zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. htag+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-09-30 18:04:28
I'm not capable of doing a full analysis on this question. I don't mean to say that this ban isn't worth doing, I meant to acknowledge that this has a downside. Let me throw out a few bullet points of those downsides of reducing the rate of new chemical compounds introduced to society.

* We are often creating chemicals that do the job of existing chemicals safer and more efficient. This ban would probably include a grandfather clause for old chemicals, and thus we might be using inferior products and doing more harm than we otherwise could. Look at refrigerants as an example of a chemical compound that has improved over the decades.

* Many chemical compounds introduced in the last 100 years directly improve productivity. The United States is in economic competition with other regions of the world. We could be creating a disadvantage that reduces our geo-political power.

* Many of these chemical compound increase quality of life. There's a strong unitarian argument for sucralose and polyurethane insulation.

replies(1): >>patapo+dD
2. patapo+dD[view] [source] 2023-09-30 22:23:23
>>htag+(OP)
Thank you, these are fair points!
[go to top]