[ryanobjc]

Paint VOCs sounds fine, until it's done at industrial scale, and it's also your neighbor, and also all the children in the neighborhood have asthma, and also healthcare is a lot more expensive...

This list isn't things you "cant do in california" but "polluting things you can't do in highly populated cities".

I'm not sure what the conclusion here is other than health is not important.

[Gigachad]

Most of this stuff could be done in compliance with the laws but it’s just cheaper to do it somewhere else where you allowed to vent poison in the air rather than having to filter it out.

[DannyBee]

This place you speak of doesn't exist.

First, manufacturers don't really make non voc compliant auto paints. The market is too small. They may make 550 and 275 variants but most don't.

Second, even like Texas has voc regulations on paints and also requires filtering and enclosed spray booths and gun cleaners and ....

And like I said, nobody is selling non compliant coatings because the market is zero.

[bmelton]

Are they only banned in the cities, or are they banned in the state, which -- even in California, should have rural areas far enough away from cities to be tenable?

It's an interesting conundrum though, because in many cases, the cities could not exist without the things that are being banned in the cities. It's a curious goal of populations to centralize, then ostracize all the things that enabled that centralization

[WD-42]

Everywhere in California that isn't a giant population center is growing food for the rest of the country, or is a mountain where these things can't be built anyway.

[cucumber3732842]

They're probably "not banned" only in the "basically lying" sense that they per rule won't approve you in certain cities and if you do happen to be rural the process is hostile and expensive enough that it's not worth it for the value such a facility would generate. That's how that sort of stuff is in my state.

[ryanobjc]

That's the thing, often when people say stuff like "its banned" what they really mean is:

- the cost of mitigating the human health risk is too high - competitors in low-environmental regulation places don't pay for those costs - ongoing verification is expensive

I mean, let's face it, "self-regulation" of industries isn't really working that great. And for things that are health hazards that are basically borne by someone else, why should a local government make it easy to cheat and lie about this stuff?

The people arguing against this seem to assume that their right to have a business, make a profit, whatever, is a self-evident Good Thing, and rarely provide any additional arguments beyond "but the jobs". If they were at the VERY LEAST saying "we can make X safe" then maybe it'd be interesting. But as it is, the argument is basically asking us to mortgage the health and safety.

[cucumber3732842]

You know what the V in VOC stands for right?

Hint: It doesn't stand for "there forever"

Nobody here wants to just let big business do whatever and turn the rivers weird colors again or go back to smog but it's very clear that the current regulatory system is not suitable and is hurting us.

It boggles the mind that someone could honestly (by which I mean dishonestly and malice are far simpler explanations) step into this conversation and be like "no, this is all fine and well, god forbid someone start spraying cars in a shop in the desert without jumping through all most of the same expensive hoops that make it not worth it down town (and would make it doubly not worth it out in the desert).

And it's not just autobody work. There's all manner of necessary economic activity that's being kept out or made artificially expensive in this manner.

[inigyou]

The V in VOC stands for "evaporates at room temperature" which means that if you use it, people breathe it in.