Washington State Copper Paint Law

[hummingway]

I put copper epoxy on my boat this year so far it has worked great. Before I did I looked at a couple of boats that had used it 2 and 3 years ago and they were in great shape. It's better then the hard paint I had on.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by hummingway

I put copper epoxy on my boat this year so far it has worked great. Before I did I looked at a couple of boats that had used it 2 and 3 years ago and they were in great shape. It's better then the hard paint I had on.

It seems to be an acceptable choice in the PNW. In California, not so much.

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

It seems to be an acceptable choice in the PNW. In California, not so much.

Your previous post says that copper loaded epoxy isn't considered an antifouling?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by hummingway

Your previous post says that copper loaded epoxy isn't considered an antifouling?

It is not an anti fouling "paint". Legally or by any other definition.

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

It is not an anti fouling "paint". Legally or by any other definition.

You're talking about using copper fill in epoxy rather then the so called modified epoxy paints? For it to work you have to modify the epoxy I think, thin it, or in other words make your own bottom paint. I would question if epoxy bottom paints aren't legal why a home made version would be?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by hummingway

You're talking about using copper fill in epoxy rather then the so called modified epoxy paints?

Yes. Copper-loaded epoxies (like Copperpoxy and Coppercoat etc.) are not paints. Modified epoxy anti fouling paint (like Pettit Trinidad) is a different animal.

Originally Posted by hummingway

For it to work you have to modify the epoxy I think, thin it, or in other words make your own bottom paint. I would question if epoxy bottom paints aren't legal why a home made version would be?

Again, copper-loaded epoxies are well represented in the commercial marketplace. Further, I have done some research into home-made anti fouling coatings, and as long as you are not supplying what you have whipped up in the kitchen sink to others, it's pretty much anything goes. if you can legally obtain the ingredients, you can use them.

[capn_billl]

I see this thing as yet another attack on rec vessels. If it wasn't comercial vessels would not be exempted. Tell me a 20ft boat pollutes more than a 300ft freighter, and there are more of them.

Boats have used copper antifouling literally for centuries, and I have yet to see anything that indicates any enviromental change. They do kill plankton that is overgrown due to our use of phosphate detergents. Want to save the algea? Just drop the used wash water overboard.

Want to help the enviroment, don't buy CFL's, (they contain murcury arguably the biggest threat to sea life, and present in toxic quantities in most species of fish, including tuna).

Want a better non-copper bottom paint, use burned out CFL's in your paint, mercury kills everything.

If there was something, (besides mercury), that made a better bottom paint I would use it.

Or we could all stay on land because a naturally occuring substance changes concentration just above detectable limits in a closed marina.

To save the planet we could all go to solar cells, that require contaminating millions of gallons of water with selenium, gallium, arsenic, phosphorus, chromium, antimony, tellurium, germanium, indium, and cadmium to manufacture.

Or we could just use a little resources, and generate as little waste as we can. The unburned gas additives from me repeatedly having to drive my boat back to be hauled out, and the old paint sanded off and redone generates far more waste, money,(which requires me to work more in a polluting factory to pay for), than just using a proven product that will last several years.

[Capt Phil]

Great posts and points of view. My biggest issue continues to be the intrusion of idiot politicians who do not understand the issues, the consequences of their actions or really care about the impact on the 'little guy'. There is a law promulgated by some numbskull that require commercial vessels coming from offshore like container ships, tankers and freighters to switch over to ultra light diesel fuel as they hit about 30 miles offshore on their way in to a CA port. The politicos clearly have never been aboard a commercial vessel of considerable size and understand the difficulty of making such a fuel switch after running bunkers or fuel oil across thousands of miles of ocean. They view the exercise as driving a truck down the road! God help us knowing they are responsible for making life and death decisions that affect all of us! I will refrain from naming the politicians in deference to our esteemed moderators. Cheers, Capt Phil

[s/v Jedi]

You guys miss the point. You are considered becoming too independant, owning a private yacht etc., so they make this new law. Now you will have to hire fstbttms to come and clean your hulls twice a month which will cost you dearly... which makes you less independant again. Furthermore, they will slam fstbbtms with a nice tax claim so that much of your money comes straight to them. The rest comes later when fstbttms spends it from sales tax to taxing whoever he paid money to.

