Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Looking over the border: EU-Regulations

Looking over the border: EU-Regulations

Pages: 1 2 3

Herr Haber - 9-3-2016 at 21:40

Fortunately around here acetone can still be found in hardware store. Just checked the manufacturer website and it says > 95 % Acetone.
I guess the rest being hydrocarbons or surfactants.

Fortunately, the labelling on the products is very clear around here. If it's not "the original product" it's clearly labelled "Substitute of" trichloroethylene for example.

phlogiston - 10-3-2016 at 03:38

Yes, mailinmypocket, it literally says "aceton" even though it contains none. This page shows the bottle: http://www.pearlpaint.nl/nl/merken-producten/eco-line/aceton...

The same happened with a product called ‘thinner’. This used to consist mostly of toluene and was excellent for all kinds of household and amateur science purposes but the eco variant (which is still labelled ‘thinner’) is an entirely different product, and now contains the same 2-butoxyethanol that is in the fake acetone.

The white spirit sold in most places has changed as well, judging by the smell of it, but fortunately it is still some kind of organic apolar solvent that is useful. I keep a bottle of the old stuff just for the smell of it. Reminds me of many enjoyable hours of woodwork and painting with my dad.

As woelen says, I believe it is realistic to expect such products to disappear very soon, even if no good substitute exists. Unless you run a business with a very good excuse to be needing them, you will not be able to obtain even very basic chemicals in the Netherlands (probably in all of Europe).

[Edited on 10-3-2016 by phlogiston]

woelen - 10-3-2016 at 04:21

I see this development as a much greater threat for home/hobby chemistry than certain regulations, which prohibit sale of specific chemicals. Simple chemicals like dilute HCl, NaOH, simple organic solvents, ammonia, all disappear from the shelves. Especially young enthusiastic people who want to do basic but fun experiments will be put off very quickly if they discover that not even the most basic chemicals can be obtained locally. Chemistry then definitely becomes something of school, companies and labs. Young people must be really devoted to the subject if they want to start with online sources. They also will be dependent on cooperating parents, who order materials online.

If I look back at my own youth (in the 1980's) I did experiments with 30% HCl, 53% HNO3, acetone, basic metal salts, sulphur, KNO3, NaOH, KClO3, bleach, all obtained locally (there was no internet) at a cost of not more than a few tens of guilders (1 guilder then is comparable to 1 euro now) spread out over several months. I bought these chemicals myself, my parents allowed me to do this, but did not actively support this. I made Cl2, did electrolysis of acids, made NO2, made small crap pyrotechnic mixes with KNO3 or KClO3 as oxidizer, and so on. All these kinds of things raised further interest. Nowadays this hardly is possible anymore. With the neutered "chemicals" you can buy nowadays you can hardly do any interesting experiments anymore, at least not more than playing with some changing colors in a test tube or making bubbles of CO2. I am quite sure, that if I were at my youth nowadays, playing with chemistry would be considered as something unreachable, far away. Of course I would know of online shops, but a 15-year old does no online shopping abroad, has no credit card and considers such shops as something far away, useful for (semi-)professionals, but not for themselves.

For the older, more experienced, amateur chemists in the Netherlands these developments are less of an issue. I myself know my ways, I have a decent income and can afford online shopping, using eBay and a diversity of specialized online shops, world-wide. These restrictions affect new/young amateurs. The current generation of amateurs will grow older, hardly any new young amateurs will be added to the pool. I am afraid that 20 years from now, in the western part of the world amateur chemistry (and possible amateur science in general) will be near-dead, only practiced by a community of older people and only VERY few younger people.

[Edited on 10-3-16 by woelen]

annaandherdad - 10-3-2016 at 11:10

I watch these development in the EU from where I am (US) with the utmost dismay. Of course similar if less drastic developments have taken place here. I cannot tell you how much science I learned from a chemistry set in the early 1960's. By 1980, it was impossible to obtain such chemistry sets anymore, due to fear of liability.
What I have heard recently is that any "chemistry set" that can be sold now must contain only substances that are edible. in other words, it has become cooking.

I wonder if there are any forces that can stand up to this. Certainly the small number of worldwide amateurs on SM cannot do it, but there must be many people in chemistry departments around the world who understand the impact this deplorable state of affairs is having on the scientific education and development of young people.
Perhaps there is some way to mobilize university and perhaps high school educators to oppose some of this stupidity.

Magpie - 10-3-2016 at 18:58

These developments in the EU are also very discouraging to me and I feel badly for the European amateur. For the future of the US, well, I have always felt that if you want to predict the future of the US look at Europe.

There are some US societies, eg, AIChE, and especially ACS, that might have enough clout to influence lawmakers. But with all the worrying about drug-making and terrorism it's doubtful. I'm not even sure that the ACS cares enough to take a stand in favor of amateur chemistry.

However, if you read the acceptance speeches of Nobel Prize winners and the biographies of CEOs of leading science and technology based companies many fondly remember having home chemistry sets. Many say that those sets greatly augmented their interest in science.

Herr Haber - 10-3-2016 at 19:03

Woelen, you are unfortunately right.

Back when I was Young I asked Santa for chemistry sets. These were nice, contained sometimes over 60 experiments to be made, glassware, chemicals etc.
It is with these kits (over the years) that I built a "lab" of some sorts. That and the help of an Aunt who was working on her doctorate in biology and living with us! Ok... maybe I stole some mercury from a barometer at school with a syringe too

With my Pocket money I could go to the pharmacy, ask for chemicals no question asked (even though the pharmacist was not stupid: what was I going to do with potassium nitrate, sulfur and... activated charcoal is all you have? I'll get it !
Since it was the same pharmacy my parents used to go they asked my parents if it was ok for them to sell me these chemicals and it was.
Well, my father had tried to make NG when he was Young, one of my uncles sent himself 2 times to the hospital with burns trying to make rockets (you know the advice not to put charcoal and KNO3 in the coffe grinder? well, one time he forgot about that).
Today there are no chemicals in the pharmacies anymore. Even getting ethanol is hard because the law makes it complicated for them. Sad... the first time I got KClO3 was in prill form from a pharmacy in Spain!

So me obviously, I wasnt going to be able to do much worse because my parents would see it coming a mile away...

Right before last Christmas, I looked up on the Internet what kind of chemistry kits were available nowadays.
The results got me sad. Not only were the kits empty of chemicals, there was no glassware (of course! it could break!) just flasks labeled with stuff like "Vinegar" and other things you find in the kitchen. There was even a printing "The adult in charge should get Sodium Bicarbonate from a general store"

So as I went to visit my parents for Christmas, I dug up one of the "really old" chemistry sets the aforementioned uncle had owned before I put my greedy hands on it.
Here are some picture of the content... And you dont get to see what was underneath: the glassware and everything you needed for a titration! And look at the chemicals! Powdered aluminium, lead acetate etc. Some "real" chemicals for impressive experiments
Notice the old nomenclature? Isnt that cute?

So you see, I've been thinking the same thing as you.
There will be no more hobbyists after us. They've made it impossible. What good is that for education? Research? I dont know. Many people I know who pursued a career in chemistry at the university have done less experiments than me. And I went to a business school !
Right after my interest in chemistry I got into electronics and made my first boards in water bottles cut in two as a bath for the FeCl3. At this time, there were stores called "Tandy" (a kind of "Radio Shack" all over the place.
These are gone now too.

It seems kids today are supposed to harass their parents for the latest smartphone or computer. There's a wealth of things to be learnt with computers too but still, it's not the same.

The good old days are gone. And I'm not even 40 yet!

blogfast25 - 10-3-2016 at 19:17

Quote: Originally posted by annaandherdad

What I have heard recently is that any "chemistry set" that can be sold now must contain only substances that are edible. in other words, it has become cooking.

Well, you've heard wrongly:

https://www.sciencemuseumshop.co.uk/experiments/chemistry_se...

It's a sorry state of affairs alright but exaggerating doesn't help our cause, IMHO.

careysub - 10-3-2016 at 19:40

The list of chemicals ChemCraft supplied in the 1950s and 1960s (I don't think any of their chemistry sets included all of these in one set):

Aluminum sulfate
Ammonium chloride
Ammonium hydroxide
Azurite (Basic Copper carbonate)
Benzoic acid
Blank test paper
Boric acid
Calcium carbonate
Calcium chloride
Calcium hypochlorite
Calcium oxide
Calcium sulfate
Chameleon paper
Charcoal, lump
Charcoal, powdered
Chrome alum (Chromium(III) potassium sulfate)
Cobalt chloride solution
Congo test paper
Dye wafer
Ferric ammonium sulfate
Ferrous ammonium sulfate
Filter Paper
Iron metal, powdered
Litmus paper
Logwood
Magnesium sulfate
Manganese sulfate
Nichrome flame test wire
Nickel ammonium sulfate
Phenolphthalein solution
Sodium bicarbonate
Sodium bisulfate
Sodium bisulfite
Sodium borate
Sodium carbonate
Sodium ferrocyanide
Sodium iodide solution
Sodium salicylate
Sodium silicate solution
Sodium thiocyanate
Sodium thiosulfate
Starch, soluble
Stearic acid
Strontium chloride
Strontium nitrate
Sulfide (lead acetate) test paper
Sulfur
Tannic acid
Tartaric acid
Trisodium phosphate
Turmeric paper
Zinc metal
Zinc powder

This was a time in which they also sold an "atomic science" kit that included uranium ore.

[Edited on 11-3-2016 by careysub]

BJ68 - 10-3-2016 at 21:44

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

I see this development as a much greater threat for home/hobby chemistry than certain regulations, which prohibit sale of specific chemicals. Simple chemicals like dilute HCl, NaOH, simple organic solvents, ammonia, all disappear from the shelves.

There are two other threats which will have a negative impact. Okay one is minor and very special, but the other will grow and affect many areas of hobbyist and amateurs.

The minor one will have an impact on people which try that kind of alternative photography: http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=65443#...
Because after September 2017 Potassiumdichromate can only be used in the EU with Authorisation from ECHA see http://www.hse.gov.uk/reach/resources/19authorisation.pdf
Even if this issue is more a problem for people which are working commercially or making workshops, there are a few problems which can target the general public. E.g. look at the numbers 7 - 13 at Article 3 of REACH http://www.reachonline.eu/REACH/EN/REACH_EN/article3.html
IMHO it means or better it can be that even a private citizen with no business can be hit by REACH if they try to synthesize or prepare SVHC after the sunset date.

