=========That is "the" REPUBLIC OF KALIFORNIA....
Honestly I would never ever even think of living in that Republic...
in the land of pleasent living on the shores of the Chesapeak Bay
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!
On Wed, 31 May 2006 10:44:00 -0400, Charlie <greatviewcsc at hotmail
dot com> wrote:
Well, you can wrap it in plastic, then seal it in a metal drum labeled
"biohazard", and store it in an earthquake proof lead-lined concrete
bunker- or you could hide it under some other crap in your trash can
and get on with your day. Or you could burn it- no, it's not good for
you or the environment, but what the hell else are you supposed to do
with the stuff? Just don't roast marshmallows over the fire, and
you'll live to see tomorrow.
I'm still of the opinion (yes, opinion- I'm not going to do an
in-depth scientific study for a 60-second rant) that there was nothing
wrong with the old PT lumber, and somebody from the screw factories
got into bed with the EPA so that we have to buy triple-coated or
stainless steel fasteners for $20+ a box because the CCX lumber eats
I swear, people seem to think that if you follow all the *rules for
healthy living*, you'll live forever. How is it really any better
that we lock up garbage and forget about it so somebody's kids can
deal with it later?
Sadly, that is probably more true than I would like to think. Then all
the attorneys that sharpened their claws on the old stuff can now
switch gears and sue for the new stuff.
I have no trouble imagining that...
Many years ago I attended a Coloquim given by the head
of the toxicology department at Carnegie Melon. He described
in considerable detail, the infrastructure they used to protect
their animals from environmental toxins. The life expectancy
of their lab mice was 50% longer than at most most other labs.
When asked about the incidence of cancer in their controls he
replied that in his twenty years at CM he had not observed a
single malignancy in a control subject.
OTOH, in some labs the mice breathe city air and drink tap water.
There may even be chrome or nickle plating in their cages.
I'm going to date myself, but... A long time ago in IBM world a suggestion
was made to remove the muffin fans from 2311 disk drives. It was done and
the suggestor became wealthy. After much failure of 2311 disk drives, a
suggestion was made to add a muffin fan to 2311's to prevent overheating.
Much wealth was dispensed for this suggestion. I really hope the same
person made both suggestions, but I doubt it.
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.
(remove all letters after y in the alphabet)
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.
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.
On 1 Jun 2006 10:54:08 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
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.
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.
On 1 Jun 2006 19:05:52 -0700, email@example.com wrote:
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
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
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.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.