More Regulation Means Safer Chemicals?

It would be nice if the bureauocratic powers that be could agree to a single registration form and submission process that would be acceptable for TSCA, DSL, and all the other chemical registry systems. But that might cut duplicative agency positions, and reduce agency size and increase efficiency, and that would be hard for government to buy into. Too much regulation and expensive testing inhibits innovation. Managers try to fit new technology under descriptions of things already on TSCA, and it becomes a game of beating the system while still complying with the letter of the law.

Who are we kidding when we would believe that a large company would want more regulation just for the purpose of protecting the community?

We all know that regulation suggested by companies that have huge influence on governments, is nothing more than a way of inhibiting their smaller competitors, and securing their own financial position.

If they have moral values of note then they will automatically apply those, even if other companies do not.

Hi Tim,

You are right that big corporations poush governments to legislate what they want or need to operate freely and profitably. However, when we have the maximum regulatory obligations on everything in the industry, the public will benefit and will be good for everyone. For example, we have eliminating use of solvent to 0 to 5% by volume, we will eliminate fire hazard and health problems for material handlers and users of the products.

Example: In Canada, we can manufacture solvent containing resin solutions applied on paving stones or concrete during the VOC level is under around 250 g/L. However, Toluene is replaced by Acetone which allows lower VOC containt in the solution. Health and fire problems are not changed. What means the legislation? Nothing! We have to work on that!!

Government has no knowledge about problems as toxicity, fire and other problems. The industry must delegate knowledgeable people from small to big companies a group of people who will create rules and regulations, and will be applied by the government to everyone.

Example: In Canada again, we have created the group, created the rules but years and years after there is no regulations from the government. Also, in the US you have to declare your consumption of solvents. The company can buy the solvent containing products from Canada or somewhere else and sell freely in the US. Again, we pass around incomplete regulations.

In addition of moral values, I would like to add "personel and community health and psychology solutions", could be added to rules and regulations.

Oil getting more and more short supply. Costs of solvents is continually rising. Rules and regulations press companies to switch to waterbourne products to eliminate solvents from products but large companies with big volumes of sales are very slow to move in the right direction. Only start-ups and small companies have the will the make the needed steps to become safer for everyone, Gil.