The bigger one is hidden in the numbers 28 until 30 of Annex XVII REACH Page 234 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLE...
Make a long story short: CMR-Substanzes https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/Carcinogenic,_mutagenic,_reprotoxic_(CMR)_substances and mixtures
which contain them should be "Restricted to professional users" only.
E.g. that is the reason why the sale of borax to the general public is banned in Germany http://www.abda.de/themen/arzneimittelsicherheit/amk/amk-nac... (in German) Even at the MSDS of Sodium tetraborate http://www.dcfinechemicals.com/files2/Hojas%20de%20seguridad%20(EN)/115630-SDS-EN.pdf you will find "Restricted to professional users.".
So this list of CMR-Subtanzes is growing and more and more chemicals and mixtures will get banned...e.g. developer or toning baths for photography for non professionals.

Bj68

[Edited on 11-3-2016 by BJ68]

[Edited on 11-3-2016 by BJ68]

woelen - 11-3-2016 at 00:07

Borax (sodium tetraborate) indeed is gone. In the Netherlands this cannot be purchased anymore if you are not a professional user. I was told that the same will be true for boric acid and boron oxide. Current stock will be sold, but there is no new supply.

phlogiston - 11-3-2016 at 02:14

You will not believe to what extent this madness is penetrating even professional labs.

I work in a laboratory in the Netherlands. Ethanol has been included on a list of carcinogenic compounds (https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stcrt-2016-43.html) and as a result we now have to take absurd measures when working with it.
The protective measures we ought to take are essentially incompatible with daily work and are written by some guy in an office that hasn’t ever worked in a lab in his life. I am not joking, that is really actually true.

To cope with the sad mental image of the prospective future I have been increasing my oral intake of ethanol over the weekends.

A worrying side effect of enforcing overprotective rules is that people stop taking them seriously, especially if enforced upon knowledgeable professionals that are themselves very capable of making a realistic estimate of the hazards of the stuff they work with (indeed, any random chemistry student with a single year of university education is apparently more capable than our lawmakers in this respect).

annaandherdad, I have also been wandering about this but have not been able to conceive of any truly convincing argument or organization with sufficient power to make a difference. An indication of the level of current determination of the authorities to remove these and other products is the fact that now even products are being banned (1) for which no suitable alternative is available, and for which (2) the potential for misuse (terrorism or drug synthesis) is very limited or non-existent, as evidenced by decades of free availability without problems. Then I don't see any compelling reason for them to stop this process.

What is als interesting is that politicians must realize that banning products will not have the desired effect. AK-47s are not freely sold to the public in France AFAIK but the Parisians have recently learned the hard way that does not help much. Yet all of this is happening rather stealthily. Authorities are not adopting half-assed measures to show off for the next election.

[Edited on 11-3-2016 by phlogiston]

annaandherdad - 11-3-2016 at 09:28

blogfast---yes, it looks like Chem 3000 is a real chemistry set, and it's available in the US, too. The main complaints from users (on Amazon reviews) is that it doesn't include some important chemicals needed, such as 1% NaOH solution and silver nitrate. Apparently the Chem 3000 people are afraid of hazmat shipping charges, and they tell their customers that they must obtain these somehow on their own. These chemistry sets are popular with people who do home schooling.

I believe Elemental Scientific will also sell a real chemistry set.

However, the gradual disappearance of vital chemicals is happening here, too. For example, first iodine is banned, and now iodide salts (which you could use to make your own iodine). It's tough to get iodine from nature---it and many other substances like toluene have to be purchased, for all practical purposes for the amateur.

Some of the gradual disappearance of chemicals is due to regulations, and some of it is just due to general fear of liability. After all, if you ask a lawyer's advice about supplying kids with NaOH, what do you think the lawyer is going to say? And I expect people like Elemental Scientific and United Nuclear are indeed taking a legal risk.

phlogiston---yes, ethanol is carcinogenic, you'd better be careful. I'm so scared of it, I think I'll have a drink. A friend of mine works in a biology lab, and he says if he buys sodium bicarbonate from a chemical supplier, he has mounds of paperwork and restrictions to go through to use it, but that if he just brings it from his kitchen, it's considered ok. It is so stupid.

I have the privilege of being able to order chemicals through my university, and sometimes I buy from Sargent-Welch. Sometimes they have shipped glassware to my house, and sometimes they refuse. It seems to depend on how they're feeling. But they never ship chemicals to my house.

They use boilerplate warning labels on all their chemicals---in case of contact with skin, flush with water for 15 minutes and call poison control center. This for sodium chloride as well as sodium hydroxide.

When you have exaggerated warning labels on everything in sight, people stop reading them. You know when you buy a CD player or any piece of consumer electronics the instruction manual (if you get one) will have 15 pages of warnings. Is there anyone who reads that stuff? Obviously its only purpose is to defend the manufacturer against lawsuits. I doubt if anyone at the manufacturer cares if any customer reads the warning labels, or if they get hurt---they're aren't really there to protect the customer, they're there to protect the manufacturer.

blogfast25 - 11-3-2016 at 09:43

Quote: Originally posted by annaandherdad

You know when you buy a CD player or any piece of consumer electronics the instruction manual (if you get one) will have 15 pages of warnings. Is there anyone who reads that stuff? Obviously its only purpose is to defend the manufacturer against lawsuits. I doubt if anyone at the manufacturer cares if any customer reads the warning labels, or if they get hurt---they're aren't really there to protect the customer, they're there to protect the manufacturer.

Just received an ice-cream maker as a present. First page of the manual: 30 'SAFETY PRECAUTIONS', one more risible than the next ('Do not allow the power cord of the appliance to hang over the edge of a table etc or touch any hot surfaces').

That's the result of our litigious societies of course: trying to settle everything through courts and having lawyers become very rich from that sorry state of affairs. Everything then becomes an exercise is *rse covering...

Magpie - 11-3-2016 at 10:33

My son knows chemical engineers that work at a federal laboratory. Because it is so much hassle to acquire 95% ethanol they are buying Everclear instead.

gregxy - 11-3-2016 at 11:28

This type of thing now effects things like owning a house.

My brother's water (in the garage) heater developed a leak so he called a plumber. The plumber charged him $1000 but recommend a "remediation expert" since a little water got on the drywall. The remediation expert charged him $2000 to set up some fans and told him to bill his insurance.
Even if the insurance pays someone has to pay for it.

careysub - 11-3-2016 at 11:57

The whole litigation-averse thing is completely orthogonal to regulations.

In the Libertarian model of an ideal world there would be no government regulation, and *all* protection from bad practice by business would come from litigation - unless it is so bad as to be criminal. But even today this virtually never happens, comparatively light fines with no one going to jail being almost always the only result of even the most egregious bad behavior by business.

I don't see the litigation, litigation everywhere world to be any better than one with government regulation.

With regulation there is at least some chance of influencing government behavior through legislators.

In the EU case, it sounds like the STEM sector could actually come together to push back against excessive safety regulation due to scientific competitiveness problems. The trick is to get everyone onboard for a broad-based push-back across the board, if it is restricted to chem lab problems there won't be enough pressure.

BJ68 - 12-3-2016 at 01:30

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

Borax (sodium tetraborate) indeed is gone. In the Netherlands this cannot be purchased anymore if you are not a professional user. I was told that the same will be true for boric acid and boron oxide. Current stock will be sold, but there is no new supply.

I would be interested in the reasons for that? Why are they restricting CMR-Substances for "non professionals"?
Okay they can argue that professionals have more knowledge...in theory...but come on if you have ever worked in a small company or if you know some craftsman, you know that the knowledge is not so good (mostly) and at least even non-professionals can gather enough knowledge to handle that stuff safely.
This restriction has even a negative impact at environmental and safety issues:
Nice example: Cobalt-Compunds (Cobalt nitrate or - chloride), they are not allowed to sell at general public, because they are CRM-Substances. So now people are taking cobalt ore or alloys with high cobalt content and put it in acid to synthesize there small batch of cobalt salts. The amounts (volumes) getting bigger, there will be more waste produced and sometimes toxic gases, too. Below the line this process will be more dangerous for people, for the environment as if the person can got to the chemical dealer and buy 50 g of Cobalt(II)chloride. There will be no run at CRM-Substances and they will not be sold at the supermarket...but the ban for "non-professionals" should be lifted, because the counter-measures what interested people will do are sometimes counterproductive.

bombjack

woelen - 12-3-2016 at 08:39

What I notice, however, is that although these products are banned from OTC sources, they can be purchased from specialized hobby shops, catering to the home chemist. Cobaltous chloride, borax, boric acid and many other things (even stuff like benzene, carbon tetrachloride, mercury salts) can be purchased from companies like Hinmeijer and Labstuff. So, apparently there is not a ban on the chemical itself as a specialty product, but for use in OTC products (e.g. cleaning stuff, general hobby equipment or consumables). You will not find cobaltous chloride at a drugstore anymore as a humidity indicator, but it still can be obtained.

blogfast25 - 12-3-2016 at 09:10

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

What I notice, however, is that although these products are banned from OTC sources, they can be purchased from specialized hobby shops, catering to the home chemist. Cobaltous chloride, borax, boric acid and many other things (even stuff like benzene, carbon tetrachloride, mercury salts) can be purchased from companies like Hinmeijer and Labstuff. So, apparently there is not a ban on the chemical itself as a specialty product, but for use in OTC products (e.g. cleaning stuff, general hobby equipment or consumables). You will not find cobaltous chloride at a drugstore anymore as a humidity indicator, but it still can be obtained.

There have been some outright bans (with exemptions) like dichromates and nitric acid too, though.

woelen - 12-3-2016 at 09:53

Yes, certain chemicals are really banned for private users, but for a different reason. These are
- nitric acid, > 3%
- hydrogen peroxide, > 12%
- nitromethane, > 30%
- potassium chlorate/perchlorate, > 40%
- sodium chlorate/perchlorate, > 40%

These chemicals cannot be purchased anymore, not at all. Private users should have no access to them, because they can be abused for making explosives.

This regulation is different from the one for e.g. potassium dichromate or borax. The latter two chemicals still can be purchased, but only as a specialty chemical, not as (part of) an OTC product, meant to be used by the general public and to be sold by general shops, such as hardware stores and hobby and art suppliers. Sale as cleaning agent, mordant, or sale as contrast enhancer for black and white photography is not allowed anymore.

This latter kind of regulation should result in much less usage of the chemical by the general public. The few persons who use it as a specialty product (e.g. for experiments) are not considered a problem, at least not in NL.

