oil based paints ban!?

Are there any waterbase products that function like Waterlox? I'm not partial to film finishes. That doesn't mean I don't or haven't used them, I prefer oil for a finish. Sutherland Welles tung oil finishes are very good too. Or were, I haven't had a can of that for quite a while.

I've also used waterbase. It worked o.k., but I still like Waterlox more.

BTW, I'm not in California, my area doesn't have those problems.

Reply to
Lazarus Long
Loading thread data ...

The time I toured the Jack Daniel's distillery, I was told they could make it and drink it there, they just couldn't buy it there.

Reply to
Lazarus Long

The following seems to be pretty balanced. The basis of its info appears to be the "Outdoor Power Equipment Institute:"

formatting link
The claim there is that an "average automobile" will generate apx. 10 times the "smog-formingemissions" that a lawnmower is likely to produce, based on realworld usage. Of course, that's talking about "average autos," not 10 mpg pig SUVs.

Formany people, reducing pollution is always Someone Else's Problem.

Reply to
GregP

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 02:24:42 GMT, Lazarus Long calmly ranted:

Use 2 coats of Waterlox as a wipe-on finish and it doesn't build much of a film. Degloss it with 0000 steel wool and paste wax and it gives you a baby's-butt smooth finish that simply cannot be beat, IMHO.

I'll give up my Waterlox and oil-based finishes only when they can pry them from my cold, dead hands.

The only waterborne product I use is in my kitchen. Future acrylic floor finish. Great stuff.

I had Waterlox bootl^H^H^H^H^Hshipped into the state when I lived there. Not a problem.

============================================================== Like peace and quiet? Buy a phoneless cord. http://www/diversify.com/stees.html Hilarious T-shirts online ==============================================================

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Run the numbers and see what you get. First look on the nice little piece of paper you got last time you took your car in for emissions inspection and see what it _really_ does compared to what the law allows.

However, since you choose to be insulting rather than arguing the facts, I'm not wasting any time on you.

Reply to
J. Clarke

Kind of short on actual numbers though. And is that based on allowable emissions or actuall emissions? My "10 mpg pig SUV" generally shows about a tenth the allowable levels in the state-required emission tests.

Reply to
J. Clarke

:>>I'll never put something that looks like milk on :>my products.

It only looks milky until it dries.

:>

:>You haven't take the time to look at quality water borne product, have you?

: I have tried them, not many because I feel they are vastly inferior to : oil based products. Most people still do.

Let's see. They dry faster. They're repairable, unlike oil-based poly finishes. They don't automatically tint and amber the wood you put them on (although you can easily add color if you want). They're better for your health.

Yup, inferior products all right!

: A step forward or a step back? Kind of an individual thing, but this : legislation is upper US and way too general.

: I guess water based products will be good on chipboard, particle board : and hardboard. Those are all such a step forward, aren't they?

The WB products also look great on walnut, quilted maple, etc.

-- Andy Barss

Reply to
Andrew Barss

In discussions of ground-level air pollution, the word "ozone" is misused. I don't know why, and I deplore it because of the confusion it causes. However, that's the usage. The VOCs contribute to photochemical smog, and that brown crud is called by some "ozone." So, you have to watch the context to know if what's being discussed is O3 or crud.

Reply to
Australopithecus scobis

"J. Clarke" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news4.newsguy.com:

Maybe the answer is to ban all cities with a size greater than

1,000,000! That will do lots of things! Solve the urban blight problem, solve the red/blue state problem. The only places that really lean strongly democratic are those huge urban areas.

It would also go a long way toward solving lots of other problem.

If we can legaly re-distribute wealth then why can't we legally re- distribute people?

Reply to
Joe Willmann

Joe Willmann wrote: ...

If only redistribute, the we will simply be run over out here...I'm all for keeping them in their enclaves--in fact, I'd just as soon move some of ours to there... :) OTOH, a large earthquake or a strategic sinking of a portion of the NE could do wonders... :)

Reply to
Duane Bozarth

Which portion of Nebraska do you want to sink?

-- Jack Novak Buffalo, NY - USA (Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)

Reply to
Nova

You beat me to it!

Barry

Reply to
Ba r r y

ALL of it, just let me get buy up a bunch of the Corn commodities here in ID,

Reply to
Richard Clements

Joe Willmann wrote: : Maybe the answer is to ban all cities with a size greater than : 1,000,000! That will do lots of things! Solve the urban blight : problem, solve the red/blue state problem. The only places that really : lean strongly democratic are those huge urban areas.

Or... the only places that really lean republican are those dinky little towns in states that get more from the federal government than they pay in.

Perspective is everything.

-- Andy Barss

Reply to
Andrew Barss

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.