4 ms·
I realize you are using these examples as something so innocuous and inoffensive nobody would oppose such regulation. However, you clearly have not read either
by tristor 3y ago
I realize you are using these examples as something so innocuous and inoffensive nobody would oppose such regulation. However, you clearly have not read either regulation in full and with due consideration of its effects. You can form your own judgments, but these regulations are not without tradeoffs.
Take 1007/2011, on one hand this just centralizes and codifies some existing regulations to reduce country-specific administrative burdens, on the other hand in Chapter 2, Articles 5 and 6, it places onerous regulatory burdens on anyone wanting to create new textile blends.
You can no longer simply produce such a product and make it honestly available to the market, it’s illegal to sell without first getting the EU to agree to add your textile blend to Annex I, which requires an extensive bureaucratic process with destructive testing requirements.
On one hand, it’s important to know exactly what is in a product, on other hand being so distrustful that you mandate expensive destructive testing before the first offer to market means either you expect people to regularly violate these laws at the margins or you intend to completely stamp out small time inventors. Contrary to what the average person thinks there is a lot of active development in the textile industry trying to find new fiber sources and production methods which lower costs and lower environmental impacts. This is especially true in the production of rayon, with things like the lyocell process, using new cellulose sources like bamboo and eucalyptus, and identifying alternative chemical pathways for the production of viscose.
Regulations like these are a two edged sword, like all regulations. Comparing the US to the EU, the EU generally has higher product quality standards but lags the US in innovation, part of the reason why is due to these types of regulations. It is much easier for a small-time inventor to go from idea to product in market in the US than the EU, including in the textile space.
- ta1243 3y agoI struggle to believe anyone actually hates such regulations, but to hate every single one of the thousands of regulations the EU government has passed over the last few decades suggests something somewhat deeper
- nebula8804 3y agoWow always interesting hearing new developments in unrelated industries. There just isn't enough time in the day to research each industry. Since you seem knowledgable, do you know what is the state of recycling old fabrics? I was fascinated by attempts to "process" old fabrics and mix them with other fabrics to create new garments as shown in this video but im not sure if this went anywhere. [1]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obO1PKfXGpQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obO1PKfXGpQ
- p_l 3y agoPossibly stupid question, but for novel material, why can't you use entry 48 in table 2 of Annex I, which is "descriptive" naming scheme for things outside current list? Plus a bunch of the current standard names includes very generic terms. Blends are accepted with the descriptive names.