Disposing of pressure treated wood

Just like the new Freon used in today's cars. Better for the ozone, worse for the humans.

Reply to
Leon
Loading thread data ...

. All variances granted by the Department of

========== That is "the" REPUBLIC OF KALIFORNIA.... Honestly I would never ever even think of living in that Republic... Period. !

Bob G. in the land of pleasent living on the shores of the Chesapeak Bay

Reply to
Bob G.

Gotta better for suggestions for the tree huggers -- the next time you fill you gas tank, save on gasoline - stuff a tree hugger in the tank! That way, we can drill where we know oil is and get rid of tree huggers at the same time -- damned bunch of hypocrites that use hydrocarbons, etc. but still gripe and cause trouble.

Reply to
Tex

AMEN BROTHER!!!

Reply to
Tim Taylor

That's ok, nobody else will date you ...

:)

Clint

Reply to
Clint

snip

snip

ROTFLMAO!!!! No truer statement has been said!

Dave

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **

----------------------------------------------------------

formatting link

Reply to
Teamcasa

I guess this is the land of fruits and nuts! However, I've never had an ice storm, blizzard, tornado, baseball sized hail or a hurricane at my house. If I want to visit the snow, in 45 minutes I can be at 8000' and see all of it I want. I could also drive for 45 minutes the other direction and be surfing, sailing or fishing. I can work all year long in my shop without a heater or an air conditioner.

Yes, the housing costs are high, lawyers run the State, two of our governors were actors and we have earthquakes and big fires. However, I'm happy to be working in my shop, loving the weather, and realizing that I made a ten fold profit on my properties here on the Left Coast!

Dave

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services

---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **

----------------------------------------------------------

formatting link

Reply to
Teamcasa

Not a group. Just one. DAGS "troll".

Reply to
fredfighter

Lock it up as opposed to what, burying it so somebody's kids can deal with a contaminated water table some day?

The problem with a lot of 'disposal' methods is that it does NOT dispose of the hazard at all. It just makes it a lot harder to deal with down the road.

Regading the PT lumber scraps, I am reminded of an old saying that there is no such thing as a scrap 2 x 4. Keep it for the next time you need rot-resistant shims or some such.

Reply to
fredfighter

Did you ever wonder if lab rats casue cancer?

Reply to
fredfighter

A surprising number of people were burning scraps of the old stuff and sitting around the fire breathing the smoke. Arsenic is a potent neurotoxin and some people got pretty sick. The widespread use of CCA treated wood without a widespread understanding of the necessity of disposing of it in a landfill was a bad idea and will remain so for more than the next 10 years.

That is not to say that the latest "cure" isn't worse than the disease; just that there was a serious problem with CCA that had to be addressed. Personally, I would have gone for public education against burning the stuff, but I guess the industry had different concerns.

Ken Muldrew snipped-for-privacy@ucalgazry.ca (remove all letters after y in the alphabet)

Reply to
Ken Muldrew

Well now that you mention it, I have laid awake many nights wondering that! :~)

Reply to
Tim Taylor

Here's the problem, Fred- Assuming you don't have all the money in the world, like most folks, PT lumber is where it's at for decking and landscaping timpers, as well as sill plates on a lot of houses and garages. Whether it's the old arsenic version, or the newer CCX, a lot of that wood is in contact with the ground and exposed to the air for long periods of time. If the problem is seepage into the water table, it's going to be a problem no matter what you do- I've never seen anyone suggesting (though I'm sure there are some) that when you put in a deck, the posts must be wrapped in kevlar-impreganted rubber to protect the ground from the toxins. Nor have I seen the DNR or EPA demanding that all PT lumber be painted with a sealing epoxy or similar to keep rainwater runoff from being contaminated by it.

I'm not trying to just be a PITA, it's just that there are plently of things to worry about in the world without adding bits of scrap wood to the ever-growing list of things that are going to kill us all. Put the junk on a pile in a tapped gravel pit, and let it rot. Arsenic comes from nature, and I'm sure it'll find a way to go back to it.

And for that matter, there isn't even any arsenic in the new stuff to worry about- so now we're getting worked up over copper salts. Last time I checked, they get copper out of the ground as well. Some folks even heat it up a lot to make metal out of it, though I've never much worried about that, either.

Truth be told, that's what I do- but the OP was looking for a way to toss it out. Those scraps have a way of building up.

Reply to
Prometheus

Back when I was a kid my mother suggested that for a July 4 cookout we use some of that "wood that's just laying around that we're never going to use." instead of charcoal. Since we had several chords of firewood just rotting away, I agreed that was a good idea.

On the day of the party I discovered a big pile of painted wood scraps and plywood in the barbeque.

Oh, my mother was a registered nurse.

Reply to
fredfighter

In general inroganics supposedly adsorb (yes with a 'd') well onto soil particals so that what leaches out of the lumber is not expected to travel far through the soil.

Personally, I expect that disposing of CCA lumber and lot of other things as well, including some radioactive waste, in a proper clay-lined landfill is not a problem.

I have a bit of a problem with the implied attitude, that everybody BUT the person who wants to dispose of something has the responsibility to take care of the problem.