[Edited on 12-3-16 by woelen]

BJ68 - 12-3-2016 at 10:00

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

Interesting because in Germany the sale is forbidden if they are for the private end-user. See: [...]2. Stoffe und Zubereitungen, die Stoffe nach Spalte 1 enthalten, die die Konzentrationsgrenzen, wie sie in Spalte 2 der Nummern 29 bis 31 des Anhangs I der in Spalte 1 genannten Richtlinie festgelegt sind, erreichen oder überschreiten, dürfen nicht an den privaten Endverbraucher abgegeben werden.[...]
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/chemverbotsv/anhang.html

And a home chemist is for German companies identical with a private end-user and even if you have expert knowledge you will count as private user. I am PTA (pharmaceutical technician), which is mentioned in §5 Abs. 1 Nr. 4 http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/chemverbotsv/__5.html and if I incorporate a chemical company I can sell chemicals without additional examination, this whole thing do not count.
Few years ago I asked one guy of a big chemical selling company, if it is possible to get chemcicals from them. They said no, at my question why, because I have the "Fachkenntnis" he said, that at a found company there are other authorities like trade supervisory authority which will look over you for security reasons....

BJ68

[Edited on 12-3-2016 by BJ68]

BJ68 - 16-3-2016 at 21:59

Update on Regulation 98/2013:

To whom it may concern and who is interested:

a) Threat assessment of matchsticks:

Quote:

[...]The Commission reported back from consultations held with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), and internally (with the JRC, the REACH Unit in DG GROW, and also the Commission's Legal Service), on the question of whether or not matchsticks fall under Regulation 98/2013. Consultations seem to indicate that matchsticks cannot be exempted from the Regulation on the grounds that they are articles as defined in REACH. At this stage, the Commission has therefore followed the current practice in the Regulation to calculate the concentration when there is a combination of a manufactured part and a substance (fertilizer granules). The preliminary view is that matchsticks do not fall within the restrictions of Article 4(1), but since they contain potassium chlorate, they are in principle subject to the reporting obligation under Article 9. However, following Recital (20) in the Regulation, the measures applied for new explosive precursors should match their threat level. In view of this, a threat assessment of matchsticks will be made in combination with the upcoming review of the Regulation.
Some Members raised objections to matchsticks being a significant threat and falling under the scope of the Regulation.
[...]

b) Inhibitor addition to precursors:

Quote:

[...]4. Presentation by the FP7 Research project EXPEDIA on inhibitor additives
The EXplosives PrEcursor Defeat by Inhibitor Additives (EXPEDIA) project is an FP7 project coordinated by the Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI). The project aims to 1) inhibit some frequently used explosive precursors and 2) increase knowledge about the so-called 'garage chemistry'. The project will develop a European guide for first responders.
More information is available on the Commission's CORDIS website (link) and the presentation is available on the CIRCABC Library (link).
[...]

Both from
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...

c) Metal powders will be added to Annex II (watched chemicals):

Quote:

[...]Another Member announced that in the weeks after the meeting it would circulate a proposal to amend Annex II of the Regulation to add metal powders.[...]

http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...

d) Important for people who visit or even passing through Austria:

Quote:

[...]Introduction: Where a member of the general public intends to introduce those restricted
explosive precursors (hydrogen peroxide in concentrations above 12 % w/w up to 35% w/w
nitromethane in concentrations above 30% w/w up to 40% w/w; and nitric acid in
concentrations above 3 % w/w up to 10 % w/w) into the Austrian territory the member of the
general public has to transfer information appropriate to Art. 8 Regulation. (EU) No 98/2013 to
the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management.
[...]

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...

Higher concentrations are not allowed for members of the general public and the fine is 500 Euro minimum (first time). This means that you can forget to etch copper, prepare silver nitrate with nitric acid, if you live in Austria and you are a private citizen.

e) Overview for the public:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...
Single measurements of the states: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...
Say good bye to concentrated nitric acid in the EU....if you are a private citizen...

f) For US citizens in the case if you think you live on the other side:
http://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2016-03-11

Have fun......

Bj68

[Edited on 17-3-2016 by BJ68]

phlogiston - 17-3-2016 at 03:29

Matchheads, oh gee. I was wandering about those already.

Maybe one way to stop it is to fuel the fire.

If we can demonstrate the possibility as amateur chemists to manufacture something out of virtually anything, they will have to expand and expand the number of banned products untill we reach a point that it impacts their own daily lives. They'll have to rub two sticks together to start the barbecue. Or recharge their phone twenty times a day becuase batteries have been banned. At that point, they will have to understand futility of their approach.

Ultimately, they would need to ban things like seawater, pencils or platinum jewelry and sugar to stop a determined malicious individual. And urine and charcoal precursors (aka trees).

BJ68 - 17-3-2016 at 05:03

Barbecue will be forbidden, because you use charcoal and you know with this you can make a deadly poison like white phosphorous...with alchemistic greetings from Hennig Brand...

Slowly I get really pissed...this above issue and the other targeting gum printing see http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/processes/gum-bichr...

Bj68

j_sum1 - 17-3-2016 at 05:07

The positive side of this is that, hopefully, some time just before the banning of tap water, someone will wise up and recognise just how ridiculous it all is -- not to mention futile.

annaandherdad - 17-3-2016 at 06:28

Speaking of matches, I hate the kind they sell now. They are hard to light and don't stay lit once you light them. Obviously they've been made "safe".
They *are* dangerous, after all, you could start a fire with them.

phlogiston - 17-3-2016 at 06:53

Assuming that point is reached someday, j_sum1, I wander if the process can ever be reversed. I am worried we are on a one-way street.

The situation seems reminescent to me of the witch hunt for communists in the 50's although I wasn't alive at the time. In both cases the authorities overreacted to a threat. Today it is terrorism. Back then it was communist spies. In both cases, the authorities sucesfully exploited fear to grow a large support base in the general population. Maybe we can find inspiration in hsitory that helps us fight this.

In any case, it is very worrying to me.

[Edited on 17-3-2016 by phlogiston]

j_sum1 - 17-3-2016 at 07:25

Another matter that is likely to arise is that the regulations become unenforceable. And the proposition over matches illustrates this. Chlorates in matches, urea in urine, metal powders on the workshop floor. Ultimately the regulations will become meaningless as they fail to accurately reflect what really happens in our world.

But in the meantime, the situation is pretty grim. Science will be replaced by ignorant chemophobia and related scourges. Public perception of experimenters becomes entirely negative. Normal household products become increasingly impotent. And potentially a dearth of scientific understanding amongst the average people in our communities.

phlogiston - 17-3-2016 at 08:03

Good point indeed. A paranoid mind might suggest that this is a desirable situation for law enforcement, because at some point everyone will have a few items in their posession that could be considered incriminating.

Reading up on the communist witch hunt, it turns out that this too was characteristic of that period of time. It was called McCarthyrism "making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence" (Wikipedia).

Let's hope this is not where we are headed.

Magpie - 17-3-2016 at 08:28

Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston

Reading up on the communist witch hunt, it turns out that this too was characteristic of that period of time. It was called McCarthyrism "making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence" (Wikipedia).

I just watched an excellent movie about this sordid period, ie, "Trumbo." It concerns the black listing of actors and screenwriters in Hollywood. It stars Bryan Cranston as Dalton Trumbo, screenwriter: Trumbo

arkoma - 17-3-2016 at 08:31

I went to Lowes the other day in search of Ethyl Acetate and toluene which they USED to carry. Neither one available. Same with CAN fertilizer. And yeah, I felt like a "kid buying condoms".

*edit*

On the subject of matches--just TRY to buy book matches in Oklahoma, Texas or Arkansas. They call the frickin' SHERIFF. "We gotta dope cook in here trying to get Red P"

[Edited on 3-17-2016 by arkoma]

Mailinmypocket - 20-3-2016 at 07:57

Went to the hardware store today and took some pictures of what is available (for now) in Canada OTC. Just for fun. It's nothing outstanding...

Very clear 31.45% HCl

Lithium hypochlorite for spas

Concrete cleaner containing nitric, phosphoric and sulfamic acid (could be a good source of HNO3, maybe.

Methanol

Acetone

Solvents...

Sulfuric acid drain cleaner. Light red color. I've seen some without color before but not at this store.

Unfortunately it's the pharmacies that do not offer anything close to what they did in the past.

[Edited on 20-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

woelen - 20-3-2016 at 09:23

In a dutch hardwarestore none of these are available anymore.

HCl: At most 10%, being phased out, replaced by specialist products for specific applications like cleaning concrete, removing chalk from glass, removing chalk from chromium and so on.
Lithium hypochlorite: Never seen this, not in the past and not now.
Nitric acid: Banned since September 1, 2014
Sulphamic acid: Never seen this before for consumer products. It is known however for professional usage, e.g. in chalk removal of equipment for catering services and restaurants.
Methanol and other pure solvents: all gone, replaced by eco-variants or specialist products.
Sulphuric acid: Not available anymore, drain cleaner is replaced by some weak mix (HG). NaOH still is available though.

Herr Haber - 20-3-2016 at 21:21

Damn I would like some of the Lithium Hypoclorite !

Woelen, you might have stumbled unknowingly on sulphamic acid. I get mine to give a new life to WW2 relics found here and there. Makes wonders to remove rust (must boil it, so there better be no HE Inside what I'm working on). Leaves a funny appearance on copper though...
The most common use for sulphamic acid OTC is to clean coffee machines. The EOD friend I talk about from time to time gets his in small bags with his coffee filters!

Mailinmypocket - 21-3-2016 at 04:45

I've often had the lithium hypochlorite in my hand intending to buy it...! The 50$ price always makes me change my mind though. I can't think of a use for it that I can justify

j_sum1 - 21-3-2016 at 04:56

LiOCl. I bought some as a pool chemical. Only 20 bucks for a kg IIRC.

It is full of sodium salts. I think NaOH. Might have others also. Perhaps borax. I need to do some testing.

If I prouce LiCO3 and then the chloride, I will have something to attempt Li electrolysis. That's the plan anyway. Some Cl2 to be made between noe and then.

Mailinmypocket - 21-3-2016 at 06:43

Speaking of sulfamic acid I came across 2+ kilos of it in storage. If there is interest I would be willing to part with some.

phlogiston - 21-3-2016 at 07:06

I wish our hardware stores looked like that! Many of those very useful chemicals never have been that easily available here for as long as I can remember, certainly not in a random hardware store.

I don't have a spa. What is the advantage of using lithium hypochlorite over the calcium or sodium salt? Do you need to use a solid for some reason? If so, why not the calcium salt? Does it help spa-goers with bipolar disorder?

Mailinmypocket - 21-3-2016 at 07:08

I'm honestly not sure because they also sell spa tablets made of TCCA. Maybe it's more stable at spa temperatures? Who knows.

I also ended up needing non chemistry related stuff at the pharmacy and wanted to see what is available to the amateur here, how disappointing. Years ago (15or so years) it was easy to buy potassium nitrate, powdered salicylic acid, bottles of usp methyl salicylate, sulfur and a few others I'm forgetting. I did however see some bandage adhesive remover in small 30ml bottles with only ethyl ether as an ingredient, $10 though.

