AwI thought cadmium yellow paints were somehow rendered safe at this point. (?)
Also I was surprised to see PILKINGTON on the list.
Printable View
AwI thought cadmium yellow paints were somehow rendered safe at this point. (?)
Also I was surprised to see PILKINGTON on the list.
"One of the big things that will obviously be fought about is what constitutes a "continuous" glass furnace, since that is what is specifically referred to in the regulations. In the industry, a continuous melt furnace is one with a continuous feed of batch going into one end while finished glass gets pulled out the other. But it seems like the bureaucrats reacting to the hype are now trying to retroactively classify virtually every glass furnace as "continuous", since all but the very smallest run 24 hours a day, even if they are not actually melting. So it looks like the EPA is now attempting to justify lumping day tanks and pot furnaces in with continuous melt tank furnaces. You can expect that to cause some people a lot of grief, even if the EPA doesn't make it stick."
Here's a link to the letter (dated April 2016) from the EPA to the ODEQ "clarifying" the definition of "continuous".
https://www.oregon.gov/deq/nr/041316EPAguidance.pdf
The relevant portion for small studio/home day tanks.Quote:
In choosing to exempt non-continuous furnaces, the EPA focused on their operation beingperiodic. A furnace that shuts down seasonally or is only operated for portions of the year wouldnot be considered a continuous furnace. This revision was meant to address the concerns ofsmall operators or artisanal shops which may turn kilns/furnaces on and off regularly. Thefurnaces you describe are kept hot (operated) for a year or more between rebrickings andproduce glass on a routine schedule.
And the "out":
Quote:
Please note that this response is a non-binding regulatory interpretation based on theinformation provided by Oregon Department ofEnvironmental Quality (Oregon DEQ) andinformation gathered by EPA. This response should not be considered an applicabilitydetermination, nor does it represent final Agency action, since it is not in response to afaci lity request. Oregon DEQ may, in its discretion, consider this interpretation and anyother relevant infonnation it has in determining the applicability of Subpart SSSSSS to anyfacilities in its state.
There is an industry that pollutes & EPA so far has refused to step up, the EPA regulates emissions from most vehicles, small engines, lawnmowers chainsaws, however they refuse to regulate the aviation industry, no catalytic converters, still using leaded fuel, no emission testing whatsoever of aircraft, but they are allowed to pollute as much as they want.
for another good example of EPA not doing anything, many industries with smokestaks polluting their community are allowed to buy up older vehicles, then they crush them, so the the vehicles as well as the parts from the vehicles do not help keep other vehicles on road & the industry gets credit for the emissions & are allowed to continue to not have to clean up their emissions, this is alot cheaper to buy up vehicles, I assume they still are doing this, I know a couple years ago they still were, & will have to research to see if still doing.
It has always been easier to drop the hammer on a small number of polluters than a large number.
A lot of it is political - going after the aviation industry would get Congress involved when the paid mouth-pieces start complaining about "over reach". Additionally, I believe AV gas has been exempted due to higher altitude requirements for high octane fuel. That's off the top of my head from what I remember from years and years ago.
Here's a video of the meeting
http://youtu.be/Z_aVxr2Uqcc
Not sure who told you that... it was true 20+ years ago, but a lot of things change in 20 years. First, the main point: https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonro.../420r05004.pdf That is US emission standards for aircraft engine. It applies mainly to larger jet engines or commercial craft. Here is the FAA's input on the situation: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets...m?newsId=14754 Lead free airports by 2018.Quote:
Originally Posted by old_biker
The only aircraft not require to undergo inspection and emission certifications are military, experimental, and non-regulated aircraft (ultralights, hot air balloons, UAVs, model airplanes, etc).
Jet A - the most common jet fuel in the world, does not contain any lead additives. Lead does not naturally occur in any significant amount in kerosene, the base of which Jet A
Small planes with gasoline engines are subjected to considerably less regulation on emissions than jets, and AV Gas does contain added lead. BUT, compared to anything like automotive or industrial emissions, small gasoline powered aircraft just don't add up to much. It's a piss in the ocean.
Just little OT perhaps, since it has to do with Spectrum closing rather than Bullseye's current political problems, but earlier tonight I stumbled across an article about the beginnings of Spectrum Glass that was interesting. And considering that one of the primary stated reasons for the upcoming shutdown of their operation was overbuilding production capacity immediately before demand took a nosedive in 2008, this paragraph of the article in particular sounded prescient:
Sadly, Spectrum is about to join the list of dead glass companies. But Wissmach and Kokomo are still running. (Unless the current EPA hysteria winds up creating insurmountable problems for them.)Quote:
At the time, 1973, there were really only two art glass manufacturers of any significance in the U.S.—Wissmach and Kokomo. Both had been making fine products for generations, but neither was showing any inclination to increase production to meet the "new demand." In retrospect, this is understandable. Across a century or so, they had seen many good times come and go for stained glass. There was no reason for them to believe that the current "good times" for their products wouldn't wane [as] others had before.
I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere if one looks hard enough.
Bullseye expects to resume production of colored glass in mid-July and resume operations at full capacity in August, after reaching an agreement with the Oregon DEQ.
http://www.bullseyeglass.com/news/bu...regon-deq.html
In the meantime, Bullseye has continued making clear glass and, perhaps, some colored glass, but has been restricted to 20% of their product line.
http://www.bullseyeglass.com/forum/i...0f8119bdd4d556
Additionally, on 1 August, Bullseye glass prices will increase by 12.5%.
http://us5.campaign-archive2.com/?u=...e&e=9daf0cd004
After reading this link last night I couldn't quit thinking about it. Very interesting! I spent a little time on chapter 1 of Contemporary Lampworking before bed last night and am starting to understand why it's so important.Quote:
Originally Posted by PyroChixRock
stop putting up so many good posts.... i cant give you any more rep! haha seriously tho. 1000000% accurate. Jet A is water white kerosene.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greymatter Glass
Great post, thank you for sharing mishaQuote:
Originally Posted by PyroChixRock
Aye yi yi. Not sure what to think of this.
http://www.oregonlive.com/environmen...for_illeg.html
I'm rapidly losing sympathy for them.
That's probably 40+ years of glass debris in that catch basin. Considering the minimal fine meted out to Bullseye, the city doesn't seem to feel it's too horrendous a problem. However, now that some locals are obviously looking for any opportunity to nit-pick Bullseye on environmental issues, it would seem wise for the BE owners to assess all of their practices and refrain from doing stupid shit like this any more. At this point the $300 fine they picked up is a bargain compared to the bad publicity that an otherwise easily avoidable issue like this will probably generate for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by PyroChixRock