The leftist utopian vision for the future of laundry...
Posted on 01/29/2007 4:42:23 AM PST by radar101
Ban on solvent may be disastrous for state's businesses
In the near future, the "Dry Clean Only" tag on clothes may become a thing of the past.
Last week at a meeting in Sacramento, California Air Resources Board enacted the nation's first statewide ban of perchloroethylene - a toxic solvent used in more than 70 percent of the state's dry-cleaning machines.
At the urging of environmentalists, dry cleaners will be banned from buying machines that rely on perchloroethylene beginning in January 2008. Also, those with such equipment must halt using them by 2023.
In 1991, the state declared perchloroethylene a toxic chemical.
"It's not good (for the industry)" said Nicholas Naccara, owner of Empire Cleaners in Rancho Cucamonga.
Naccara's equipment uses perchloroethylene, a popular dry-cleaning method in which the solvent replaces water to clean fabrics.
Naccara, who owns two dry cleaners and has been in the business for 10 years, said the cost of changing his machines will affect his businesses, both of which are already struggling due to rent increases.
"If you have to take the old (machines) out and put in new ones, you have to raise the prices," he said.
The new regulations will raise a customer's bill at least 10 percent, according to CARB estimates.
Chino Hills resident Kurt Allan said he will continue to utilize cleaners' services even if the prices rise, but said he hopes alternatives will become available.
"I just hope there are other alternatives that don't put the cost of dry cleaning out of reach," said Allan, who agrees with the ban because it will be better for the environment.
Alice Orona, of Ontario, who takes her clothes to the cleaners once a week, was surprised to learn most dry cleaners use a soon-to-be-banned toxic chemical.
"I'm still going to get my clothes dry-cleaned," Orona said. "Even if the cost goes up."
The owner of Ontario Cleaners, Daniel Jussicha, said one reason he switched to a nontoxic wet-cleaning method, which uses carbon dioxide, is because his landlord threatened to raise his rent if he didn't dispose of a perchloroethylene machine.
On a regular basis, the landlord sent an inspector over to make sure the harmful liquid wasn't damaging the floor, said Jussicha, who was told he would also have to seal the floor if he continued.
"That would cost about $8,000," he said.
In October 2004, Jussicha installed the wet cleaning system.
Last week, he was invited to the air resources board's hearing in Sacramento, where he shared the results from his environmentally friendly method.
"I spoke about safety and health issues, and cleaning results," he said.
Jussicha said he used to carry an inhaler for asthma because it would flare up when the old machine was running due to the strong fumes. Now, he rarely uses it.
Health officials told the board that perchloroethylene could cause several cancers, including esophageal, lymphoma, cervical and bladder cancer.
"Coalition for Clean Air has been working for more than a decade to remove this toxin from dry cleaning," said Annette Kondo, spokeswoman for CFCA, an environmental group.
She said she hopes the statewide ban will spread to the rest of the country.
"We are the first state to do this, and it's the wave of the future," she said.
Kondo said the 15-year phaseout is to give the small business owner plenty of time to convert.
Reports show that 85 percent of dry cleaners are small business owners with slim profit margins. The new equipment costs between $41,000 and $175,000.
Jussicha said he paid $40,000 for his wet cleaning system, but took advantage of rebates totaling $20,000 offered as an incentive by the state and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Naccara said the ban may force dry-cleaning business owners out of the state, and he's not looking forward to making the change.
"Why is the perch only banned here?" he said. "There's no proof it causes cancer."
Perchloroethylene's cleaning capabilities make it the best chemical to remove grease and oil.
Jussicha said the wet cleaning system works great on stains because most stains are water-based.
"If you wash it with a water-based system, it will easily wash out," he said.
Another dry-cleaning option uses hydrocarbons, which are a source of air pollution, and environmentalists have urged the state ban its use as well.
Jussicha said he chose the wet cleaning method because the hydrocarbon system uses flammable chemicals similar to diesel.
Staff writer Shelli DeRobertis can be reached by e-mail at shelli.derobertis@dailybulletin.com, or by phone at (909) 483-8555.
Ludicrous. The cost of new equipment will just be factored into the cost of the service.
As long as the regulations apply to all cleaners, none will have a competitive advantage or disadvantage. Customers will continue to use the service despite the increased price, as the alternative is ruining expensive clothes.
It looks like they're being given a generous change-over period.
Hey, wait a minute ... carbon dioxide? environmentally friendly? what about global warming??? what good will clean clothes do when we're all under water? How can this beeeeeeeeeeeeee?
It's been 20 years since I had anything dry cleaned.
How do they get these solvents out of the cloths they clean?
The difference is the fluid isn't vented to the atmosphere, it's reclaimed because the machine is a closed system.
Very little fluid is wasted if the process is done properly.
I'm just wondering how much residue is left.
Which is worse for Kalifornia's environment?
The Chemicals used in dry cleaning
or
The millions of illegals who breath the air, pass gas, burn fuels, consume resources, pollute the countryside where they slip across the border, etc... The CO2 emissions alone.....well, anyway...
They don't really need clean clothes in California.
Got me wondering as well. I figured it was highly volatile, so all of it gets evaporated...but if there's residue that's going to remain, it can't be good.
It can be nasty stuff if it's not handled properly but it's also quite expensive so it's to the drycleaners advantage to reclaim every bit possible.
Doesn't California also often have severe droughts? Won't this ban add to the water problem?
The leftist utopian vision for the future of laundry...
Dry cleaning costs are already outrageous. Invest in a high end front loading washing machine, they use less electricity, and the wash cycle is such that most fabrics can be cleaned effectively, many of which are tagged as dry clean only. Suits, sports jackets, etc. still need to be dry cleaned but there are a lot of items that can be effectively cleaned at home.
Uh, whoa!!!
The extent to which the cost of the new equipment will "just be factored into the 'cost' of the service" depends on the relative price elasticities of supply and demand. If supply is very inelastic or demand is very elastic, the supplier would end up eating most of the increase in cost.
I hope they exit the state. The rest of the U.S. has benefited from California's craziness for years. We've gotten some of our best professionals and experts after they fled the Golden State. Why stop with dry cleaning?
Fricking idiot. The alternatives will be worse than the product banned.
Junk science rides again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.