Re: Caught in rain

On 5/8/2025 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/8/2025 7:12 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 5/7/2025 7:49 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Wed, 7 May 2025 07:24:50 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>

I rinse mine for a few minutes in a coffee can with brake cleaner
(https://www.grainger.com/product/CRC-Brake-Cleaner- Solvent-35WT64)

>
Almost pure dry cleaning solvent:

>
Yup, and it works great as a degreaser.
>

>
<https://www.grainger.com/sds/pdf/259633.pdf>
   Chemical name:  tetrachloroethylene
   Common name and synonyms:  perchloroethylene
   CAS number:  127-18-4
   %  90 - 100%
>
"EPA Proposes Ban on All Consumer and Many Commercial Uses of
Perchloroethylene to Protect Public Health"
<https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-proposes-ban-all- consumer-and- many-commercial-uses-perchloroethylene-protect>

>
I'm not to worried about this administrations actions having anything to do with protecting public health. Quite the opposite, in fact.
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/epa-rollback- environmental-regulations-zeldin-rcna196112
>

>
"Risk Management for Perchloroethylene (PCE)"  (Dec 2024)
<https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals- under-tsca/ risk-management-perchloroethylene-pce>
"EPA has set a 10-year phaseout for the use of PCE in dry cleaning to
eliminate the risk to people who work or spend considerable time at
dry cleaning facilities."

>
It's a good thing I'm not using it for dry cleaning then. In the meantime, there's no talk of banning it as an industrial solvent (degreaser).
>
I agree with limiting it in cases where people may be exposed to it all day everyday, like dry cleaner employees. For people that use it a couple time a week in a garage, not likely that big of a deal. For someone who uses a pint to clean a batch of bike chains every couple of months - there's more risk from the diesel fumes I inhale during my commutes.
>
>

 +1
A little perspective can be quite helpful.
 A distinct outlier is California's Prop 65:
 https://oag.ca.gov/prop65/faq
 which requires notice for anything with 1/1000 of the lowest reported harmful level by any study for any material or product.  That has crossed from safety into harassment.

I don't necessarily disagree with requiring notifications. At that point the decision to use the product then falls on the user. This doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable burden.
--
Add xx to reply