"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article ,
says...

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
in.local...
In article ,
says...

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

"Joseph Gwinn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:


[snip]


Now, about EPA overreach and the dishwasher detergent
regulations:
They
aren't from EPA at all. It's 16 individual states that enacted
the
near-ban
in 2009 and 2010.

The question is what prompted them.

And if the EPA had declared dishwasher detergent phosphate use as
de
minimus, the states would not have argued. Actually, they could
not
have argued, by federal preemption. So, we are back in
Washington.

Uh, I'm not sure where preemption enters this. EPA did not dictate
to
the
states what they had to do. They supplied research and analysis.

There was a recent Supreme Court case on just this. If the Feds
have
entered an area, the states have to back off.

For instance http://www.faegre.com/13445.

There may be others, but I wasn't paying attention at the time.

Joe Gwinn

Yeah, I'm aware of the law regarding federal preemption, but I have
seen
no
evidence that it applies in this case. If the EPA wrote a regulation
on
it
and if a state tried to oppose it, there would be a preemption case.

Again, I have not come across any such issue in the little reading
I've
done
about it.

I believe that he's saying that IF the EPA had declared phosphates in
dishwasher detergent to be ACCEPTABLE then the states could not have
banned it.

If that's what he's saying, that's not the case. On the other hand, if
the
EPA banned it, and a state tried to legalize it, preemption would have
kicked in.

That's the case with lots of laws. Unless there's a 14th Amendment issue
involved (regarding a "fundamental right"), or some specific federal
authorization, states can make more restrictive laws than the related
federal ones. Those issues have been involved, with the resolution still
to
be determined, over immigration. Likewise, even after a constitutional
Amendment legalizing alcohol, states can regulate it, and can authorize
municipalities to outlaw its sale.

This is how we got the mess we have with automobile emissions laws.
However Congress finally fixed that--after some year California can no
longer have different emission standards from the Federal government,
but I don't think that year has arrived yet.

I didn't follow this dishwasher-detergent/phosphate law to the end of the
line, but it looks like the EPA wasn't involved in the bans. It appears
that
it's all state law. I could be mistaken, but I didn't see any federal
administrative law involved in it.

You're right that the Federal EPA wasn't involved, at least not
directly--they may have given some "aid and comfort". I'd like to see
Congress enact legislation that forbids the ban.

Its main effect is that it's taking us back to the Middle Ages when
people had to roll their own cleaning agents.

Somebody needs to open-source a formula for an effective phosphate-based
dishwasher detergent. I've looked for one and the only ones I can find
are phosphate-free Greenie crap.

This is not my turf -- nothing to do with chemistry is my turf -- but, as
I've mentioned, I have had some discussions about TSP with Oakite engineers,
when they were my client.

The takeaway was that TSP neatly solves a lot of little problems, but it's
not as good a detergent as some of the other options available today.
Reading about what they're doing in Europe, it appears that they have some
better formulations.

They are tricky and sometimes are more expensive. Now the question is
whether the externalized costs of using TSP in dishwasher detergent are less
than the cost of the new formulations.

That is, if all environmental issues are to be taken as a straight
dollars-and-cents proposition. "Externalized costs" is a fuzzy concept
because the costs in quality of life are always arguable.

On the whole, I've thrown my hat in with environmental protection. I don't
doubt that they've gone overboard in some areas, and I can see why they may
have had to in some of those instances. But 10% of the phosphate load from
detergents was never trivial, if a particular body of water is still
suffering oxygen depletion or eutrification. The lower Delaware, which has
always been one of my main interests in water-quality issues, had a 0%
oxygen level around Philadelphia in 1960. That was a dead river. It's come
back to life. I'll leave the details for those who want to fight it out, but
I like living rivers much more than dead ones. I saw the dead river when I
was a kid, starting in 1953. It's an ugly, depressing, and costly sight.
I'll err on the side of protection and I'm willing to pay the small price
for it. Water spots on my drinking glasses are not equateable to millions of
dead fish.

--
Ed Huntress