[Edited on 21-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

[Edited on 21-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

Herr Haber - 21-3-2016 at 17:20

Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston

I don't have a spa. What is the advantage of using lithium hypochlorite over the calcium or sodium salt? Do you need to use a solid for some reason? If so, why not the calcium salt? Does it help spa-goers with bipolar disorder?

You're an ass. But so am I

I was wondering the exact same thing. Why bother making lithium hypochlorite anyway? It's bound to be a lot more expensive so there must be a really good reason.
That said, I've been diagnosed slightly bipolar. Not enough to need medication fortunately but enough to end any long lasting relationships. Some things are just not meant to be for all. I've read some horror stories about Lithium carbonate especially when you try to quit. Things that make look death by heroin OD actually a good experience.

Back on topic: you can still find nitrites and nitrates quite easily. Your hardware store dont have them anymore? Go to your fridge, get that pack of ham/turkey or other processed meat and tell me what you find among the preservatives

I'm pretty sure you can find a wholesale store where you can find a 5kg pot of spices for chicken, 2 kg bags of black Pepper and... 2 kg of Potassium nitrate, a benzoate or two etc...
Check the "E" list of additives. It's very informative and it might give you an idea or two on how to get those chemicals you're missing.

EDIT:
What I meant is that it might be easier to find than you think: they might just call it another name.

[Edited on 22-3-2016 by Herr Haber]

BJ68 - 21-3-2016 at 21:26

Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston

Good point indeed. A paranoid mind might suggest that this is a desirable situation for law enforcement, because at some point everyone will have a few items in their posession that could be considered incriminating.

Sorry it´s not paranoid, it will became slowly reality....look at the example of Austria. I am working now in Switzerland and if I go back to Bavaria I will pass Austria...if I have Hydrogen peroxide from concentrations above 12 % w/w up to 35% w/w or even worse nitric acid in concentrations above 3 % w/w up to 10 % w/w with me I have to register e.g. the point "Introduction" at page 2 of http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...
and for concentrations which are higher e.g. 50% hydrogen peroxide and 53% or 65% nitric acid which are common, there is no way that I am allowed to go through Austria.

Bj68

PS: For the authorities:

I etch copper e.g. a very old piece (one of the first tries)

and for that I use sometimes concentrated nitric acid...and i think that is a very legal reason, that even a private person has a use for using nitric acid with higher concentrations or very short: It´s called FREEDOM/LIBERTY Words which are not known anymore from the ****ing morons of this kind of politicians....perhaps it´s time to push this kind of regulations up to place where no sun shines....

[Edited on 22-3-2016 by BJ68]

woelen - 22-3-2016 at 02:50

Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber

Back on topic: you can still find nitrites and nitrates quite easily.

Nitrites yes, nitrates no. Nitrites are not useful as oxidizer (I actually tried, it totally sucks as oxidizer in pyrotechnic mixes, even red P only smoulders when mixed with nitrite and ignited).

Nitrates are rapidly banned from the Netherlands. Many companies do not want to sell them anymore. They are available, but only as part of mixes in fertilizers and then only at fairly low concentration. E.g. we used to have ammonium nitrate fertilizer (with a few percent of CaCO3 added), nowadays this is replaced by a mix of ammonium sulfate, ammonium nitrate and some other stuff (CaCO3, MgO). Pure KNO3 and NaNO3 are gone as well. Ten years ago I could buy 25 kg bags with so-called "chili-salpeter", which were 99% NaNO3 and we had K-N-Mg fertilizer, which was 95% KNO3 (the rest being impure MgO, in separate darker prills, which could be sorted out manually). Both are gone, now we only have mixed fertilizers, containing some nitrate, but also sulfate, phosphate and insoluble matter as MgO, MgCO3 and CaCO3. The pure nitrates probably only are available for farmers, who have the right paperwork.

[Edited on 22-3-16 by woelen]

phlogiston - 22-3-2016 at 04:38

Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber

Back on topic: you can still find nitrites and nitrates quite easily. Your hardware store dont have them anymore? Go to your fridge, get that pack of ham/turkey or other processed meat and tell me what you find among the preservatives

I'm pretty sure you can find a wholesale store where you can find a 5kg pot of spices for chicken, 2 kg bags of black Pepper and... 2 kg of Potassium nitrate, a benzoate or two etc...
[Edited on 22-3-2016 by Herr Haber]

No, that is a good description of what is was like in the past. Every amateur chemist becomes good at sourcing chemicals from OTC sources like this. Nitrates could indeed be bought readily if you knew what they were used for. I have known about the availability of nitrite and nitrate as meat preservative for a long time, and would probably have been able to buy significant quantities without questions if I had wanted to.

Now these last sources are drying up too.

Pure nitrates are very quickly becoming unobtainium here. An interest in making sausages at home is not enough to get a permit.

woelen - 22-3-2016 at 12:08

Removed a post, containing political off-topic crap about islam, libertarians, and thought control.

[Edited on 22-3-16 by woelen]

ganger631 - 22-3-2016 at 12:20

Quote: Originally posted by Mailinmypocket

Very clear 31.45% HCl

[Edited on 20-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

Are you sure those are 31.45% HCl, i purchased a few of those and on the side label it says "20*." I wonder if it's just regular azetropic hydrochloric acid, around 20%. I could be wrong.

woelen - 22-3-2016 at 12:53

I just read about new upcoming regulations in the EU, agreed upon at November 18, 2015. Directive EU 98/2013 will be tightened and this will be done at an accelerated rate: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/eur...

Most important changes:
- extending the list of annex I explosives precursors: sale, use and possession of more chemicals will be forbidden;
- tighter monitoring of international transfers of chemicals and movements of firearms by improving existing statistical analysis tools and prioritizing information exchange at EU-level;
- extending the scope of directive EU 98/2013 to professional users as well. Annex I chemicals will also be forbidden for many professional users so that the chance of diversion into the general public is strongly reduced;
- end-user declarations for the few professional users which still may use annex I chemicals;
- assess the risk of availability of 3D printers and possibly restrict technology needed for that;
- harmonizing the rules for every EU nation, a new directive 2016 will be used and will be enforced at an accelerated rate EU-wide.

I expect that any licensing of annex I chemicals will be gone if the new regulations come into effect. Apparently the economic losses due to restricting the use of these chemicals even for professional users is deemed acceptable and if that is deemed acceptable, then forget about a member of the general public who does some experiments or has some nice art project being allowed to use any of these chemicals.
I expect that in the near future annex I chemicals only will be allowed in large university labs and maybe a few multinational companies and of course government labs.

This makes me sad, really sad

Mailinmypocket - 22-3-2016 at 13:15

Quote: Originally posted by ganger631

Quote: Originally posted by Mailinmypocket

Very clear 31.45% HCl

[Edited on 20-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

Are you sure those are 31.45% HCl, i purchased a few of those and on the side label it says "20*." I wonder if it's just regular azetropic hydrochloric acid, around 20%. I could be wrong.

What you purchased is 20 Baume. Baume is I believe a somewhat antiquated term. Google: 20 baume HCl

See, this old bottle I bought from the hardware store:

[Edited on 22-3-2016 by Mailinmypocket]

BJ68 - 22-3-2016 at 21:31

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

Most important changes:
- extending the list of annex I explosives precursors: sale, use and possession of more chemicals will be forbidden;

There are rumors, that potassium permanganate should be added to Annex I (= forbidden) and according to the dutch government Aluminium, Magnesium and Magnalium powders with less than 200µm size should be included in Annex II (Watched chemicals) see https://www.wko.at/Content.Node/Interessenvertretung/Umwelt-...

Quote:

- extending the scope of directive EU 98/2013 to professional users as well. Annex I chemicals will also be forbidden for many professional users so that the chance of diversion into the general public is strongly reduced;
- end-user declarations for the few professional users which still may use annex I chemicals;

These steps are logic from the standpoint of the authorities, because if somebody has a business and a business registration with a trade certificate in Germany he can order almost all chemicals...only narcotics (Betäubungsmittel) and substances which are in the "GÜG" (drug precursor law) are forbidden, because you need a special permit. They want to screen if your business has a "probable cause" for ordering of Annex I chemicals...

Quote:

I expect that any licensing of annex I chemicals will be gone if the new regulations come into effect. Apparently the economic losses due to restricting the use of these chemicals even for professional users is deemed acceptable and if that is deemed acceptable, then forget about a member of the general public who does some experiments or has some nice art project being allowed to use any of these chemicals.
I expect that in the near future annex I chemicals only will be allowed in large university labs and maybe a few multinational companies and of course government labs.

This makes me sad, really sad

They will try it..no question, but I think they will stir up a hornets' nest: If the "master painter Huber" get in trouble, because his measures against theft of e.g. acetone are not so good, he will roast the local politicians and that will be beatback to the higher ranking politicians after a while. So there will be a point, where even the small companies will be pissed and than they will kick back...or the whole thing will be more or less ignored, because you can´t control and enforce it.

BJ68

[Edited on 23-3-2016 by BJ68]

phlogiston - 23-3-2016 at 05:01

Right, so metal powders I can still understand a little in this context. There are not many legitimate uses for these things outside of pyrotechnics.
Seriously though, 3D printers? Has anyone, ever been killed with anything made by a 3D printer? Did they ever bust a terrorist or criminal anywhere on earth that was using a 3D-printed weapon? And then weigh that against the incredible utility of 3D printing and the technical advances made in and due to rapid, cheap prototyping.
The cost/benefit ratio of these laws is off the scale. They look like desperate measures, to be doing at least something or appear to be doing so.

I heard every single politician on TV yesterday say we should not let recent events force us to give up our freedom and way of life. We are clearly already in the process of rapidly giving up freedom.

[Edited on 23-3-2016 by phlogiston]

BJ68 - 23-3-2016 at 06:57

I think 3-D printer are at the list, because you can print gun parts....this whole shit is prevention or better precrime and because that are fictive scenarios, there is no need for a reason....
On the other hand no authority wants the "Schwarzer Peter" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_maid_(card_game) if they do nothing and something happens everybody will blame them...so they make action (security theater) think on the liquid ban in planes...and additionally if you begin with something security relevant like this regulation you will find loopholes, so it´s a self-fulfilling prophecy....

BJ68

Herr Haber - 23-3-2016 at 14:12

Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston

Well... I guess I'm gonna go shopping tomorrow

It's not as cheap as some other sources being foood additive quality but.... getting some for days to come seems like a good idea.

