Oh ... actually ... http://www.sharklet.com/sharklet-products/sharklet™-marine/
Apparently they're already working on it.
Apparently they're already working on it.
Washington State bans copper bottom paint
- Thread starter RichH
- Start date
- Status
Can't we just kill a bunch of sharks and staple their skins to our bottoms? we could sell the fins for soup
Recieved today (not affiliated with company in any way):
Washington Bans Copper Bottom Paint
Which State is next on the chopping block???
On May 4, Democratic Washington governor Chris Gregoire put an end to copper-based bottom paint in her state by signing into law a ban on the use of the product on recreational boats under 65 feet — the first state to do so. The law prohibits the sale of new boats with copper paint after January 1, 2018, and no paint with more than a half a percent of copper can be used starting in 2020.
California is diligently working to get rid of copper as well. Senate Bill 623, which would put into place a similar ban. On May 2, the Senate Committee on Environmental Quality approved the ban and sent it to the Senate Appropriations Committee for further consideration. If made into law, the legislation would ban the sale of new boats with copper paint as of January 1, 2015, and ban the paint outright starting in 2019.
Erik Norrie, CEO of New Nautical Coatings, Inc said "Although we don't necessarily agree with the ban or the data supporting it, we have seen this coming for years. That is why we have designated a great amount of capital and research into the development of our copper free line of products." For the past 10 years New Nautical Coatings, Inc has been diligently working on the next generation starting with Seahawk Mission Bay our copper free product containing Zinc Pyrithione and finally the "ONLY" completely metal free product on the market Seahawk Smart Solution. Many other companies have metal free claims but if you look at the data sheet you will see they still contain Zinc which is a metal.
EPA and most states departments of Agriculture are chomping at the bit to further ban all metals. That is why Seahawk Smart Solution is years ahead of the competition, as it is the worlds first completely metal free product. Click here or the video to the right.
Seahawk Smart Solution is a viable solution for a copper free antifouling paint. Watch the video below to learn more about the product.
Ablative Copper Free Paints
Hey, Fastbottoms, in looking over the line up of copper-free, most appear to be ablative or semi-ablative. I didn't see a hard paint, although I did see a reference to one. Additionally, it looks like the spec sheets that have a service life technical comment are only single season. E-paint makes reference to PS's 24 month test results but has nothing in the data for expected life.
So, what are you going to do for work if the products are ablative? I assume the cleaning would only be once or twice a season. Am I wrong? I guess the silicon coating being tested requires a bi-monthly cleaning if my memory serves correctly, but I don't recall a service life. It may be that it's still being determined.
Hey, Fastbottoms, in looking over the line up of copper-free, most appear to be ablative or semi-ablative. I didn't see a hard paint, although I did see a reference to one. Additionally, it looks like the spec sheets that have a service life technical comment are only single season. E-paint makes reference to PS's 24 month test results but has nothing in the data for expected life.
So, what are you going to do for work if the products are ablative? I assume the cleaning would only be once or twice a season. Am I wrong? I guess the silicon coating being tested requires a bi-monthly cleaning if my memory serves correctly, but I don't recall a service life. It may be that it's still being determined.
Silicon Coating
It looks like this product will be released for the pleasure boat market in California:
http://www.international-marine.com/intersleek900/Pages/Default.aspx
Edit: It was released and is available at (WM) $599 / gallon but for professional application only. It was originally designed for vessels + 10 knots speed and not vessels moored for long periods but perhaps they have modified it for pleasure craft.
It looks like this product will be released for the pleasure boat market in California:
http://www.international-marine.com/intersleek900/Pages/Default.aspx
Edit: It was released and is available at (WM) $599 / gallon but for professional application only. It was originally designed for vessels + 10 knots speed and not vessels moored for long periods but perhaps they have modified it for pleasure craft.
Are you under the impression that ablative paints cannot be cleaned? I don't know what the recommended cleaning frequency is, but I do know that non-copper paints tend to need cleaning more frequently than copper-based paints. There is no paint in existence that only needs to be cleaned once or twice a year in California.
There are issues with Intersleek and the exceedingly high price may not be the only reason it is not particularly suitable for the recreational boating market.
Re: Cleaning Ablative Bottoms
"Are you under the impression that ablative paints cannot be cleaned?"
Yes, I am under that impression, from reading the technical papers, what I have understood in the past, and because of the following, which applies to Washington State right now, not California:
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]“The Washington State Departments of Ecology (Ecology) and Natural Resources (DNR) have determined the cleaning, by commercial divers, of vessels (as defined by federal regulation) painted with sloughing and ablative anti-fouling paints, and those vessels painted with tin-based compounds while the vessel is afloat is prohibited by state law. The use of mechanical or hydraulic devices for in-water hull cleaning and the manual scraping of hard growth off surfaces painted with anti-foulants is also prohibited.”[/FONT]
I have zip experience with ablative paints, so I have really no clue in real world applications. It's just that most of the non-copper paints I see advertised are ablative right now, so it would appear to diminish the need for or ability to clean bottoms coated with it. Am I wrong?
"Are you under the impression that ablative paints cannot be cleaned?"
Yes, I am under that impression, from reading the technical papers, what I have understood in the past, and because of the following, which applies to Washington State right now, not California:
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]“The Washington State Departments of Ecology (Ecology) and Natural Resources (DNR) have determined the cleaning, by commercial divers, of vessels (as defined by federal regulation) painted with sloughing and ablative anti-fouling paints, and those vessels painted with tin-based compounds while the vessel is afloat is prohibited by state law. The use of mechanical or hydraulic devices for in-water hull cleaning and the manual scraping of hard growth off surfaces painted with anti-foulants is also prohibited.”[/FONT]
I have zip experience with ablative paints, so I have really no clue in real world applications. It's just that most of the non-copper paints I see advertised are ablative right now, so it would appear to diminish the need for or ability to clean bottoms coated with it. Am I wrong?
