones. In fact (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat... ) there are at lea…

> why would anyone expect that to be the case?

Why would you expect it to be impossible?

Re: Banned in California

#94

Post by burkaman »

richwater wrote: post #64
mparkms wrote: post #48

The creator of the website is the CEO of a battery-powered induction cooktop company. ( https://x.com/sdamico ) He clearly has an agenda against what he perceives as onerous environmental regulations: https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026536815902208479 https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026552845294792994

> has an agenda Everyone has an agenda. Is anything on this site false? Is it incorrect information?

Really difficult to say because it doesn't make many concrete claims. It doesn't mention any regulations or say what chemicals or processes are actually banned. These are not easy things to look up. I can tell you that at least the semiconductor fabrication stuff is false, there are many fabs in California and here's a new one as of a few days ago: https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/02/19/san-jose-tech-nokia-i....

I realize it isn't completed yet but I don't think anyone is buying sites for something that's impossible to build.

Here's another one: https://www.bosch-semiconductors.com/roseville/

Re: Banned in California

#95

Post by wewtyflakes »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #7
wewtyflakes wrote: post #3

So no new car paint shops or oil refineries? I'm okay with that.

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.

Re: Banned in California

#97

Post by thephyber »

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.

Maps of California are dotted with SuperFund sites where these companies left the taxpayers with the bill to clean up their toxic messes. We don’t “foist” these externalities on other people; they choose to hold lower value on a clean environment than regions which regulate pollutants and other negative externalities.

Re: Banned in California

#98

Post by no-dr-onboard »

richwater wrote: post #64
mparkms wrote: post #48

The creator of the website is the CEO of a battery-powered induction cooktop company. ( https://x.com/sdamico ) He clearly has an agenda against what he perceives as onerous environmental regulations: https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026536815902208479 https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026552845294792994

> has an agenda Everyone has an agenda. Is anything on this site false? Is it incorrect information?

Maybe reworded as “He has skin in the game”

> so obviously his point can’t be true > so obviously he’s biased and we can’t do the mental work of sifting > so obviously I can dismiss this as teleologically false.

Please don’t be so lazy you guys. There is something to be gained here.

Re: Banned in California

#99

Post by jbellis »

blintz wrote: post #53

They are playing a bit fast and loose with the word "banned". > Your smartphone contains materials processed through semiconductor fabrication, chemical etching, metal anodizing, glass tempering, and electroplating — none of which you could start a new facility for in California without years of litigation. I agree that we should make it easier to do things, specifically by decreasing the amount of litigation involve…

He's talking about taking the government to court to force it to follow the law, not "maybe we'll get sued later."

Re: Banned in California

#100

Post by ixtli »

dlev_pika wrote: post #49
crawshaw wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That’s ok, Texans don’t mind having to drink bottled water

I lived in Mexico for a while and while I really enjoyed it it’s horrible that you have to fear the tap water. It’s not humane
Post reply on HN