Don't ever think that these measures have anything to do with the environment.... excepts as being the excuse to implement them. The part that isn't about getting your money is about manouvering themselves into a better position for more power.

ciao!
Nick.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

You guys miss the point. You are considered becoming too independant, owning a private yacht etc., so they make this new law. Now you will have to hire fstbttms to come and clean your hulls twice a month which will cost you dearly... which makes you less independant again. Furthermore, they will slam fstbbtms with a nice tax claim so that much of your money comes straight to them. The rest comes later when fstbttms spends it from sales tax to taxing whoever he paid money to.

Don't ever think that these measures have anything to do with the environment.... excepts as being the excuse to implement them. The part that isn't about getting your money is about manouvering themselves into a better position for more power.

Please leave me out of your paranoid right-wing rants.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by richard_wb

The WA legislation was supported by the Washington's Northwest Marine Trade Association, which represents WA marine businesses, including boatyards. Here is their statement:
Northwest Marine Trade Association - Member Search

As the previous post states, several boatyards were recently sued by the Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, an environmental group, over copper waste. Essentially, the trade association supported the new law in order to avoid future lawsuits.

The linked article does provide some important details about the WA law. It doesn't take effect for 9 years, and before it takes effect a study of available paints is supposed to be done.

I work in a NMTA yard here in Seattle. While we have received a few small EPA fines in the last 15 years, we haven't received any in the last 5. It's not really that difficult to comply with the regulations and all of them make sense. I'm familiar with all of the yards which were sued and have worked in most of them. All I can say is there were reasons. One of our families close friends works for Puget Soundkeepers, and as a yard worker here I have no problem with them. They are just trying to do the right thing for our waterways. I could tell stories about the lack of effort to control grinding dust and runoff I've seen in some yards. In our yard we've always made an effort, and as a result the EPA, PSA, and the Fire Department treat us nice and have a lot of respect for us. Other yards very close to us have recently closed or are under new owners. Controlling toxic waste is a no-brainer. The yards which closed probably should have if they weren't willing to make an effort to deal, and they weren't. I've seen some attitudes in those yards that were very similar to some displayed on this thread. Now those damn kayakers that snitch you out by cellphone for sanding bare wood on the water are a different story...

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

You guys miss the point. You are considered becoming too independant, owning a private yacht etc., so they make this new law. Now you will have to hire fstbttms to come and clean your hulls twice a month which will cost you dearly... which makes you less independant again. Furthermore, they will slam fstbbtms with a nice tax claim so that much of your money comes straight to them. The rest comes later when fstbttms spends it from sales tax to taxing whoever he paid money to.

Don't ever think that these measures have anything to do with the environment.... excepts as being the excuse to implement them. The part that isn't about getting your money is about manouvering themselves into a better position for more power.

ciao!
Nick.

Now a daze they need to rake in the money wherever they can. My cell phone bill looks more like a government form then a phone bill.
But after all these years of using copper/bottom paint, can anyone show me the damage it has done so far.
Maybe it's the bottom cleaners, that are being poisoned and they've lobbied to politicians to get rid of the toxins that they scrub off, and to boost their work agenda.

[Ironhorse74]

Here is the thing that chaps my a@@ about this law. It does not apply to everyone. If the copper bottom paint is so bad, ban it completely. Do not pick out certain boats it applies to and other boats that are exempt. I don't think this law could stand up to a legal challenge on that basis.

[minaret]

Heres the first paragraph on a Cruising World article on this issue. A lot of hard figures that are hard to argue with.


The year 2011 may be remembered as the year when sailors started thinking differently about copper. After centuries of relying on toxic metals to ward off growth on the bottoms of boats, sailors are awakening to a new era of environmental consequences, greater regulation, and breakthroughs in science and paint technology.


Link to whole article-

Bottom Paint without Copper | Cruising World

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Please leave me out of your paranoid right-wing rants.

No need for personal attacks, I didn't know your left-wing feelings would get hurt by my boat-owner with a little money POV joke in which you were not attacked at all BTW. I reckon many of your customers owning yachts etc. might vote right too. Hope that isn't a problem for you...

cheers,
Nick.