There has been a ban on cleaning ablative paints in Washington for years. But I assumed we were discussing the situation in California, where there is no such ban.
Yes, you're assumption is wrong. Ablative paints need to be cleaned every bit as often as any other type of paint. Further, the non-copper alternatives (as a rule) tend to be less effective than copper-based paints, regardless of whether they are ablative or not. So yes, in general, non-copper ablatives absolutely will need to be cleaned in California, and on a somewhat more frequent basis than their copper-based cousins.
California State Senate Passes No-Copper Bill...
... on a party line vote:
http://www.thelog.com/news/logNewsArticle.aspx?x=12378
... on a party line vote:
http://www.thelog.com/news/logNewsArticle.aspx?x=12378
Vote Tally
In case you want to know how your Senator voted:
Ayes - 25
Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
Noes - 13
Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa, Strickland, Walters, Wyland
In case you want to know how your Senator voted:
Ayes - 25
Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, Correa, De León, DeSaulnier, Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
Noes - 13
Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa, Strickland, Walters, Wyland
Absent, Abstention or Not Voting - 2
Dutton, Runner
Dutton, Runner
Update on California's Copper Paint Bill
From Recreational Boaters of California:
RBOC is continuing our lobbying efforts to protect the ability of boaters to utilize effective and affordable anti-fouling paints on the hulls of our vessels. RBOC Vice President-North Jack Michael recently testified regarding SB 623 before the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee expressing our opposition to the bill unless it is further amended. His testimony can be seen on our web site (rboc.org). The bill passed the committee and next proceeds to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
We are also engaged in discussions with Senator Kehoe as the author of SB 623, together with the sponsors, proponents and other stakeholders. Progress is being made on this front. We are pleased to report that, as currently worded, SB 623 does not contain an outright ban on copper based anti fouling paints. The bill would allow boaters to use low-level, low leach copper antifouling paint after January 1, 2015.
On Friday, July 8, RBOC held a teleconference with paint manufacturers’ associations, the author’s staff, and the sponsor of the bill. We were informed that a variety of paints will be readily available in all areas of the state, will be as easy to apply as current paints, will not require stripping of our hulls, and will be effective in protecting the hulls of our boats.
Under the provisions of SB 623 the Department of Pesticide Regulation [DPR] would be setting the standards for low-leaching, low-copper paints and all such paints would need to have the approval of DPR before going on the market. RBOC has confidence in DPR and have observed the department to make careful, considered decisions based on science.
Also under SB 623, by January 1, 2019 the State Water Resources Control Board would determine whether the use of low-leaching, low-copper paints could result in the attainment of water quality objectives in marinas and harbors for dissolved copper. If the Board finds that it does not, within one year paints containing biocides (copper and zinc) would be prohibited. Non-biocide paints would be allowed.
Senator Kehoe is planning to make further revisions and refinements to SB 623 soon and we are monitoring this closely. RBOC is encouraged by the change in the bill to permit the use of low-leaching, low-copper anti-fouling paints and by the discussions we are having with the author. As developments occur, they will be posted on our web site (rboc.org).
From Recreational Boaters of California:
RBOC is continuing our lobbying efforts to protect the ability of boaters to utilize effective and affordable anti-fouling paints on the hulls of our vessels. RBOC Vice President-North Jack Michael recently testified regarding SB 623 before the Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee expressing our opposition to the bill unless it is further amended. His testimony can be seen on our web site (rboc.org). The bill passed the committee and next proceeds to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
We are also engaged in discussions with Senator Kehoe as the author of SB 623, together with the sponsors, proponents and other stakeholders. Progress is being made on this front. We are pleased to report that, as currently worded, SB 623 does not contain an outright ban on copper based anti fouling paints. The bill would allow boaters to use low-level, low leach copper antifouling paint after January 1, 2015.
On Friday, July 8, RBOC held a teleconference with paint manufacturers’ associations, the author’s staff, and the sponsor of the bill. We were informed that a variety of paints will be readily available in all areas of the state, will be as easy to apply as current paints, will not require stripping of our hulls, and will be effective in protecting the hulls of our boats.
Under the provisions of SB 623 the Department of Pesticide Regulation [DPR] would be setting the standards for low-leaching, low-copper paints and all such paints would need to have the approval of DPR before going on the market. RBOC has confidence in DPR and have observed the department to make careful, considered decisions based on science.
Also under SB 623, by January 1, 2019 the State Water Resources Control Board would determine whether the use of low-leaching, low-copper paints could result in the attainment of water quality objectives in marinas and harbors for dissolved copper. If the Board finds that it does not, within one year paints containing biocides (copper and zinc) would be prohibited. Non-biocide paints would be allowed.
Senator Kehoe is planning to make further revisions and refinements to SB 623 soon and we are monitoring this closely. RBOC is encouraged by the change in the bill to permit the use of low-leaching, low-copper anti-fouling paints and by the discussions we are having with the author. As developments occur, they will be posted on our web site (rboc.org).
What should be highlighted in your post is that the current version of SB 623 stipulates that if the implementation of "low-leach rate" paints fails to produce the necessary water-quality results, all anti fouling paints will be banned, be they copper, zinc or otherwise. Be careful what you wish for.
Last edited:
- Status