Edit: Ohh, I *fed up the coding again

[Edited on 23-3-2016 by Herr Haber]

BJ68 - 23-3-2016 at 21:27

Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber

Well... I guess I'm gonna go shopping tomorrow

Do it and buy stocks, because:

Quote:

3) Substances proposed for addition into Annex I Sulphuric acid in concentration of 40 % w/w or higher (United Kingdom) (transfer from Annex II)

Source:
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...

Bj68

Magpie - 24-3-2016 at 08:41

Quote: Originally posted by BJ68

Source:
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...

According to the 2nd reference above sale of chicken and pig manures will become illegal in Europe: manure

BJ68 - 24-3-2016 at 09:48

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie

According to the 2nd reference above sale of chicken and pig manures will become illegal in Europe: manure

Not illegal, but the sale will be watched and monitored. Suspicious transactions have to be reported...
The term "shit police" will then have a new sound.....

Bj68

Mabus - 25-3-2016 at 10:05

So, it has come to this... banning shit.
EU is just wonderful

aga - 25-3-2016 at 12:25

Quote: Originally posted by Mabus

So, it has come to this... banning shit.
EU is just wonderful

Erm, the EU is not what you may think.

It is supposed to be all the same kind of place, yet it is not, and never ever could be.

UK, Holland, Germany, France tend to apply EU rulings as if it was the Word of God.

Other more wily EU member-states apply the rulings to the letter of the EU law without actually doing anything at all.

The EU is simply some odd dream which only works because Germany hands out loads of free money.

It will end one day, probably soon.

Mabus - 26-3-2016 at 03:54

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Quote: Originally posted by Mabus

So, it has come to this... banning shit.
EU is just wonderful

I know what EU is, I live in it

What bothers me is the EU has decided to go the nanny state way and most decisions they take lack any form of critical thinking, it's like they refuse listen to reason. So for all their talks about "better Europe", "multiculturalism", how their politics are supposed to be better, etc. etc. etc., they are nothing more than the average sleazy politician, except unlike the latter, they're in a different power position.

BJ68 - 26-3-2016 at 08:37

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Other more wily EU member-states apply the rulings to the letter of the EU law without actually doing anything at all.

Would be nice, but is not true:
List of measures to implement Regulation (EU) 98/2013 on explosives precursors in the EU/EEA
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...

Interesting page:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/cri...

Bj68

macckone - 26-3-2016 at 09:20

Home chemists can still make nirtic acid from air and electricity. Glycerine is unlikely to be outlawed. Plaster of paris and salt can be used to make quick lime, sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide with sufficient application of heat and knowledge. Urea and quicklime can make ammonia. Toluene is a major component of gasoline. Sugar and yeast can yield ethanol. Acetic acid can be made from ethanol. Baking soda is not getting outlawed. Dry distillation of wood yield many by products. Just because you have to make low level reagents doesn't mean you can't do chemistry.

woelen - 26-3-2016 at 12:57

All these things you say may be true, but let's be realistic. A young person (let's say 15 years old) with an interest in chemistry very soon will be put off if he/she is not able to find even the most basic reagents anymore in shops locally. Such persons do not make nitric acid by passing arcs through air, or making sulphuric acid from basic materials and a lot of heat. Such endeavors require considerable engineering and having acceptable yields requires large scale setups. People must be REALLY devoted to do all these difficult things.

When I was a boy of 16 years old, I made Cl2, NO2, small rockets, little pyrotechnic mixes, metal mirrors, nice crystals, all with materials I could buy at a hardware store, supermarket, and a few items required buying things at a drugstore or pharmacy. It was those things which sparked my interest for the rest of my life. Young people of e.g. 2020 will have no such options anymore and I expect a sharp decline of home chemistry in the next two decades and following that, a sharp decline in quality of professional chemistry and probably even science in general, simply because young people are put off.

aga - 26-3-2016 at 13:43

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

Young people of e.g. 2020 ... are put off.

Prevented is more likely.

As with all Repression methods, this will simply push it all Underground.

Emerging amateur chemists will find nothing interesting to do in the Legal arena, yet plenty of OC and EM possible if they align with a criminal organisation.

Recrystallise table salt if you pass an exam/have a permit,
OR (with lots of $ as well) freely make crystal meth, TNT, Nitroglycerine, TATP - whatever you like.

it would be an, erm, unusual youth that chose the salt.

Repression invariably leads to an excess of that (thing:implied)* you wish to repress.

May as well ban Sex or Breathing - people always find a way, because they want to do the things that they want to do.

Edit:

*reading the post i noticed that the sentence would be a very difficult case for me if it was written like that in Spanish or German, and not all readers speak perfect English (including some native English speakers ...)

[Edited on 26-3-2016 by aga]

macckone - 28-3-2016 at 15:25

Before 1900 if you wanted chemicals you made them from raw materials. Many kids explored chemistry back then. Some like edison got in trouble with it. Things like sulfur and salt peter where more available than the sulfuric acid we take for granted.

BJ68 - 7-4-2016 at 01:13

Got a few new sources:

1.

Quote:

Sweden presented its proposal to add magnesium nitrate hexahydrate (CAS RN 13446-18-9) to Annex II. The main use of this substance is in the form of fertilisers, by professionals. Other known uses by the public are for making ceramics and in printing, but the impact on the supply chain and consumers is expected to be low.
There were no major objections to the proposed amendment, but the ensuing discussion extended to other nitrates, including calcium nitrate tetrahydrate, and to nitrogenous fertilisers as a whole:
 Two alternative measures were also discussed, which would consist in (a) adding 'fertilizers with nitrogen content from nitrate equal or higher than 8 % by weight' or (b) adding 'nitrogenous (solid and liquid) fertilizers with nitrogen (N) content equal or higher than 3% by weight', both as a group of substances, to Annex II. These two alternative measures have already been discussed in previous SCP meetings1 without reaching consensus. DG HOME will check whether groups of substances, as opposed to individual substances, can be the subject of delegated acts.
 Participants also noted that the inclusion of calcium nitrate in Annex II, as opposed to including calcium nitrate tetrahydrate, could be regarded as an error, since the tetrahydrate is the form used for fertilizers. DG HOME will check whether the CAS number could be changed as a correction.
In addition, some participants noted that, ideally, all hydrate forms of all the listed nitrate salts should be covered in the Regulation's scope, since chemical conversions between them are in principle possible.

Quote:

The Netherlands presented its proposal to add the following metal powders to Annex II:
 Aluminium and alloys thereof with a particle size less than 200 μm (CAS RN 7429-90-5) [in concentration of 70 % w/w or higher]
 Magnesium and alloys thereof with a particle size less than 200 μm (CAS RN 7439-95-4) [in concentration of 70 % w/w or higher]
 Magnalium and alloys thereof with a particle size less than 200 μm (CAS RN 7429-90-5, 7439-95-4) [in concentration of 70 % w/w or higher]
In the ensuing discussion, Denmark noted that it already restricts the marketing and use of metal powders (over 70 % w/w) and that it has not experienced any problems in doing so. The main consumer products identified were some types of paints and pyrotechnic articles. The latter articles are however explicitly exempted from the scope of the Regulation3.
There were no objections to the proposed amendment, but some suggested that magnalium, being itself an alloy of the other two substances, should not be added to Annex II.

look at https://www.wko.at/Content.Node/Interessenvertretung/Umwelt-...

3.

Quote:

3) Substances proposed for addition into Annex I
The United Kingdom presented its proposal to transfer Sulphuric acid (in concentration of 40 % w/w or higher) into Annex I. This amendment can only be introduced via the adoption by the Commission of a legislative proposal. The main consumer products identified were some drain cleaner products in niche markets where the number of sales are very low.
In the ensuing discussion, Denmark and Sweden noted that they already restrict sulphuric acid over specific concentrations, and that they have not experienced any problems in doing so.
Sulphuric acid is scheduled under the Drug Precursors Regulation. It is subject to the reporting of suspicious transactions in that context, to export authorisations to third countries in some instances, and to a registration requirement also in some instances4.
DG HOME

from
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regexpert/index.cfm?do=grou...

New Development in Germany:

There is a bill from "BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN" which suggests that for the Annex I (within the allowed concentrations, which are legal for the public) and for the Annex II Substances there should be maximum quantities for selling to individuals put in force. That could mean for example that if you go to the DIY market you will get only one liter of acetone. Additionally they make pressure for an new extra law, which should put the 98/2013 regulation in force in Germany. They complain that the regulations of the 98/2013 are not enough and should be tightened more.
Here the PDF of this bill in German:
http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/18/076/1807654.pdf

For me it´s within the bounds of possibility, that this German issue will backfire to the EU and may tighten the regulation itself (at EU level) or even in other countries the local law.

So if somebody is interested in further informations, which should not be public shared, because they are confidentially and there are discussions over strategies, people are invited to join the board at https://ivntforum.phoerauf.de/
Please if you want, write me a PM with your pseudonym, because I have to activate every user. Reason for that, is that at a other forum we had disguised readers from authorities and I will try to avoid this.
The board mentioned above is until now mostly in German, but it should be no problem to switch to English.

Thank you

Bj68

woelen - 7-4-2016 at 23:39

From one of my suppliers I heard that in NL we get new regulations about so-called "zeer zorgwekkende stoffen". These are compounds which raise great concerns. Private use of such compounds should be forbidden or at least strongly regulated in the near future. At the moment some suppliers are implementing these new regulations already. Some examples of "zeer zorgwekkende stoffen" are:
- Hydrochloric acid 30%
- Sulphuric acid 96%
- Nitric acid (also covered by other regulation 98/2013)
- Na/K/NH4-dichromate
- Na/K/NH4-chromate
- CrO3
- nickel salts (exempted: nickel metal in bulk state)
- cobalt salts (exempted: cobalt in alloys)
- lead salts (exempted: lead metal in bulk state)
- mercury and its compounds
- cadmium and its compounds
- arsenic and its compounds
- borates and derived compounds
- a whole bunch of chlorinated hydrocarbons
- hydrazine and derived compounds/salts
Some of these compounds are on the list because of toxicity, others because of corroriveness, yet others because of extreme flammability, or being oxidizer. The list I post here is far from complete, there are many many more.

For instance, a dutch supplier, called Labshop, which sells to private persons, already put most of its compounds on the list and this means that these compounds cannot be purchased anymore, unless you are a company and have a legitimate use for these compounds.

I do not know where these regulations come from, but if I read the links posted above, then it looks similar to the REACH stuff posted by BJ68. I have the impression though that the dutch list of "zeer zorgwekkende stoffen" contains many more compounds than whatever list I have seen before and that the dutch government recently has become much more active in suppressing the diversion of these compounds in the general public.

