3 ms·

Is it really about being better or about being very cost effective but poisonious options?

by herbst 3y ago

owenversteeg 3y ago
In a lot of these cases yes, it is truly the best chemical for the job at any price. I’m not aware of any nontoxic antifoulings that come anywhere close to TBT. If you produced anything nearly as good you could very easily sell a few gallons for _ten thousand dollars_ and I’m just talking what some small scale fisherman or guy with a boat will pay, simply because it will save them more in fuel+paint+haulouts, not even some crazy performance yachts or whatever which would pay FAR more.
- LeifCarrotson 3y ago
  You could sell it at thousands of dollars per gallon, sure, but could you sell it at a price which would support 30 years of mitigation of its effects on the marine ecosystems where the boats go? If it was popular enough to go on enough boats to kill off ten-thousand-year-old coral reefs, could you possibly charge enough to reverse that? If you don't pay for that, you're not charging the full cost of the chemical and instead stealing those funds from the rest of society.
ryukoposting 3y ago
Both, sort of. TBT is effective because nothing grows on it. It's kinda like deet. Being bad for the environment isn't just an unintended side effect, it's a direct contributor to its effectiveness.
- meepmorp 3y ago
  DEET isn't especially toxic, and while it does have negative effects on some marine life, doesn't bioaccumulate. Also, DEET doesn't rely on toxicity for its effects - it (probably) works by interfering with mosquitoes' sense of smell, and possibly also being noxious should a mosquito actually land on someone. Which is to say, DEET is not a huge problem for the environment and any impact on the environment is not part of its effectiveness.
  - ryukoposting 3y ago
    DEET isn't toxic, but it repels pollinators from areas where it is heavily used [1]. This isn't exclusive to DEET, every bug repellant does it to some extent, but DEET is unique because it's so damn effective. Don't get me wrong, DEET isn't bad enough to be illegal. It washes away in the rain. It doesn't foul up groundwater, and although it does get washed into rivers and streams, it really doesn't do much once it's there. I mention DEET as another example of a chemical that is bad for the environment because it's too good at its intended purpose - did not mean to indicate that it's as bad as that boat coating stuff. [1]: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/potential-impact-of-mosquito-and-nuisance-insect-sprays-on-pollinators https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/potential-impact-of-mosquito-a...

Is it really about being better or about being very cost effective but poisonious options?

by herbst 3y ago

Is it really about being better or about being very cost effective but poisonious options?

In a lot of these cases yes, it is truly the best chemical for the job at any price. I’m not aware of any nontoxic antifoulings that come anywhere close to TBT. If you produced anything nearly as good you could very easily sell a few gallons for _ten thousand dollars_ and I’m just talking what some small scale fisherman or guy with a boat will pay, simply because it will save them more in fuel+paint+haulouts, not even some crazy performance yachts or whatever which would pay FAR more.

LeifCarrotson 3y ago
You could sell it at thousands of dollars per gallon, sure, but could you sell it at a price which would support 30 years of mitigation of its effects on the marine ecosystems where the boats go? If it was popular enough to go on enough boats to kill off ten-thousand-year-old coral reefs, could you possibly charge enough to reverse that? If you don't pay for that, you're not charging the full cost of the chemical and instead stealing those funds from the rest of society.

ryukoposting 3y ago

Both, sort of. TBT is effective because nothing grows on it. It's kinda like deet. Being bad for the environment isn't just an unintended side effect, it's a direct contributor to its effectiveness.

meepmorp 3y ago
DEET isn't especially toxic, and while it does have negative effects on some marine life, doesn't bioaccumulate. Also, DEET doesn't rely on toxicity for its effects - it (probably) works by interfering with mosquitoes' sense of smell, and possibly also being noxious should a mosquito actually land on someone. Which is to say, DEET is not a huge problem for the environment and any impact on the environment is not part of its effectiveness.
- ryukoposting 3y ago
  DEET isn't toxic, but it repels pollinators from areas where it is heavily used [1]. This isn't exclusive to DEET, every bug repellant does it to some extent, but DEET is unique because it's so damn effective. Don't get me wrong, DEET isn't bad enough to be illegal. It washes away in the rain. It doesn't foul up groundwater, and although it does get washed into rivers and streams, it really doesn't do much once it's there. I mention DEET as another example of a chemical that is bad for the environment because it's too good at its intended purpose - did not mean to indicate that it's as bad as that boat coating stuff. [1]: https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/potential-impact-of-mosquito-and-nuisance-insect-sprays-on-pollinators https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/potential-impact-of-mosquito-a...