Read on another site that the US government is bringing in a law to reduce the amount of styrene used in poly. This could phase out the feasibility of manufacturing and using poly for many people apparently.
December 2013 styrene is supposed to be less than 10%. The law presently puts the responsibility on the manufacturers of finished product so it’s not really been enforced. Who’s gonna chase a bunch of surfboard manufacturers around. The law has also been at 30% and the resins are apparently close to that. But according to what I’ve read they will now place the responsibility on suppliers. And they’ll fine those who are selling unlawful compounds.
In reality epoxy is now just as fast, no more expensive to use, is 100% solids and can be used on EPS or urethane. I know there will be many who still won’t want to change though. But we’ll see if this actually happens. Was supposed to happen 20 years ago and didn’t. Politics.
Poliester production will just move overseas or south of the border where they don't have the rediculous BS government regulations. Boat manufacturers here in New Jersey have already begun the move thanks to our states enviro regulations. We didn't need those jobs here anyway. What they did in our state a couple years back is put in a polution tax which adds about $10,000 to the production cost of a boat. Styrene emissions were included in that tax. Guess what North Carolina and Florida don't have that tax so production is heading elsewhere. The same thing will happen if there is a national law only the jobs will head to other countries.
Does that make any sense? If the problem is pollution, why does paying a tax make it okay to go ahead and pollute? Our government at work.
I think it was mentioned in the recent TSJ that California surfboard industry has a narrow exemption that allows them to use polyesther where it’s otherwise severely limited. I thought that was interesting…I had no idea.
Crow Haley was saying that the rules are so ridiculous that as a manufacturer he has a hard time (either prevented or exorbitantly charged, I don’t recall) getting a permit for the use of some solvents that any one of us can go and grab from the Home Depot.
You know … I’m somewhat environmental for basically three reasons. 1. I’ve been to Sumatra and 2. I’ve been to Cairo. I know it seems that regulation is sometimes over the top but 3. I surfed in SoCal in the 70’s and had to get out of the water in the early afternoon because I could no longer breathe. In Cairo the pollution is so bad you can’t see across the street on some days. Sumatra isn’t much better. And I can now surf all day in SoCal without feeling like I’m on death’s door. I see the reasoning behind wanting clean air and accepting the price for that.
Crow’s situation is unique and he uses such small quantities that there isn’t a replacement. This is unfortunate and there should be some way of permitting him. But surfboards are different. The industry has a small change to make. We have the technology to change so why don’t we?
7 years ago I in Orange County I had the fire department drop by, they wanted me to move sprinkler heads right above my resins and acetone drums, and then wanted them locked in fireproof cabinets. I went on a fury about how Lowes and Home depot carry just as much if not more of the same product and they dont have to follow that protocol so why should I? I spent 10 grand on sprinklers in the begining to meet thier requests as it was. I got hasseled until i moved to escondido. And to this day at that Home Depot and Lowes, or any as far as I know acetone and resins are on pallets, without direct sprinklering and not in fireproof cabinets.
Its interesting who they target to pick on sometimes.
I think, in part, Home D. and Lowe’s have “sealed” containers - No one is opening, using, and closing them.
good perspective…
They’re also small containers which have entirely different rules attached to them. Dude’s, I ship hazmat all over the world … you want to talk rules!!! You would not believe …
How deep of a lecture do you want on this. I am going to assume you have no econ training. The more expensive something is the lower the quantity is that is demanded. Adding a tax to use a product makes that product cost more, therefore less will be demanded. Think of it this way: if we doubled the price of gas with a tax, would you still drive the same number of miles in your car? Or, would you combine trips, carpool, use public transportation, ride a bike to check the waves? Probably. There is nothing to say you can’t use gasoline it is just making it a less appealing to do so. Same thing with the tax on styrene, it doesn’t stop the pollution but decreases the amount; if they keep the trend of decreasing the amount that can be used and make it more expensive to use styrene, eventually it will be too costly and manufactures will turn elsewhere as long as there is a substitute product. I welcome any questions you may have, and if you would like to discuss this further I would be happy to do so.
