The EPA banned CCA pressure treated lumber a couple years ago, though the actual ban is currently on hold and one can still purchase CCA lumber at any building supply store.
Obviously, both lumber companies and wood treatment plants are worried about the ban and are certainly seeking other ways to treat lumber that would pass EPA specifications.
Since paint is itself a mild form of wood treatment, it wouldn't be very difficult for the Polymer Science people to redirect their research in the effort to find a replacement for CCA. Now, this wouldn't be a bad thing, but given the level of corruptness Klumb and Thames maintain (both covert and overt), I'm sure that if they are investigating this, they're doing so to line their own pockets with patent monies. Furthermore, this could be the reason Thames was installed as president and the reason Klumb steadfastly refuses to fire him.
After a bit of research -- in between studying for finals -- I have found that polymer scientists have been searching for a feasible alternative to CCA lumber. The present alternatives are both very expensive and less effective than CCA lumber.
Though I've found nothing on either Klumb or Thames' possible interest in CCA alternatives, as secretive as the two are, it wouldn't surprise me if it is part of their agenda.
Does anyone know if Poly Sci is researching anything along these lines?
__________________
Invictus
Date:
RE: RE: Klumb &Thames + EPA ban = two rich (er) pe
quote: Originally posted by: Sarge " Does anyone know if Poly Sci is researching anything along these lines? "
Since I'm terminally addicted to feeding conspiracy theories, I'll throw in that the USM chemistry & environmental science depts did quite a bit of toxicology work on wood preservatives back in the '70s. There was a project involving the treatment plant south of the H'burg Country Club...
That should be enough fodder for folks with a Thomas Cooley sized imagination