Official recent info from dutch government from 4-4-2016: http://www.rivm.nl/rvs/Stoffenlijsten/Zeer_Zorgwekkende_Stof...
There are lists on the website (right part). Some lists are proposals.

Up until recently I was inclined to say that in the Netherlands things were quite OK from an amateur's point of view. Things were not available on every corner in the street, but there was quite some choice of suppliers and nearly everything was allowed as long as you used common sense and did not have kilos of dangerous compounds in your garage. With some effort you could obtain a lot. But now at a very high rate this freedom is removed and nearly everything interesting will be prohibited by government. Even basic chemicals like acids and many metal salts will be regulated and may only be sold to a licensed laboratory. The general public soon will have no pure acids stronger than 10% acetic acid and stronger acids only will be present in specialist products, such as concrete cleaner, which also will be full of perfume, dyes, surfactants and so on.

[Edited on 8-4-16 by woelen]

phlogiston - 8-4-2016 at 01:59

At this rate, we'll soon have to resort to isolating everything from nature.
Back to the middle ages.

[Edited on 8-4-2016 by phlogiston]

Chem Rage - 8-4-2016 at 07:55

Quote: Originally posted by phlogiston

At this rate, we'll soon have to resort to isolating everything from nature.
Back to the middle ages.

[Edited on 8-4-2016 by phlogiston]

I'm off to boil down some aged urine, following in the footseps of many an alchemist

Seriously though, these overzealous regulations are an abomination. People are being treated by the Nanny State like little kids who can't be trusted to even boil water without scalding themselves. Those who are intent of harming others, be they terrorists or wannabe acid attackers, will find alternative means. Druggies will find alternative means of making their illicit brew. Meanwhile, amateur scientists who have no intent on harming others, who can handle and dispose of chemical reagents in a safe competent and environmentally harmonious manner, and who simply desire to satiate their passion for scientific curiosity, will find it much harder to obtain even moderately hazardous materials.

It is very wrong to paint everyone with the same brush, which is exactly what these blanket bans and restrictions do. How patronising it is to be treated like a little kid who needs Nanny State to keep you safe :mad:

arkoma - 8-4-2016 at 08:01

I thought we were screwed here in the US, but now it doesn't seem so bad. I can READILY get "Liquid Fire", NaOH, HCl and just the other day a farmer friend of mine gave me a five gallon bucket full of NH₄NO₃. Different farmer let me get a grocery sack full of (NH₄)₂SO₄ this morning. Already have ten pounds of urea I picked up off the ground from a spill.

Woelen, I feel for ya.

Rosco Bodine - 8-4-2016 at 10:18

The increasing "safety" regulations in response to a state security threat, like many other type "social justice" regulations that serve to protect and enable a "special interest" minority demographic to impose "cultural diversity", are a de facto gradual dhimmitude being inflicted, and imposed upon a freedom loving european population and western culture, by what is an invading alien culture bent on conquest and enforcement of liberty destroying totalitarian rule based upon a brutal credo, bearing no resemblance to what is typical western civilization.

Being "diplomatic" and not calling the problem exactly what it is because speaking the truth might "offend" those accountable for the problem that is an irreconcilable cultural clash, is in effect being a quisling and collaborator with that invading alien culture which would have any factual criticisms or truthful indictments prohibited being spoken, while rebranding such truthful speech as "hate speech" or some other euphemism for blasphemy which will be the ultimate implementation of banning free speech that is made "prohibited speech".

I have tried to call attention to the truth of what is occurring and correctly identify the cause of the state security problem that has produced a need for such oppressive "safety regulations". This "analysis" has become almost an "inside joke" among all the people who know exactly as I do know also exactly what is the situation....but dare not speak it what is the obvious source of the problem.

People don't speak freely because the enforced dhimmitude has already reached a point of absurdity that to speak the truth about the source of the problem will be dismissed by all the more politically correct, denying what is unvarnished truth, and calling it instead a revealing of "bigotry" or "racism" by anyone daring to honestly and correctly identify by straight talk what is the real problem.

Pretending a problem is something else different from what it is, or pretending the problem will go away if only no one dares to speak of it, is a kind of "tolerance" that has only seen an escalation by an emboldened adversary who correctly identifies such response as weakness and cowardice. A progression has been occurring as a result and its future destination is clear. Europe not only needs to close its borders to that certain demographic of "immigrant" that is the problem, but deport all of that same "alien culture" who refuse to assimilate in a western culture they do have an agenda to replace with their own inferior "brand" destroying all liberty in the process. Around the world the same realization of reality needs to occur and the "problem" be dealt with accordingly. Free men have a choice between liberty and dhimmitude, and in one way or another for them, making a choice of the one or the other is unavoidable.

Should the entire world be required to forfeit liberty and make all kinds of concessions for "safety and security" that is really an illusion, or deal assertively with the source of that threat that is causing a devaluation of liberty and life for nearly everyone? Why should the free world bear the cost and pay the bill for the criminal acts of a "special class" minority making themselves more expensive to "tolerate" than any advantage that paying such a price is worth? Doing the cost / benefit analysis there, then what is the bottom line for what makes sense?

BJ68 - 8-4-2016 at 10:33

@woelen

It seems that the dutch government is now coming up at the same level or restriction like Germany...

Quote:

Zeer zorgwekkende stoffen zijn:
• kankerverwekkend (C)
• mutageen (veroorzaakt genetische verandering) (M)
• giftig voor de voortplanting (R)
• persistent, bioaccumulerend en giftig (PBT)
• zeer persistent en zeer bioaccumulerend (vPvB)
• of van soortgelijke zorg

and

Quote:

Criteria De stoffen op de volgende sheets zijn geselecteerd op basis van de volgende Europese wetgeving en verdragen:
• stoffen in de EU-GHS Verordening EG 1272/2008 geclassificeerd als C, M, of R categorie 1A of 1B (CLP A VI)
• stoffen op de kandidaatslijst voor REACH Annex XIV (bijvoorbeeld PBT/vPvB) (XIV CL)
• gelijkwaardige zorg stoffen in de POP Verordening EG 850/2004 (EU-POP)
• prioritair gevaarlijke stoffen in de Kaderrichtlijn Water 2000/60/EG (KRW-PHS)
• stoffen op de OSPAR lijst voor prioritaire actie (OSPAR) Ook zijn enkele stoffen opgenomen die al onder de Nederlandse Emissierichtlijn Lucht (NeR) als minimalisatieverplichte stof (MVP) of extreem risicovolle stof (ERS) waren geïdentificeerd, maar niet in bovenstaande wetten of verdragen voorkomen.

Source: http://www.rivm.nl/rvs/dsresource?type=pdf&disposition=i...

That means now

a) Restriction of CMR-Substances
b) Restrictions on Substances of the Authorisation List (Annex XIV)
http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/author...
c) Restrictions even on the substances at the candiate list http://echa.europa.eu/web/guest/candidate-list-table
That are substances where the decision if they will put in Annex XIV is pending...
d) Restrictions on persistent organic pollutants
http://www.kemi.se/en/directly-to/rules-and-regulations/addi...
e) Water protection
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLE...
f) Water protection Part 2:
OSPAR List
http://www.ospar.org/work-areas/hasec/chemicals/possible-con...

They are now revoking the recent law and preparing new regulations...

Bj68

[Edited on 8-4-2016 by BJ68]

arkoma - 8-4-2016 at 11:52

what is the deal with borates? Heck, here in redneckville a lot of folks I know use 20 Mule Team Borax to wash clothes.

BJ68 - 8-4-2016 at 12:29

Quote: Originally posted by arkoma

what is the deal with borates? Heck, here in redneckville a lot of folks I know use 20 Mule Team Borax to wash clothes.

They are toxic for reproduction see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21424392
and for the EU that means that they are not more allowed to sell at private users...

You know we in the EU are little children or better toddlers and we will put all powder what we find in our mouth and swallow it, so we have to be protected.....my blood pressure is rising......

Bj68

woelen - 8-4-2016 at 13:36

Indeed, boric acid, borax and other boron-containing chemicals are banned in NL. Borax suddenly, within a few months, completely disappeared from the shelves. It always used to be an OTC product in the Netherlands, now you only can obtain it at chemical companies and you need a license. Exactly the same is true for potassium dichromate and sodium dichromate. They were available as mordants and some pottery shops sold sodium dichromate, but they cannot be obtained anymore.
These compounds are even more restricted, because the use of these compounds is actually forbidden (not only purchase, but also use of them is forbidden). No licensing system will be introduced for these chemicals and there is no maximum amount: zero usage! The government is free to add more compounds to this list of forbidden compounds if they desire so. The list contains all common chromates, all common dichromates, chomium trioxide, but also compounds like trichloroethylene and other chlorinated hydrocarbons, and also boric acid, borates, perborates, nickel sulfate, nickel chloride, nickel oxide, cobaltous oxide, cobaltous sulfate and many many more.

In drugstores they tell you that borax cannot be purchased anymore, the product simply is discontinued without explanation. As a borax replacement they have "eco citrus waspoeder", which means something like eco-friendly washing powder, based on citrus fruits

.

I am afraid that many experiments on my website use one or more compounds, for which use is forbidden in the Netherlands. I read that these new rules became active at March 21, 2016.

I think the time has come near to stop doing active chemistry. I will try to complete my element collection and maybe I will do some occasional experiment, but the fun has gone where it is about doing larger experiments and syntheses. What irks me most is that not only sale is prohibited, but also use. If I write a new webpage and in this webpage I use e.g. potassium dichromate, then I show that I still have that compound and use it and that is not allowed. Fines can be high (500 euros or more). People having compounds at home from list 14 should bring them to a proper waste processing facility and have these compounds destroyed in a safe manner. In the Netherlands this can be done without cost. I do not know about other EU-countries.

I can do many things with the chemicals I still have, but if I cannot share anymore with other people what kind of expeirments I am doing, then the fun is gone for me. A very important part of my fun in amateur science is writing about it, discussing things, sharing beautiful pictures of experiments. I do not feel safe anymore about doing that.

In only 5 years time the climate for amateur chemistry has gone from quite relaxed to extremely restrictive. I think the EU will soon be among the most restrictive areas in the world when it comes to amateur chemistry.

[Edited on 8-4-16 by woelen]

aga - 8-4-2016 at 14:11

i just typed a huge number of words saying No ! Do not Stop ! in a nice way.

Something happened and the board said 'Error', which i take to mean that even the SM board software does not want you to stop doing amazing Chemistry.

On behalf of all of the SM membership, We dearly hope you do not restrict what you do because of these new EU laws.

If Publishing is an issue, i feel sure most of us would be willing to help.

