Freeper Breaks Foam Problem Story at FR First!!!

Freerepublic ^ | 4/1/03 | Freepers

[Jael]

Freepers are the best. :-)

[Black Agnes]

Did you catch the reply during the news conference this morning/afternoon about their installing more 'environmentally friendly' foam due to EPA regulations or some such?

Course, it'll be covered up and never make national news or anything.

[Jael]

Freeper breaks foam issue story. :-)

[Jael]

Yes, I did notice that. They keep focusing on the tiles, but only a few are breaking the enviroment foam issue. (While still discussing the foam itself.)

NASA was probably pressured by the EPA to do it. (Just a guess.)

[unspun]

My $.02 worth says ice, not foam.

[davisfh]

The formula was changed around 1996/1997 to make it more "environmentally friendly." I'm sure that no consideration was given to manned space flight safety when this happened.

The fact that the spray on foam insulation (SOFI) formula was changed should be questioned, but it won't be. It's doubtful that you'll ever see anything about this on the evening news.

[Lancey Howard]

Thanks for the ping!
The memory of our astronauts and the integrity of the space program demand that no stone can be left unturned. Congratulations to Free Republic and to the great people here who continue to make it work.

[Chad Fairbanks]

Who are you, and how did I end up on your ping list? :0)

[Alamo-Girl]

Wow! Way to go!!!

[Lancey Howard]

By the way, I maintain that the most pertinent part of this story is the environment-friendly lunacy that lead to the production of an inferior, more dangerous foam insulation.

Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production. I want to know if the environmental extremists and their Democrat sponsors bear responsibility for the horrible deaths of seven astronauts.

[Ken H]

Yeah, point blank, I want to know if NASA was forced by the Clinton EPA in 1997 (or thereabouts) to produce the foam without benefit of freon in its production.

Good question.

[Ken H]

The lead story on the national newsfeed (I think from ABC) on the radio was the change in the foam production in 1997.

They did not give any more details.

They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.

[Ken H]

FYI

[JohnBovenmyer]

My $.02 worth says ice, not foam.

It amounts to the same thing if the new "enviro friendly" foam provided less insulation than the original foam. Then you'd be more likely to have ice form on it. Both the thermal and the structural qualities of the foam are important here. Degrading either would be problematic.

[Lancey Howard]

The lead story on the national newsfeed (I think from ABC) on the radio was the change in the foam production in 1997. They did mention that records of this were being impounded but I don't think it mentioned who was doing the impounding.

First I heard about this.
This is very interesting.

[Black Agnes]

Very interesting. The Thot Plickens.

Course, if it's the EPA doing the impounding, they'll lose or shred them or otherwise destroy them like they did under Carol Browner.

[zeaal]

Sounds like FreeRepublic News Service FRNS!

[Jael]

Thanks!!

Just also want to add how much I respect you for everything you did to document the Clinton years. What a resource.

[Jael]

Did you see this one? It's heartbreaking.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833885/posts