- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
You must log in or # to comment.
What are the replacement materials?
I presume that laminated/coated MDF isn’t the same market segment as heavy, dense engineered stones. Perhaps they’ll go solid epoxy with no silica filler? That would be more expensive but probably work. I suspect they’ll still want cheap fillers however, so non-silica stones might be chosen (but surely most stone dusts are bad?).
EDIT: Oh dear https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-05/study-finds-safety-concerns-in-engineered-stone-alternatives/103185450
Silicosis can come from a wide variety of sources, basically anything where stone dust occurs can produce it, even natural stone countertop manufacturing has long been known to be dangerous in that regard.
This whole ban feels more like populism than addressing the real problems. Engineered stone has become a popular material, lots of people have worked with it with insufficient safety precautions and now there’s a number of people permanently disabled by it.
Simply banning engineered stone won’t solve that problem, since it will now just happen with other materials.You wouldn’t generally get all federal and state governments signing on to something that is just ‘populism’.
Engineered stone is more dangerous than natural stone because it contains much more silica, and so it has resulted in an acute accelerated form of silicosis: https://www.medicalrepublic.com.au/why-silicosis-is-on-the-rise-and-what-to-do-about-it/24559
The underlying point has some validity though. Many materials contain silica, even tiles, although not the same amount. Here are some other examples.
- ceramic tiles: 5% to 45%
- engineered stone: 80% to 95%
- Sandstone: 70% to 90%
- Granite: 25% to 60%
- Slate: 20% to 40%
- autoclaved aerated concrete: 20% to 40%
- concrete: less than 30%
- brick: 5% to 15%
The cancer council of Australia says “there is currently no evidence to suggest a safe level of silica dust exposure”.
If there is no safe level of silica, then by extension presumably this would rule out many other products containing silica.
There are mitigation strategies, however they seemingly weren’t good enough for engineered stone, and presumably again by extension many other materials high in silica.
It’s just not clear to me why engineered stone is banned but many other materials potentially high in silica are for choice of better words let off the hook.
As someone who works making glass, I want to underline that it’s silica dust that is dangerous. Your windows, drinking glasses, pyrex jugs, dinner plates, they’ll all be around 40–50% silica and are absolutely safe. Silicosis is a reaction to the shape of silica particles when inhaled, the particles cause scarring in the lungs and aren’t “mucused out”, so they remain causing more damage over time.
I can’t think of any reason to ban anything for containing silica, the problem is mitigated by wearing a mask in areas where there are airborne particles.
Yup understood. The materials I listed are typically cut though at some stage and therefore release silica dust.
So engineered stone is too dangerous. But sandstone for a example, with potentially also very high levels of silicate dust when cut, is apparently fine provided you have mitigation strategies i.e. wet cutting masks etc. and like you say wouldn’t the same strategies also apply to engineered stone?
To me it just doesn’t seem consistent.
Ah, I missed what you were getting at before. Agreed, can’t see why engineered stone should be a particular hazard if proper safety measures are being taken. Best guess is that they weren’t, and this ban is simply the chosen way to stop people being harmed by the work. Just seems more performative than useful.
I’ll admit I am concerned they’ve set a precedent that’s not practical that will now flow onto many other materials. But I’m open to the idea I’ve misunderstood some of the reasoning behind the decision.
This comment gives a great summary, better than I can do: https://aussie.zone/comment/5073286
(In case that comment disappears for any reason, though:
Particularly there is this report: https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/decision_ris_-_managing_the_risks_of_crystalline_silica_at_work_-_for_publication_pdf.pdf
But broadly, engineered stone is significantly different because of both its composition and how it’s used. The proof of the pudding, though, is that with its rise in popularity we’ve also seen the rise of these ‘acute accelerated’ cases of silicosis.)
yeah the real issue they need to come down hard on is disregard for oh&s in the building industry, poor education and worker exploitation. I expect this to happen around the same time my grandmother’s pig sprouts wings and takes flight.
What are the replacement materials?
Laminated chipboard/MDF or natural stone mainly, depending on how expensive ones tastes and budget are. Still wouldn’t want to be breathing dust from either of those though…
As another comment suggests stainless steel is another option, or perhaps even expoxied timber/bamboo. These do suffer from aesthetic and durability issues respectively though when it comes to trying to convince people to use them.
N.B. Porcelain is a silicate. Clay dust exposure is one of the traditional causes of silicosis, potters are (mostly) taught to clean their workplaces with hoses not brooms.
You’re right but Porcelain contains very low amounts of silicate, typically less than 4 per cent I’ve read.
Laminated wood products suck for countertops. If the sealing isn’t completely perfect and water is ever allowed to sit on a joint, the fibers will swell and you get a bump that progresses to a crumbly mess. The damage is not repairable without replacement either.
Wood is one option. More maintenance, yeah it can scratch. But it can also be sanded I guess.
I’ve also read porcelain is another option.
No it isn’t.
How about real stone? That’s pretty analogous to fake stone. Wood isn’t even pretending.
I’m sure you’ll find breathing stone dust doesn’t do you any favour’s either. Strange to be they banned the product instead of mandating wet saws or something.
Right? Use filters yo.
I didn’t mean in the analogous sense. I just meant other materials that can be used for bench tops more broadly.
And of course you can use real stone but be prepared to sell an organ to pay for it.
Funnily enough, we ended up with a very pretty real granite in our kitchen last year because it was 25% cheaper than the engineered options we found.
Very good luck because it doesn’t normally work that way!
Laminated / coated mdf is shit and it looses its colour in kitchen environments pretty quickly and stains are impossible to remove
Laminate bench tops make me gag. And sadly I have to look at mine every day until I’m in a position to renovate.
