SailNet Community - Reply to Topic

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Gear & Maintenance > Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus
 Not a Member? 


Thread: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus Reply to Thread
Title:
  

By choosing to post the reply below you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Click here to view the posting rules you are bound to when clicking the
'Submit Reply' button below


Topic Review (Newest First)
11-22-2013 12:56 AM
PaulinVictoria
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

Ah gotcha, yeah, that makes sense. I distrust any report in any situation that is paid for by a party that has in interest in the situation. There was a recent one here around increasing coal shipments and surprise surprise, the environmental impact study commissioned by the coal company stated that there would be impact, flying completely in the face of every other study done.
11-22-2013 12:09 AM
Fstbttms
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulinVictoria View Post
I am assuming cleaning the hull would also remove the expensive paint much faster than just leaving it there, requiring re-coating with expensive paint more often. In which case, what would the expensive paint manufacturers have to gain by suggesting that it never gets cleaned (or cleaned less often)?
I don't expect that you would have any experience in this, boating in a region of very low fouling as you do, where hull cleaning is rarely (if ever) performed, but frequent, gentle in-water hull cleaning actually helps an anti fouling paint last much longer than it otherwise would. In regions of moderate to high fouling (such as California) anti fouling paint is going to foul fairly rapidly. Allowing it to become even moderately foul means it is then necessary to use abrasive cleaning media to remove that fouling. This (of course) scrubs paint (and therefore copper) off the hull and into the water. By cleaning frequently, the hull never gets particularly foul and the softest, least abrasive cleaning media can be used to remove fouling growth. This keeps the paint (and copper) on the hull, where it belongs.

The paint companies are up against the wall. They were able to recently defeat proposed legislation (similar to Washington's) that would have banned copper-based anti fouling paints in California. They have much to gain by making their products appear to be less polluting and in-water hull cleaning to be more polluting.
11-21-2013 10:36 PM
PaulinVictoria
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

I am assuming cleaning the hull would also remove the expensive paint much faster than just leaving it there, requiring re-coating with expensive paint more often. In which case, what would the expensive paint manufacturers have to gain by suggesting that it never gets cleaned (or cleaned less often)?
11-21-2013 05:02 PM
zz4gta
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul323 View Post
What gets me - which I mentioned when they tried to ban copper-based paints a year or so ago - is the the focus is on recreational craft. I look at those big container ships in SF Bay - each one polluting hundreds of times more that the recreational boats. .
SF makes lots o' money from shipping. Big money will get their way and find a way to get the little guy to pay for it.
11-21-2013 05:01 PM
Don0190
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fstbttms View Post
"The fox guarding the hen house," this scenario should clear that right up for you.

[/url]

I believe this phase applies much more to a hull cleaner saying the report is wrong!
11-21-2013 04:43 PM
paul323
Re: Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

As you said, I wonder what the paint manufacturers will do with this. "Don't clean your bottom" is rather naive; even with fresh paint, the bottom gets fouled in a few weeks; it would be pretty bad left uncleaned for a few months. Perhaps they will claim that copper paints aren't so bad (because none of the alternatives work, or are too expensive), so long as it isn't cleaned...thereby avoiding the retooling and expense of finding alternatives.

Regardless, thank you for posting it.

What gets me - which I mentioned when they tried to ban copper-based paints a year or so ago - is the the focus is on recreational craft. I look at those big container ships in SF Bay - each one polluting hundreds of times more that the recreational boats. .
11-21-2013 11:55 AM
Fstbttms
Hull Cleaners Thrown Under The Bus

Earlier this year I began a thread entitled "Anti Fouling Paint Manufacturers Taking Aim At Hull Cleaners." Maybe some of you remember it. Anyway, in that thread, I referenced a study of in-water hull cleaning's copper contribution to the water column. Not the first study of its kind, but the first one funded by the paint manufacturer's lobbying group. It was published a couple of weeks ago and as expected, the results show that copper-based anti fouling paint is much less of an issue than every other previous study has shown, and that in-water hull cleaning is much more of a problem. By a factor of 10. Where previous studies show that hull cleaning contributes about 5% of the copper that gets into the water from anti fouling paint, this study shows it to be about 50%. If you were ever in doubt about the meaning of the phrase, "The fox guarding the hen house," this scenario should clear that right up for you.

We don't know how the paint manufacturers will want the state to use this study, but we suspect it could be used to implement mandatory cleaning frequencies in California, and by that I mean much less frequent than the boat owner would like. FYI.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/1...14.2013.841891

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:00 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.