this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
130 points (98.5% liked)

Australian News

588 readers
12 users here now

A place to share and discuss news relating to Australia and Australians.

Rules
  1. Follow the aussie.zone rules
  2. Keep discussions civil and respectful
  3. Exclude profanity from post titles
  4. Exclude excessive profanity from comments
  5. Satire is allowed, however post titles must be prefixed with [satire]
Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Banner: ABC

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

What are the replacement materials?

I presume that laminated/coated MDF isn't the same market segment as heavy, dense engineered stones. Perhaps they'll go solid epoxy with no silica filler? That would be more expensive but probably work. I suspect they'll still want cheap fillers however, so non-silica stones might be chosen (but surely most stone dusts are bad?).

EDIT: Oh dear https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-05/study-finds-safety-concerns-in-engineered-stone-alternatives/103185450

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Silicosis can come from a wide variety of sources, basically anything where stone dust occurs can produce it, even natural stone countertop manufacturing has long been known to be dangerous in that regard.
This whole ban feels more like populism than addressing the real problems. Engineered stone has become a popular material, lots of people have worked with it with insufficient safety precautions and now there's a number of people permanently disabled by it.
Simply banning engineered stone won't solve that problem, since it will now just happen with other materials.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You wouldn't generally get all federal and state governments signing on to something that is just 'populism'.

Engineered stone is more dangerous than natural stone because it contains much more silica, and so it has resulted in an acute accelerated form of silicosis: https://www.medicalrepublic.com.au/why-silicosis-is-on-the-rise-and-what-to-do-about-it/24559

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

yeah the real issue they need to come down hard on is disregard for oh&s in the building industry, poor education and worker exploitation. I expect this to happen around the same time my grandmother's pig sprouts wings and takes flight.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What are the replacement materials?

Laminated chipboard/MDF or natural stone mainly, depending on how expensive ones tastes and budget are. Still wouldn't want to be breathing dust from either of those though...

As another comment suggests stainless steel is another option, or perhaps even expoxied timber/bamboo. These do suffer from aesthetic and durability issues respectively though when it comes to trying to convince people to use them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

N.B. Porcelain is a silicate. Clay dust exposure is one of the traditional causes of silicosis, potters are (mostly) taught to clean their workplaces with hoses not brooms.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Laminated wood products suck for countertops. If the sealing isn't completely perfect and water is ever allowed to sit on a joint, the fibers will swell and you get a bump that progresses to a crumbly mess. The damage is not repairable without replacement either.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Laminated / coated mdf is shit and it looses its colour in kitchen environments pretty quickly and stains are impossible to remove

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why can't we just have stainless steel?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

There’s the acrylic polymer/stone blend like Corian. Though that might be the $$$ option.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

... someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this just sounds like some random local corruption story, right?

Like, instead of passing & enforcing worker safety laws they just ban the (safe) product? The same type of diseases can workers get from eg processing cotton, flower, cement, and any fine-dusty thing really. And such things can be managed with safety precautions & exhaust filters (to not affect the broader local area over the years of dust buildup).

The logical exceptions are things like asbestos where even the end product crumbles into dangerous particulates (that are even more irritating/cause serious problems at much lower quantities).

Then again it really saddens me that we don't invest more into like cellulose based materials (buildings, cutlery, bags, windows, cars, medical equipment, ... limitless potential, can be made sustainable, & has the prospect of doing something good in the long run).

Also with the same logic Australia could ban other things as well, like cocoa/chocolate imports, much of the fashion industry (dyes), and above all else - fossil fuels.

As for the replacement materials for countertops - bamboo (pressed & oiled?) is great!

[–] Benj1B 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's a national news story thats come to light due to a large number of otherwise healthy, fairly young workers getting sick and dying from silicosis. The suggestion to ban came directly from the occupational safety watchdog, who are tasked with keeping workers safe. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/safety-topic/hazards/crystalline-silica-and-silicosis is pretty comprehensive.

In February they released a report (https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-02/decision_ris_-_managing_the_risks_of_crystalline_silica_at_work_-_for_publication_pdf.pdf) outlining exactly what you refer to, with 6 options for governments to consider. The ban on engineered stone is the most dramatic, and uses basically the same legal framework that was used to ban asbestos in the first place.

Essentially they have been screaming at stonemasons and employees for 5 years to no avail, compliance with health and safety regulations in this area is atrocious, and no matter what laws you pass, more and more people are going to get sick and die from a preventable disease if you leave the stuff on the market.

It's only in recent years that the real dangers of silicate dust have been understood and it's being banned for essentially the same reason asbestos was - it's too hard to manage safely, and the most exposed people (workers) have to be protected. Asbestos is dangerous because it can get embedded in lung cells and not be exhaled - silicate dust is similar. Makes sense to me to put it in the same category especially if some poor bastards are dying from it.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, I was just reading that. I understand now how things went down & why a complete ban was implemented. A good legislative result overall.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Thanks for this, great summary 👍👍👍

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are wrong to a degree, while the underlying issue is a lack of safe workplaces, engineered stone typically has a much higher rate of silicate (like 90 plus) compared to almost anything else

There are other types of engineered stone that are low in silicates

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh, so they differ substantially, didn't know that (but makes sense bcs of the variety they produce). I'm not anti-ban (the work itself doesn't seem like it's worth the end product anyway), I would have just expected more regulation (safety, or just a ban in crystalline silica perhaps) instead of an overall ban. But that's just the EU in me talking, a ban is at least much clearer & in this case quicker to get passed.

Edit: actually safe work Australia already drafted guidelines, I guess they didn't catch on

Workplace exposure standard for respirable crystalline silica: The eight-hour time weighted average workplace exposure standard (WES) for respirable crystalline silica (RCS) is 0.05 mg/m3. This means that your workers must not be exposed to levels of RCS greater than 0.05 mg/m3 over an eight hour working day, for a five day working week.

Edit2: EU does have a directive in place but it's not yet implemented into law (like a 'delegated regulation' or a demand to incorporate it in local laws) + its still evolving so no actual limit numbers (or a complete ban) yet. EU directives usually work in such a way that at first they gather industry knowledge & best practices (via mandated reporting) that they then implement into law (more or less strict depending on the end goal, but in administration sense compatible with the current industry capabilities - I'm actually proud of the efficiency & lifecycles of such a system).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's a good step to ban this should the the silicosis be a legitimate concern. The rest of the world should follow Australia's lead here. Don't want a repeat of the asbestos situation globally. I still remember attending sone primary and high school classes in pre-fabricated asbestos classrooms in South Africa during the 2000s and 2010s.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Australian here. We only had to ban it because all of our tradespeople are deadshits.

The same people that wouldn't wear a mask to protect them from covid won't wear one to protect themselves from inhaling silica dust. Really, I'm shocked.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

My house is asbestos in Australia haha. World's highest user of the shit

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Another win from the union movement 💪

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Thank fuck.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It was my understanding that silicosis can be prevented with proper adherence to safety standards and use of PPE. Is a flat out ban really necessary?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Yes. Because tradies and their associated business owners simply can't be fucked with using - or enforcing the use of - PPE.

They're also often dicking around trimming pieces during the final installation on site where eg bulk extraction and filtering of dust is "difficult". Not "impossible" , merely difficult, and we all know difficult costs money and time.

The industry was warned and didn't do much in particular to sort themselves out, so here we are.