A while back most local governments quit taking automobile batteries and auto tires, and come places require that those who sell them accept them back when they are worn out. The result is that batteris and tires are being recycled into batteries and tires. That might be more expensive in the long run than making them out of virgin material and dumping them in landfills but that extra expense is being borne by the consumers who use those products, instead of everyone else.

Reply to
fredfighter

Reply to
Locutus

Doesn't this contradict the concern about burying them? I'll buy the party line of not burning them- I don't do it, though I don't raise a stink if someone else does, and I've seen it more than a couple of times.

Ok, I'll buy that as well- it sounds just fine. But the OP was about the city not accepting PT lumber. When there is no venue for disposal availible, excavating and lining a personal landfill is a little out of the reach of your average homeowner, and even if it were feasable, I suspect we'd have far more problems as a result. So, what is a person supposed to do? AFAIK, there are no disposal companies dedicated to the removal and storage of PT lumber, so the only options I can see are:

  1. Keep piles of scrap forever
  2. Sneak them into the trash
  3. Bury them in the yard (or)
  4. Burn them

No, the person who wants to dispose of something should make a reasonable effort to do the right thing. But sometimes there is no real option because legislation is put into place to prevent sane disposal methods without offering any solution in their place.

Now, I can't say for sure what is in the trash of any given city's landfill- but it seems a fairly safe bet that there are any number of things at least as bad or worse than construction lumber. Old household cleaners, rat poision, used motor oil, circuit boards, old mercury thermostats and god only knows what else are almost certainly in any given dump site whether they are supposed to be there or not, so it seems prudent that the garbage collection cost should cover the price of making any given landfill equal to the task intended for it- namely, disposing garbage.

I don't know about you, but the garbage company doesn't allow me to dicker with them over prices, I just have to pay what they tell me it costs. So if they add a $2 a month (or $20, for that matter) surcharge to the bill to make a better landfill, that's all there is to it- I'll pay it, and for that fee, I expect them to know their business. My responsibilty is to pay for the disposal, and theirs is to do the disposing in the proper manner.

It should not be incumbent on every member of a specialized society to know every aspect of every product that directly or indirectly touches their life. I don't know a thing about growing wheat- but I do eat bread; there is no way that I would be able to track the pesticide use of every farmer that sends grain to every mill that produces the bread I purchase, and the same concept applies to scrapping. I don't have room in my house or my head to keep track of an itinerary of each and every household chemical under the sink and it's proper neutralizing agent, the correct way to prevent outgassing from the shower curtain if it is mixed with shellac, Windex and drain cleaner, whether it's all right to deposit substance "A" in the trash, or if I need to treat it with a .05% solution of subtance "B" to render it inert first.

That is the garbage company's job, and they need to do it. If they have to charge more to do it, fine- but merely saying "no" doesn't cut it.

Tell ya what- if they want to do that with lumber, they can do that. It might slow construction down, but if needs to happen then it needs to happen. They can stamp an 800 number on the planks so I know where to get rid of them, just like the batteries on my cordless tools, and it'll be just fine. But if there is no other option, the stuff is going in the trash with the rest of the crap.

Reply to
Prometheus

It's not the rats, its the cages.

Reply to
lwasserm

Pretty much the same here. We also stand upwind of the smoke.

Reply to
Mike Marlow

The adsorbtivity of soil is not unlimited. So there is a difference between using landscaping timbers and burying a pile of scraps. Leach rate is also strongly dependent on surface area so that sawdust and chips will leach at a rate that is several orders of magnitude higher than a 2 x 4. There is no guarantee that the soil itself is going to stay put either.

The other issue is that by not traveling far, the soil near the wood stays contaminated indefinately. Consider the adhomition about growing root vegetables in close proximinity to CCA treated wood. After the property has changed hands a few times, how is anybody going to remember where the treated wood used to be?

Also Woods scraps buried in a landfill are not buried in soil, they are buried in garbage which loaded with a pethora of other chemicals that compete with eh arsenic and chromium ions for sites on those soil particles.

1.5 keep them until he finds somewhere that does accept them. 1.75 Make something else out of them.

The material in question is HIS property. Dealing with it is HIS responsibility.

Mine doesn't dicker with me over what I am allowed to put in my garbage either. Tires, and used motor oil are handled by the people who sell them. It becomes part of their cost of doing business.

No it doesn't. The farmer is certianly responsiblity for how he uses his pesticides, just like you are for the pesticides you use. Ditto for wood scraps. The difference between trace trace contaminants that aren''t even listed on the label of the product you buy, and the product itself, is obvious.

I have absolutely no sympahty for people who refuse to read the labels on the products they buy. I have considerable sympathy for people who cannot read the fine print.

You don't have to, that information is on the label of pretty much every product sold. That's part of why I pay taxes, to suport public schools to teach you how to read. As an aside, the number of questions about products that are asked in this newsgroup and can be answered by reading the label is truly appalling.

Damn near everthign bought today includes disposal instructions, usually where they can be read before opening the package. If you aren't willing to follow them, don't buy the product.

Fine, so long as YOU properly label everything you put in your garbage. After all, it was properly labeled when you bought it, right?

Agreed.

I'm quite sure that you have the option to hold on to it for a few months while looking for a solution.

Reply to
fredfighter

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.