TBT Antifouling - Morally Reprehensible ?

[Bash]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Probably as much to do with local gun ownership restrictions..........

Sigh. Excessive cuteness is just wasted on some people.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by YOGAO

From a more thread-specific standpoint, it is still shocking to me that the TBT ban is entirely appropriate in places of high boat populations and enclosed harbors like San Francisco, Baltimore, Seattle, etc, etc, etc, while a TBT ban may not be appropriate in other locations. "One size fits all", does not always fit.

The ban is not site-specific. It is nationwide, which means in all coastal waterways, as it is in the 34 other nations that are participating.

Look, defend it all you want. But TbT is bad stuff and there is no valid reason to continue using it.

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by YOGAO

From a more thread-specific standpoint, it is still shocking to me that the TBT ban is entirely appropriate in places of high boat populations and enclosed harbors like San Francisco, Baltimore, Seattle, etc, etc, etc, while a TBT ban may not be appropriate in other locations. "One size fits all", does not always fit.

Aquaculture and generally shellfish harvesting is done in less populated areas since shellfish is very susceptible to pollution.

We get fairly large tides up here, todays high will be over 16 feet, and so you would expect a good flush and yet there are areas where the current is restricted so that everything doesn't flush out.

Are you planning on restricting your boating to areas with no shellfish, few boats and high volumes of water?

I don't believe a light population make putting poison in the water ok.

[bljones]

Looks like a nerve has been struck.

[Vachon]

No brainer. The use of TbT damages in a markedly more significant way the very ecosystems that caused us to buy the damn boat in the first place. It makes me think a bit of the campers that go into the woods to enjoy all the pristine nature, and then leave a bunch of plastic bags and other crap behind that will be ingested by the wildlife and harm the formerly pristine environment.

The only reason to use TbT is it means less work for us keeping the bottom clean.

So yes, call it like it is... users of TbT are choosing to to damage or destroy marine ecosystems to save a few hours of work every year or two.

Everyone will have to make that choice for themselves. My hope is that more will choose to haul the boat a bit more frequently or spend a bit more time in the water cleaning the hull.

[Capt Phil]

I would be interested to learn on a scale of 1-10 where these different ablative/non-ablative coatings lie in their proven harm to the environment. I'm probably dating myself somewhat by recalling slapping on literally gallons of 'red lead' bottom paint after replacing wooden planks in my old seine boats in British Columbia. It was an annual ritual. I fear I may have obliterated whole species as a result of ignorantly using this product. The one consolation is that I usually got as much on myself as I did on the bottom of the boat thereby guaranteeing that according to Darwins Survival of the Species theory, I'm not going to be around much longer... Capt Phil

[Vachon]

ha! "Paints" quite the picture!

If one borrows the "morally reprehensible" theme from the title of this thread, I think many would feel there is a moral difference (if not a difference to the sealife) between someone using an effective product without being aware of the risk to the environment and, having been made aware of the impact, intentionally continuing with the practice.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

I would be interested to learn on a scale of 1-10 where these different ablative/non-ablative coatings lie in their proven harm to the environment.

Every set of in-water hull cleaning Best Management Practices that I have ever read frowns upon the cleaning of abaltive paints or causing a "plume" of color in the water when doing the cleaning, ostensibly because that means greater harm is being done to the environment. That being said, I know of no studies that show that copper in our coastal waterways is causing harm to the ecosystem. The reason that there is so much effort to reduce copper in the water (in California, at least) is simply because the federal government has determined what levels of copper are acceptable and many bodies of water in this state exceed those levels, not because there is proof that damage is being done.

[capn_billl]

Even small amounts of disolved copper kills plankton, and algea. That is why we use it in paint. A large amount can take out the bottom rung of the food chain.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

I would be interested to learn on a scale of 1-10 where these different ablative/non-ablative coatings lie in their proven harm to the environment...

Antifouling Paint Biocides by Ioannis K. Konstantinou
➥ Antifouling Paint Biocides - Google Books

This volume describes the state-of-the-art advances regarding antifouling paint biocides and provides thorough evaluation of research and information on major topics such as occurrence and levels, environmental fate, analytical techniques and methods for the monitoring and control, environmental modeling, ecotoxicological effects and risk assessment placing emphasis on the knowledge acquired over the last 10 years. The contamination of the aquatic environment by antifouling compounds has been a topic of increasing importance during the last few years. The major classes of antifouling active biocides are discussed including the old-fashioned organotin compounds, the modern organic booster biocides and the promising naturally occurring antifoulant products. Therefore, the reader will get a balanced view of this developing field. Chapters were written by leading experts in their field who critically surveyed all the major areas of progress. This volume is an important resource and can constitute a good grounding in the field of antifouling paint biocides.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Even small amounts of disolved copper kills plankton, and algea. That is why we use it in paint. A large amount can take out the bottom rung of the food chain.

I understand as well as anyone that copper in anti fouling paint is used as a biocide. And I agree that less copper from anti fouling paint being introduced into the environment is a good thing. The point is, there are no studies linking it to environmental damage, unlike TbT.

[s/v Jedi]

I am really curious about the stance of the professional diver-hull-cleaners amd US berthed yacht owners when the next step in environmental protection is taken in the USA... which is a ban on cleaning anti-fouled hulls while in the water.

This practice releases much more poisons like copper and chemicals in the environment than cleaning the boat during extra haul-out's where the waste is contained and disposed of in a way that is safe to the environment.

Civilized countries like Panama already enforce this in many locations. Time for the USA to follow and take this next step to a better and healthier marine environment.

ciao!
Nick.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I am really curious about the stance of the professional diver-hull-cleaners amd US berthed yacht owners when the next step in environmental protection is taken in the USA... which is a ban on cleaning anti-fouled hulls while in the water.

Scary idea, but way off base. Water quality control is handled primarily at the state level, so a nationwide ban on hull cleaning is not even a remote possibility. The actual "next step in environmental protection" is to reduce the copper content in existing anti fouling paints while at the same time exploring non-copper alternatives, like zinc-based paints or non-toxic anti fouling coatings.

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

This practice releases much more poisons like copper and chemicals in the environment than cleaning the boat during extra haul-out's where the waste is contained and disposed of in a way that is safe to the environment. Civilized countries like Panama already enforce this in many locations. Time for the USA to follow and take this next step to a better and healthier marine environment.

Pretty ironic, you ranting about American water quality policy, when you use TbT paint on your own boat.

BTW- in California (and other states as well) all boatyards are required to capture and filter their wastewater, disposing of the solids as hazardous waste.

[foggysail]

GEEZ, now I am getting ready to support forced CAP & TRADE, a WINDMILL in every back yard, a ban on carbon fuels for automobiles (even though electrical generation and distribution requirements are overlooked). Just how morally responsible can government compel us to be????

Foggy

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by foggysail

Just how morally responsible can government compel us to be????

Foggy

They can't compel you to be morally responsible at all, just to act like you are.