[Edited on 8-4-2016 by aga]

phlogiston - 8-4-2016 at 15:25

Woelen, I feel exactly the same way, sad but true. Any fun you get out of it is simply not worth the risk if you have a family and a decent life. I removed my webpage ages ago for the same reason and felt sad about it, but at least still enjoyed experimenting on a small scale.
I would be content if I could still prepare small amounts of chemicals to do interesting experiments with, but new laws prohibit even possession of certain chemicals, and the penalties are no joke. Possibly jail, criminal record.

One can be stealthy when doing an experiment, but a webpage advertises your activities and the authorities are not as ignorant as they once were in that respect. Furthermore, there is always the risk of a burglar breaking into your house and the police visiting to inspect/collect evidence and accidentally running into the lab.

My profession also involves lab work, but it is no substitute for the joy I got out of doing whatever experiment I personally found interesting.

S.C. Wack - 8-4-2016 at 15:33

Quote: Originally posted by BJ68

Quote: Originally posted by arkoma

what is the deal with borates? Heck, here in redneckville a lot of folks I know use 20 Mule Team Borax to wash clothes.

They are toxic for reproduction see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21424392

???...the abstract says exactly the opposite...unless the EU is protecting rats from being force-fed boron...

..."The present study was conducted to investigate the reproductive effects of boron exposure in workers employed in boric acid production plant in Bandirma, Turkey. In order to characterize the external and internal boron exposures, boron was determined in biological samples (blood, urine, semen), in workplace air, in food, and in water sources. Unfavorable effects of boron exposure on the reproductive toxicity indicators (concentration, motility, morphology of the sperm cells and blood levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and total testosterone) were not observed. The mean calculated daily boron exposure (DBE) of the highly exposed group was 14.45 ± 6.57 (3.32-35.62) mg/day. These human exposures represent worst-case exposure conditions to boric acid/borates in Turkey. These exposure levels are considerably lower than exposures, which have previously led to reproductive effects in experimental animals. In conclusion, this means that dose levels of boron associated with developmental and reproductive toxic effects in animals are by far not reachable for humans under conditions of normal handling and use."

BJ68 - 8-4-2016 at 22:06

@S.C. Wack

Yes, I have seen it...the story in short:

I think it was Sweden (not sure) which made the pressure in the EU and they made experiments with ridiculous high amounts. At one forum I made the suggestion that with that method you can show that NaCl ist toxic, too.

Here the first lines from the abstract:

Quote:

Boric acid and sodium borates have been considered as being "toxic to reproduction and development", following results of animal studies with high doses. Experimentally, a NOAEL (no observed adverse effect level) of 17.5 mg B/kg-bw/day has been identified for the (male) reproductive effects of boron in a multigeneration study of rats, and a NOAEL for the developmental effects in rats was identified at 9.6 mg B/kg-bw/day. These values are being taken as the basis of current EU safety assessments

I think there is additionally some politics aspects in the issue....they want to ban chemicals for private use....and that is the reason why this train will never stop.....

Bj68

arkoma - 8-4-2016 at 22:16

I frickin hate it for you poor bastards. I am A FELON and fired four different pistols the other day. Every society gets the government it deserves, R.I.P Liberty in Europe. End product of the "everyone needs to be safe welfare state". BALLOT BOX

Mabus - 9-4-2016 at 00:30

Someone should speak to the EU and tell them to ban adenosine diphosphate from use, it's responsible for all the criminal behavior in the world... NO! WAIT EU, I was just joking! Oh my God, what have I done....

Rosco Bodine - 9-4-2016 at 01:58

It is important to protect the liberty of minorities

S.C. Wack - 9-4-2016 at 06:38

It's not about chemicals, it's about fear and control. This is a fear and control indicator.

This sometimes politically correct fear culture, the voluntary serfdom, it's not exclusive to Europe or the unranded. Fear is stronger than rationality for a lot of people in ways that they may not realize. People are very trusting of studies (or anybody saying anything, really) when the conclusion is that we need more fear and control. Yet it's full speed ahead towards the black hole, embracing root causes.

It's like the lone voice of reason is coming from Turkey, of all places. They won't stop saying WTF is wrong with you people. Only when there are financial interests, someone will stand up to fear and control.

"Accordingly, classifying boric acid and sodium borates under "Category 1B" as "presumed reproductive human toxicant in the CLP regulation seems scientifically not reasonable."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26511087

[Edited on 9-4-2016 by S.C. Wack]

BJ68 - 9-4-2016 at 08:20

Quote: Originally posted by S.C. Wack

"Accordingly, classifying boric acid and sodium borates under "Category 1B" as "presumed reproductive human toxicant in the CLP regulation seems scientifically not reasonable."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26511087

[Edited on 9-4-2016 by S.C. Wack]

Yep....I found this:
http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/consumer_sa...

and I think that is the reason for the ban:

Quote:

However, the Panel also noted that exposure to boron from its natural occurrence in the diet and from other sources (food supplements, food contact materials, feed for food-producing animals, cosmetics, oral hygiene products, etc.) may already lead to exposures exceeding the ADI.

http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/3407

No matter how you look at it, it´s fact that the EU made the decision to categorize boron compounds as toxic for reproduction category 1B and even partly as SVHC see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borax#Risk_to_fertility_and_pr...

For me a example that this whole issue is questionable....and there are not only scientific arguments which are counting....

Edit:

Quote:

The effects of boric acid and boron compounds on reproduction and development indicate that a classification with Repr. 1B, H360FD (May damage fertility and the unborn child) should be applied for boric acid. This was recently confirmed by RAC in their opinion on proposed harmonized classification and labelling of boric acid (ECHA/RAC opinion (2014)).

http://mst.dk/media/149704/eba-danish-borate-report_eba-comm...

Bj68

[Edited on 9-4-2016 by BJ68]

phlogiston - 9-4-2016 at 11:54

I previously wrote about my annoyance in this thread about a bottle labelled 'acetone' that I bought in a hardware store that had no acetone in it.

Perhaps they are reading along with this thread, because they have now have changed the label. I noticed today it says 'acetone substitute' ("acton vervanger") now:

http://www.pearlpaint.nl/nl/merken-producten/eco-line/aceton...

[Edited on 9-4-2016 by phlogiston]

gregxy - 19-4-2016 at 14:03

A while back I accidentally glued my fingers together with crazy glue.
Fortunately I had some real acetone, to un glue them.

The alternative would have been a trip to the doctor or ER ??

I see no reason to restrict acetone.

arkoma - 19-4-2016 at 14:41

Quote: Originally posted by gregxy

A while back I accidentally glued my fingers together with crazy glue.
Fortunately I had some real acetone, to un glue them.

The alternative would have been a trip to the doctor or ER ??

I see no reason to restrict acetone.

Because of TATP

Deathunter88 - 19-4-2016 at 18:21

Quote: Originally posted by arkoma

Quote: Originally posted by gregxy

Because of TATP

And because it is a drug precursor.

OneEyedPyro - 20-4-2016 at 17:56

I don't think acetone is a vital precursor to any illicit drugs though, rather just another solvent useful for the extraction or recrystallization of those drugs. I could be wrong though.

TATP being so easy to manufacture and hard to detect makes its precursors a major target for the coward law makers.

arkoma - 21-4-2016 at 07:21

Quote: Originally posted by OneEyedPyro

I don't think acetone is a vital precursor to any illicit drugs though, rather just another solvent useful for the extraction or recrystallization of those drugs.

Correct. MgSO₄ dried acetone is a WONDERFUL solvent for cleaning up various substituted phenylethyl-phenylisopropylamines.

*edit* spelling

[Edited on 4-21-2016 by arkoma]

BJ68 - 24-4-2016 at 23:02

To all which may be interested....

there is a "SVHC Roadmap to 2020 implementation" at
http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/substa...
which includes "PACT – RMOA and hazard assessment activities".
At http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/substa... you will find the list and you can see if there will be some actions from the authorities.
Source in German: http://www.reach-clp-biozid-helpdesk.de/de/REACH/SVHC-Roadma...
Overview in English: http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/substa...

In short: The SVHC-List will grow....

E.g. according to this list Sweden thinks that metallic lead has CMR-properties and there is a RMOA "Risk management option analysis" running now....
see http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/substa...

Bj68

S.C. Wack - 25-4-2016 at 15:53

They'll probably be wanting to not totally outlaw everything, just make it so businesses have to spend a lot on licenses and fees, to support the agency while making it as large as possible. Everyone else is SOL, but not at risk of risk and that's what's important isn't it.

I note that here in the good old USA, arsenic herbicides for lawn use were removed from stores years ago (a couple years after nitrates), to the delight of crabgrass, but cotton, etc. farm use wasn't regulated. The purpose of the arsenic regulations was to lower the amount of arsenic in water, by eliminating a fraction of the total arsenic used; the most users, representing the smallest share. Somehow, this policy has had no effect on arsenic in rice baby food, but oh well.

Quote from Reuters last week, different agency, same animal: "Over four decades, [the IARC] has assessed 989 substances and activities, ranging from arsenic to hairdressing, and found only one was "probably not" likely to cause cancer in humans."

Rosco Bodine - 27-4-2016 at 19:21

The abolition of science experimentation and other small liberties is such a small sacrifice which must be made by all for the wonderful return that is enjoyment of perpetual dhimmitude. Now don't fret children, the nanny state must run a tight ship for the greater good of everyone, and if you know what is good for you then you will simply go along with whatever the nanny says is "the rules" for your life reduced to kindergarten. Wait until you get your own school uniform so you will better fit in here at the little red school house. Won't you be proud!

Doesn't it all just make ones heart swell with joy to give up all that is doing ones fair share? It's such a wonderful time to be alive as a fellow traveler always moving Forward and enjoying Progress towards realizing utopia. Wake me up when the bandwagon arrives in tomorrowland. Oh wait....we're here.

BJ68 - 27-4-2016 at 20:03

Little glimpse in the future:

CoRAP with The List:

http://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/evaluation/co...

Here you find such nice things like "methyl salicylate" which should be a CMR- and ED-Substance....

That are candidates for the PACT – RMOA and hazard assessment activities-List and later a part of it e.g. CMR-Substances will be moved in the Annex XIV of REACH ("Authorisation List") or Annex XVII (Restriction List). Both lists will have an impact at the public and the private use of this compunds.

Bj68

woelen - 27-4-2016 at 23:16

That list really is insane.

Even methanol, silver, sodium silicate, silicon dioxide, and sodium sulfite are on the list. Nearly every solvent I know of is on the list. Actually, half of the chemicals I have in my lab is on this list.

So, after a few years we are not allowed anymore to have silver in the house? And mundane stuff like sodium sulfite, used for home brewing, is not allowed anymore?

