Messages sorted by:
[ date ]
[ thread ]
[ subject ]
[ author ]
Bob you are right about licensed applicators being allowed to apply the tin
bottompaint at outrages prices, but I disagree about the EPA not being
clueless, since steel and aluminum are equally effected on the galvanic
principals of more noble metals being in electrolytic contact with the hull.
That's why we all use an epoxy barrier on our metal hulled vessels.
The point I was trying to make is the unfairness and stupidity of banning
much smaller square footage bottoms from using the stuff.
As far as disallowing larger vessels to use TBT in the future, is nothing
but a farce, since most of the ships are registered, repaired and painted in
some banana republic where none of the rest of the world's rules and regs
count. Then they come over to our waters and nothing we can do about it, nor
does it dawn on most people what's going on.
I know the case against TBT Is Compelling and again, I agree with you a
hundred percent. It's just that if you ever cruised the southern regions of
the US you'd be wishing you had it on...
My wife used to make disgusting amounts of money scrubbing boat bottoms in
FL...outlawing good bottompaint was a good thing for commercial divers...
I also agree with you on pepper in the paint being a "wacko idea", however
did you know that West Marine sells a product called "Compound X"?
Compound X is nothing other than cayenne pepper sold in a 10 gram little
bottle for 15 bucks as a "bottom paint additive".
Now There Is Wacko...
Capt. Joe
www.marinesupportonline.com