This is what I am getting my degree in (a BA in Environmental Studies and minor in Economics)
[quote="$1"]
[quote="$1"]
Does that make any sense? If the problem is pollution, why does paying a tax make it okay to go ahead and pollute? Our government at work.
[/quote]
How deep of a lecture do you want on this. I am going to assume you have no econ training. The more expensive something is the lower the quantity is that is demanded. Adding a tax to use a product makes that product cost more, therefore less will be demanded. Think of it this way: if we doubled the price of gas with a tax, would you still drive the same number of miles in your car? Or, would you combine trips, carpool, use public transportation, ride a bike to check the waves? Probably. There is nothing to say you can't use gasoline it is just making it a less appealing to do so. Same thing with the tax on styrene, it doesn't stop the pollution but decreases the amount; if they keep the trend of decreasing the amount that can be used and make it more expensive to use styrene, eventually it will be too costly and manufactures will turn elsewhere as long as there is a substitute product. I welcome any questions you may have, and if you would like to discuss this further I would be happy to do so.
This is what I am getting my degree in (a BA in Environmental Studies and minor in Economics)
[/quote]
Good response. You might have forgotten one thing though. When you increase taxes and regulations on producers the producers will move to a less taxing environment. We live in a world where everyone is mobile, including business. Businesses will move and jobs will be lost. Its already happening.
Indeed this is true. We can regulate here but we can not regulate elsewhere. The purpose of taxes especially on pollution is to force the cost of the externalities of the transaction back upon those involved. We could put a tax on any product sold in the US made using styrene regardless of where it was produced(kind of like alcohol) in order to decrease the use of styrene globally. I was not debating the placement or implementation of the tax just explaining that placing a tax is not saying “it is alright go ahead pollute.” It is forcing the people involved to pay for their actions in order to discourage the behavior so the amount of that behavior is brought down to a level we accept.
I was not addressing the issue of international trade on here and I don’t really like to discuss that as it turns into a big political discussion and those really suck over the internet. Economics doesn’t deal with moral issues or emotional issues.
Solutions------------DRILL BABY and DRILL NOW! Ease up on small business and enterpenuers. Rein in Govt. spending. Cut taxes for all ----- across the board. Reduce restrictions(but be harsh on those who violate those Minimal restrictions.). Send any senator or congressman who has spent more than one term in office home(as per US constitution). Then get out of the way! This thing will take off like a race horse at the Derby.
Oh yeah! And bring home all US troops with exception of S. Korea. Let all you guys over in Euro and Aus. deal with the World's problems. We'll save millions and the rest of the world will learn to be responsible for itself.
Oh yeah! And bring home all US troops with exception of S. Korea. Let all you guys over in Euro and Aus. deal with the World's problems. We'll save millions and the rest of the world will learn to be responsible for itself.
Great idea, maybe no other countries will get invaded then??, you also might not lose thousands of your armed service people?? Just a thought.
Oh yeah! And bring home all US troops with exception of S. Korea. Let all you guys over in Euro and Aus. deal with the World's problems. We'll save millions and the rest of the world will learn to be responsible for itself.
Great idea, maybe no other countries will get invaded then??, you also might not lose thousands of your armed service people?? Just a thought.
Solutions
a. Wire up the high desert SW for solar using gov funding and tax incentives
b. build an efficent electrical grid for transmission using gov funding and tax incentives
c. pay for it by bringing home all US troops with exception of S. Korea. Let all you guys over in Euro and Aus. deal with the World’s problems. We’ll save millions and the rest of the world will learn to be responsible for itself.
gentleman please what a nasty streak i see coming out here . mcding
are you still on nasty pills greg i thought you said we needed each other
US spends too much money on war. Just running a quote there … didn’t mean to dis UK or Oz.