I hope that they make these lists so long that really everything useful is on it. Then they never can make it happen.

I think that nearly every chemical, also naturally occurring substances, are more or less "toxic", with "toxic" meaning that they put some strain on our body. Our bodies metabolize all kinds of things, and while doing so, the body "wears out". This process is called "aging". Even oxygen, which we breathe from the air, slowly damages cells in our body. Our body repairs things, but this ability is not infinite and sooner or (hopefully) later our bodies get old and ill. What these lists tell us is that indeed nearly everything puts some strain on the body, even things like being exposed to fine particles of SiO2 or wearing silver jewelry, but I see this as natural life.

A similar discussion exists for what we eat and drink. Red meat is a class I carcinogen, ethanol is also, but I also see that as a natural limitation of the mechanisms in our body. We don't have infinite lifetime, we wear out.

crystal grower - 27-4-2016 at 23:26

Oh my god ! All the seasides rivers and deserts full of toxic SiO2 !!!!

woelen - 28-4-2016 at 01:18

This list holds many chemicals, but for some of them it is the form in which the chemical is used. E.g. SiO2 in the form of fine particles is regarded as problematic, the same is true for TiO2 and CeO2.

I also checked the details of the entry for silver and this is for particles smaller than 1 mm. These can easily get into water and silver metal is considered very toxic. So, we still may wear our silver jewelry, but small silver granules or powders soon are not allowed for private use anymore.

For most chemicals, the concern simply is for the chemical itself in whatever form (e.g. methanol, sodium sulfite, many solvents), but for some inert chemicals the concern is for granules or powders or particles of a specific shape.

If we summarize all these regulations, then we can conclude that by 2020 or so the general public will not be allowed anymore to use and possess:
- strong oxidizers (explosives precursors)
- strong acids (solutions with pH < 1, explosives precursors)
- strong bases (solids and solutions with pH > 13, toxic, corrosive)
- many transition metal salts (toxic, some of them carcinogen or reproductive risk)
- fine powders of inert materials (inhalation risk, lung issues)
- metal powders (explosives precursors, some of them toxic for water life)
- organic solvents (most of them are toxic and the few non-toxic ones are either explosives precursors or carry the label F+ for extremely flammable)
- a selection of elements either as element or in compounds (arsenic, antimony, lead, beryllium, cadmium, barium, mercury, boron, thallium)
- a selection of very commonly used pure chemicals (e.g. graphite, methanol, C-7 and higher alcohols, sulfites, soluble silicates)
These classes partially overlap.

I get the impression that these regulations are meant to ban the private use of ANY pure chemical (except some really mundane stuff like some selected metals in bulk form, salt, sodium bicarbonate and dilute acetic acid). Nearly all chemicals fall into a certain class, even very common ones.

phlogiston - 28-4-2016 at 01:42

In the column 'initial grounds for concern', many entries list 'consumer use', which I find confusing.
Do they mean that the listed compound is used by consumers? Would that not be an argument to hesitate with regulation, lest you ban a consumer product for which no good substitute exists?

Similarly, 'high (aggregated) tonnage' seems odd. If a large amount is used, it is probably a very useful chemical. If it is banned, manufacturers or consumers will try to find an alternative. That alternative may not be on the list, because it is currently not used in large quantities, and perhaps more expensive (or even more hazardous!). So, then the list will be expanded to include this alternative compound that is now also used in large quantities, and consumers will find yet another alternative. It goes on and on until every thing is on the list.

I wander how they will deal with the use of these compounds in products. Even if they are not available as pure compounds to consumers, exposure of consumers will continue to occur.

A few decades from now, we will look back with amazement at the times when we were allowed to paint our own house and fill our own car with gas. No joke, I actually believe that may happen.

BJ68 - 28-4-2016 at 03:28

It´s bad but not so bad...

a) If you look at the PACT – RMOA and hazard assessment activities List http://echa.europa.eu/en/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/sub... you will find substances which this outcome:
"No need to initiate further regulatory risk management action at this time."
Practical example: Sodium hydroxide http://echa.europa.eu/en/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/sub...
If you look at the PDF "RMOA conclusion document / Hazard Assessment outcome document" http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/eeec3441-d96a-4c46-b91... you will see, that the target where drain cleaners and the Swedish EPA thinks until now no further actions are needed. But read the points 3. and 4. of this PDF.

So there are small chances that substances are not regulated even they are on assessment...

b) If you go further in the list you will find this "nice" link from the Danish EPA:
http://mst.dk/service/publikationer/publikationsarkiv/2011/m...

I am asking me if the assessments are truly at scientific facts or if they are partly made from political prospects....

c) "Nice" found:
Oil of Wintergreen Methyl salicylate should be CMR and ED
http://echa.europa.eu/addressing-chemicals-of-concern/substa...

Edit: I mentioned before, but here is the Link....

@phlogiston

Yes that thing "Consumer use" hits me, too.....but if you look at page 3 at this PDF http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13628/background_doc_c... you will find this:

Quote:

Exposure related selection criteria:
 Wide dispersive use5
o The number of sites of use
o Pattern and amount of releases/exposure
o The number and type of reported uses and exposure scenarios from different registrants
o The substance is incorporated into mixtures or articles used by the public (e.g. consumers)
o The potential size of the exposed population
 Number of using sites if emission due to industrial use
 Consumer use and exposure of sensitive subpopulations such as children
 Aggregated tonnage

so it´s a little more understandable, but it shows IMHO a tendency to a general chemical prohibition or at least restriction for public use.

Bj68

[Edited on 28-4-2016 by BJ68]

Chem Rage - 3-5-2016 at 22:34

An earlier poster remarked that the wicked actions of A. Brieveik and extremists of a certain religious persuasion have given the political elite an excuse to clamp down on our liberties further; the repressive blanket bans and restrictions of useful and common "work horse" chemicals we take for granted being one end result of this.

The poster may indeed be correct. It could be that some- if not all- of these wicked actions attributed to extremists are False Flag operations carried out by a hostile political "elite"- a foreign entity- firmly entrenched in Western governments; this hostile "elite" are the ultimate masters in deception, psychological manipulation and subversion.

The same "elite"- a hostile foreign entity firmly entrenched in Western governments- are trying to curtail freedoms in the USA; their powerful lobbying groups are at the forefront in the push for the criminalisation of handgun ownership by law-abiding and peaceful American citizens. Hypocritically, however, the same lobbyists are silent over the fact that ordinary citizens in Israel are allow to carry submachine guns!!

See this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDr6SjPMRzs&bpctr=146234...

[Edited on 4-5-2016 by Chem Rage]

Herr Haber - 7-5-2016 at 07:13

Quote: Originally posted by woelen

In only 5 years time the climate for amateur chemistry has gone from quite relaxed to extremely restrictive. I think the EU will soon be among the most restrictive areas in the world when it comes to amateur chemistry.

[Edited on 8-4-16 by woelen]

Everyone say "Thank you Anders Breivik"
All this was put in motions way before we had Djihadis coming back from conflict zones...
I am Lucky enough to have a good relation with the people at an online drugstore and they tell me a couple of things about why this or that is happening and what's coming next.
Oddly enough they still sell 35% H202 but dont sell Boron compounds anymore for the reasons you mentioned.
They tell me of stories about grand mothers who used boric acid and sugar to kill ants that are now disappointed. Same stories about trichloroethylene (cant imagine how old people asking for this are: thats an old ban!).
We were talking about Crystal growing and they told me that the next product to go will be... copper sulfate !

Considering the first time I contacted them was for advice on how to remove grease stains from this and that I'm glad we got into a good Relationship otherwise they might frown at my current orders of NaNO3 and H2SO4

Rosco Bodine - 7-5-2016 at 07:55

Fertilizers are now over regulated and overpriced "jihadi safe" inferior formulations due to the exclusions of needed nitrates and substitutions generally of sulfates in those formulations of what nitrates should correctly be there.

Avoiding a correct identification of what / who EXACTLY is the security threat that is causing a loss of QUALITY OF LIFE generally for others who are not a member of the precisely identified problem demographic that is turning life to shit for others, is practicing the deceit that is in effect a type of blasphemy law where it is forbidden as being "hate speech" to with absolute precision correctly and truthfully identify the problem that is a particular demographic identity as a common denominator about that distinct demographic.

To blame any generic "extremists" as being the "neutral identity" PC handicapped / redesignated amorphous kind of "generalized threat" is a huge lie and disinformation.
Does anyone really need to review the case of Brevik to understand that he was by a brutal and evil means attempting as it were to fight fire with fire for the shock value it would have simply to attempt to call attention to an alarm being raised? The sad case of Brevik to me seemed to be like a man who saw a building on fire and was shouting the alarm to none who would listen, so as a misguided "reverse psychology" and "aversion therapy" he had the bright idea to make hotter the fire that was being ignored .......and make it so hot it could not be ignored any longer. Of course it was a fine madness and evil to inflict such "shock therapy" to try to call attention to an already existing problem and more serious "threat" than any one person like Brevik or a dozen Breviks. Brevik was calling alarm to the thousands of others who do not have a scandanavian name but who are foreign invaders destroying the racial and cultural identity of Europe .......at a cost more dear than any hundred Breviks .......while Europe ignores that threat and denies what is the identity of that threat because the dhimmitude of Europe has put in effect blasphemy laws which have redefined simply speaking the truth as being prohibited "hate speech". A virtually identical "blasphemy law" has been put in effect on this discussion board.

So everybody knows what is the real problem but no one will speak it. Does that policy of censorship make the problem go away or solve it? No, that dishonesty simply empowers a lie that seeks to redefine reality and deny what the actual problem is.

aga - 7-5-2016 at 08:29

Not sure why everyone thinks the EU is one single entity.

Here in Spain you can go to any supermarket for 20% HCl, Distilled water and sodium hydroxide, all cheap.

At any Ironmongers' you can buy :-
1 litre 98% H₂SO₄ for 5 euros (also at a plumber's shop).
12% sodium hypochlorite (20 litres, 17 euros)

At a Garden Centre you can buy :-
Nitric Acid (min 30 litres, 9 euros)
Phosphoric acid (min 20 litres, 26 euros)
Potassium Nitrate (min 20kg)
Ammonium Nitrate (min 25kg)
Flowers of Sulphur (1 euro a kilo)
Cannabis seeds
Bee Hives
Live chickens

It is Illegal here to keep Bees without a licence, although you can have as many chickens as you like.

In the UK you'd be burnt at an equal-opportunities stake for trying to buy Any of those items !

Seems i can have some guns and ammo as well if i want, same as Switzerland, Germany, France, Austria etc.

(i don't want one because their single purpose it to just kill things)

Pages: 1 2 3