TBT Antifouling - Morally Reprehensible ?

[foggysail]

Originally Posted by hummingway

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

That is right!!! But they can make you WISH YOU WERE!!!

[Capt Phil]

Panama is civilized? When did that happen? CP

[Capt Phil]

Hey Gord... great link... I read a lot of it and got a real education. Haven't kept up on the science end of bottom paints, just tried to do what made sense and was legal. Where does the old Trinidad Blue fall on my 1-10 scale? I've still got about 4 gallons kicking around... Capt Phil

[svcambria]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

Panama is civilized? When did that happen? CP

Government is moral? When did THAT happen?

Michael

[Capt Phil]

Careful, svcambria... don't get political or Gord will shut down the thread! Ho Ho... CP

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by YOGAO

Before passing judgement, I would invite you to spend several seasons in the Caribbean doing the "more frequent" scrubbing that the highest quality non-TBT paints would require (aka every 2 - 3 days).


Fair Winds,
Mike

2-3 days.

I'm stayin' home.

Sheesh!

[Therapy]

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.


ciao!
Nick.

I am going to haul my boat every month or so? EEEK!!

I just lowered my asking price!

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by YOGAO

Before passing judgement, I would invite you to spend several seasons in the Caribbean doing the "more frequent" scrubbing that the highest quality non-TBT paints would require (aka every 2 - 3 days).

I find it difficult to believe that bottom paint in good conditon would need cleaning every couple of days, regardless of where the boat lives. Further, I have never heard anybody give any anecdotal evidence to support that claim.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

or non-toxic anti fouling coatings.



.

What the hell is that!?

Are the coatings going to talk to the barnie's and ask them to stick to the pilings?

[SimonV]

If the powers that be were to give you back you right to choice..so given that all these paints where available in your given area, which way do you go.

paint A. cheap, long lasting, extreamly efective, enviromentaly unfreindly!

paint B. mid price, longish lasting, not so efective, enviromentaly sort of freindly!

Paint c. expensive, short lived, lots of work to be efective, enviromentaly freindly?

For me it would be A every time.

edit: I want to know what they use on submarines..

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by osirissail

Another excellent link - When the restrictions were put in place, Organotins (TBT) was placed under the restricted substance-pesticides and anybody handing it had to go to "pesticide school." A lot of stuff about termites and ants and of course, Organotins. Only licensed individuals could purchase and apply or supervise the applications of TBT paints and dispose of the left-over product. It was a yearly license and when I sailed off to the Caribbean in 2004, obviously I had no need to renew the license which required classroom attendance.
- - I have personally seen what organotins (TBT) does to shellfish and the result is too disgusting to eat. That effectively shuts down the shellfish market in areas of organotin pollution. So I am personally in favor of the ban just as I am favor of the MSD objectives to clean up the waters.
- - But just like the various threads on other pollution problems worldwide and domestically, it seems there are too many "exceptions" for the rich and powerful and governments and only us little guys get "restricted/banned."
- - And the great link is also clear that only signatories to the treaty voluntarily or are coerced into banning the use of organotins (TBT). It would be interesting to see if they removed the "exemptions" for large vessels and commercial shipping and the military from the latest version of the treaty.
- - China and other countries that are not signatories to the treaty are still making millions producing and selling the product.
- - So as one poster or more has said, it is really a personal "moral" decision to use or not to use organotin (TBT) paints. In controlled countries you cannot purchase it but in the rest of the world it is there on the store shelf. And in the case of Islands 44 - "Made in the USA."
- - And from the link - "The United States played a leadership role in drafting the treaty, but has not yet ratified the agreement.. "

Sorry, but I can't go along with the implied logic here - I know TBT is a bad thing, but until the whole world bans its use, I don't see why I should stop using it.

Surely if your take your recreation, or even base your lifestyle in the marine environment, it just crazy to take action which destroys that environment.

I live in China. I can easily get hold of some really nasty antifouls that are about a quarter the cost of the Convention compliant ones, but I choose not to.

It's not a moral issue, its not a legal issue, its about taking on responsibility for the environment that you use for your pleasure / lifestyle.

What is encouraging is that generally, the younger generations are much better at assuming this responsibility than the older ones..................and the latter aren't going to be around for much longer.

[YOGAO]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

I find it difficult to believe that bottom paint in good conditon would need cleaning every couple of days, regardless of where the boat lives. Further, I have never heard anybody give any anecdotal evidence to support that claim.

As in many things discussed here (and elsewhere), YMMV.

However, we have had many, many Caribbean-based cruisers relate this experience over the last 2+ years. We have also had many, many of the same cruisers who have had their "modern" biocide and copper paints "replaced" by the manufacturer because the paint did not come close to living up to its specs. These have been both professionally applied and user-applied according to manufacturer specs. Some cruisers have taken a cash settlement and moved on to the "morally reprehensible" stuff, others have re-applied the "modern" stuff only to see it fail again before becoming "immoral".

Fair Winds,
Mike

[bruce smith]

Anecdotal evidence..... Luperon= 2 days
South Coast of Grenada(Clarks Cove)=5days
St Maarten Lagoon = 4 days
Englih Harbor= 8days
List goes on n on ... this being with , say 4 month old Trinidad, not the evil TBT.
San Fran Bay= 6months ,one quick scrub

[YOGAO]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

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.

FWIW, biocides used in today's paints are not copper based. They are being used in combination with cuprous oxide paints (and other paints where cuprous oxide is not the best partner). They are generally formulated to add additional bottom protection by reducing plant growth (for ex., slime) while the cuprous oxide reduces the animal growth (for ex., barnacles). One of the really nice enviro advantages of biocides is they seem to dissipate quickly and allow plant growth to resume once the biocide has been removed from the area.

Fair Winds,
Mike

[boatman61]

I've spent a few months at a time in the St Martin lagoon... dunno if it was where I anchored.. near the entrance to the lagoon French Side.. and a steady ebb and flow of water but once a month I'd sail to Gran Case, anchor up and 1/2hr with a wood wedge and teflon pan scrubber would see me good for another month...
Then sail back after a few days...
Anguila, St Barts & BVI's pretty much the same..