Chemicals used in building an RV

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

You know, for the longest time, the one thing that has concerned me about building an RV is the chemicals. MEK, in particular, seems like a particularly nasty
component, although it certainly is effective at all getout.

So I was surprised to see on the AP wire today that the government no longer is requiring MEK to be on the so-called "toxic inventory list," which requries an assessment of how much is released into the environment.

In particular, this caught my eye:

"The trade group had argued MEK is not a toxic chemical under the
law, because it doesn't cause illness or injury when absorbed into

a person's body. MEK is a clear, colorless, highly flammable liquid

used as a solvent in surface coatings and adhesives.

EPA has found that inhaling it irritates the eyes, nose and

throat, and some animal studies have shown slight effects on

nerves, breathing, liver and kidneys, plus fetal malformations."

(further)

Williams wrote that EPA's decision to include MEK in its list
"is based on an impermissible construction of the statute."

"At a minimum, the chemical must cause harm via exposure," he

wrote. "Because EPA's own analysis demonstrates that MEK fails

this test, EPA's denial of the council's petition to delist was

improper."



So perhaps this stuff isn't as bad as we all thought?

[Davepar]

I guess as long as your pets don't mind "slight effects on nerves, breathing, liver and kidneys, plus fetal malformations."

But seriously, here's the MSDS sheet for it: http://www.temarry.com/MSDS/Methyl_E...etone_msds.htm. Doesn't sound as bad as chromate primers. I read somewhere that the danger with MEK is that other stuff dissolves in it readily and then is more easily absorbed through the skin.

[kevinh]

Originally Posted by Bob Collins

So perhaps this stuff isn't as bad as we all thought?

Or perhaps this adminstration has appointed EPA leadership that don't actually care about the environment? ;-)

[cobra]

As an environmental/safety engineer of 20+ years, I cannot let that last cheap shot pass by without comment.

The Clinton/Gore administration governed the EPA through emotion and innuendo- they passed many "dumb" rules/laws that had little effect on the environment other than tying up real improvements and cleanup efforts in the courts. Bush has redirected the EPA to use science to govern. No doubt, most arm-chair environmentalists and tree huggers do no like scientific arguments that make decisions based on dosage and health studies as opposed to scare tactics and emotional overractions. MEK is not much different in its health effects than acetone, a very common unregulated solvent.

If you want to see real reuslt of Clintonian EPA meddling- look at Methylene Chloride- it was banned only because it is a member class of chemicals known to have carcinogenic tendencies (haloginated hydrocarbons), not because of scientific data. MECL is one of the best paint stripping solvents ever, with a long history of (mis)use in a number of industries- it has 0 recorded cases of ill health effects. The same is true of 111 trichloroethane, a great degreaser. Both have high flash points- safe to use around flame/heat unlike many of their more expensive replacements.