Why can’t we just have stainless steel?
It’s an option but not every body likes the aesthetics of having a kitchen that looks like the morgue ;)
You don’t have to do everything in stainless steel. Like the cabinets can be in a different style. Also stainless steel can be colored. Trough heat treatment, chemical process or a nano coating. It’s expensive though, that’s why you only see kitchen sinks in colored stainless steel.
And you can use other metals for a countertop like brass. Though brass ages and gets a patina. You either love or hate that.
Yeah thanks I don’t want verdigris on my pastry.
yeah verdigris is too much patina lol. I was more talking about how brass will get brownish gold spots. If you let it turn green your not cleaning it often enough.
No matter how much you clean it, it’s always going to have a layer of ooxides, and they’re water soluble, which would taste like sucking on loose change.
That’s why you don’t see brass cookware. Copper bowls can be a thing, but that’s weird chef stuff, and cleaning them before use is arduous.
Yeah I just can’t do metal bench tops. For me if I couldn’t have stone I’d lean towards wood.
Why not gold?
Ooooonly gooooold!
There’s the acrylic polymer/stone blend like Corian. Though that might be the $$$ option.
… someone correct me if I’m wrong, but this just sounds like some random local corruption story, right?
Like, instead of passing & enforcing worker safety laws they just ban the (safe) product? The same type of diseases can workers get from eg processing cotton, flower, cement, and any fine-dusty thing really. And such things can be managed with safety precautions & exhaust filters (to not affect the broader local area over the years of dust buildup).
The logical exceptions are things like asbestos where even the end product crumbles into dangerous particulates (that are even more irritating/cause serious problems at much lower quantities).
Then again it really saddens me that we don’t invest more into like cellulose based materials (buildings, cutlery, bags, windows, cars, medical equipment, … limitless potential, can be made sustainable, & has the prospect of doing something good in the long run).
Also with the same logic Australia could ban other things as well, like cocoa/chocolate imports, much of the fashion industry (dyes), and above all else - fossil fuels.
As for the replacement materials for countertops - bamboo (pressed & oiled?) is great!
It’s a national news story thats come to light due to a large number of otherwise healthy, fairly young workers getting sick and dying from silicosis. The suggestion to ban came directly from the occupational safety watchdog, who are tasked with keeping workers safe. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/hazards/crystalline-silica-and-silicosis is pretty comprehensive.
In February they released a report (https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/decision_ris_-_managing_the_risks_of_crystalline_silica_at_work_-_for_publication_pdf.pdf) outlining exactly what you refer to, with 6 options for governments to consider. The ban on engineered stone is the most dramatic, and uses basically the same legal framework that was used to ban asbestos in the first place.
Essentially they have been screaming at stonemasons and employees for 5 years to no avail, compliance with health and safety regulations in this area is atrocious, and no matter what laws you pass, more and more people are going to get sick and die from a preventable disease if you leave the stuff on the market.
It’s only in recent years that the real dangers of silicate dust have been understood and it’s being banned for essentially the same reason asbestos was - it’s too hard to manage safely, and the most exposed people (workers) have to be protected. Asbestos is dangerous because it can get embedded in lung cells and not be exhaled - silicate dust is similar. Makes sense to me to put it in the same category especially if some poor bastards are dying from it.
Yes, I was just reading that. I understand now how things went down & why a complete ban was implemented. A good legislative result overall.
Thanks for this, great summary 👍👍👍
deleted by creator
Oh, so they differ substantially, didn’t know that (but makes sense bcs of the variety they produce). I’m not anti-ban (the work itself doesn’t seem like it’s worth the end product anyway), I would have just expected more regulation (safety, or just a ban in crystalline silica perhaps) instead of an overall ban. But that’s just the EU in me talking, a ban is at least much clearer & in this case quicker to get passed.
Edit: actually safe work Australia already drafted guidelines, I guess they didn’t catch on
Workplace exposure standard for respirable crystalline silica: The eight-hour time weighted average workplace exposure standard (WES) for respirable crystalline silica (RCS) is 0.05 mg/m3. This means that your workers must not be exposed to levels of RCS greater than 0.05 mg/m3 over an eight hour working day, for a five day working week.
Edit2: EU does have a directive in place but it’s not yet implemented into law (like a ‘delegated regulation’ or a demand to incorporate it in local laws) + its still evolving so no actual limit numbers (or a complete ban) yet. EU directives usually work in such a way that at first they gather industry knowledge & best practices (via mandated reporting) that they then implement into law (more or less strict depending on the end goal, but in administration sense compatible with the current industry capabilities - I’m actually proud of the efficiency & lifecycles of such a system).
It’s a good step to ban this should the the silicosis be a legitimate concern. The rest of the world should follow Australia’s lead here. Don’t want a repeat of the asbestos situation globally. I still remember attending sone primary and high school classes in pre-fabricated asbestos classrooms in South Africa during the 2000s and 2010s.
Australian here. We only had to ban it because all of our tradespeople are deadshits.
The same people that wouldn’t wear a mask to protect them from covid won’t wear one to protect themselves from inhaling silica dust. Really, I’m shocked.
My house is asbestos in Australia haha. World’s highest user of the shit
Another win from the union movement 💪
It was my understanding that silicosis can be prevented with proper adherence to safety standards and use of PPE. Is a flat out ban really necessary?
Yes. Because tradies and their associated business owners simply can’t be fucked with using - or enforcing the use of - PPE.
They’re also often dicking around trimming pieces during the final installation on site where eg bulk extraction and filtering of dust is “difficult”. Not “impossible” , merely difficult, and we all know difficult costs money and time.
The industry was warned and didn’t do much in particular to sort themselves out, so here we are.
Thank fuck.
deleted by creator
