Phosphates are expensive, not only in production but also in cleanup. They need to be removed from the wastewater, or they will disrupt the phosphor cycle and cause eutrophication. Admittedly, the phosphates contained in laundry detergent are unlikely to cause a major issue, being dwarfed by phosphate mining and water purification.
I believe the environmental concern is the reason recent editions of Tide have elected against phosphate use, and phosphate laundry powders need to be hunted down in retail stores (once, they were ubiquitous).
If you actually believe this crap, then don't buy my products. As you already have acknowledged, the residential contributions of phosphates to wastewater systems is miniscule; particularly as compared to what industry does, and industry isn't limited in this regard. I should know, since I use industrial chemicals to create my products, bought legally & without restrictions within the commercial/industrial cleaning products market. The big complaint about phosphates is that there is some evidence that phosphates favor the growth of freshwater alge (pond scum), thus negatively affecting the habitats of fish. This has nominally zero bearing on the environment, unless you happen to be directly dumping your wastewater into streams untreated; which is and has been a crime anywhere in the US for at least 80 years. And if you are doing any such thing, there are many other things more hazardous to fish in there than phosphates. If you use a municipal treatment plant, they artificially create conditions ideal for either anarobic or arobic breakdown; which happen to be conditions ideal for the growth of pod scum anyway. If you live in the countryside and depend upon an individual system, they all pretty much do the same thing on a more local scale. By the time the water leaves the system, it's oxygenated and not at all harmful for fish; even if the levels of phosphates that you use in you dishwasher or washing machine were not increadiblely diluted just by the amount of water you flush down your California approved toilet. There will be phostphates in my formulas. It does wonders for the dard water problem that aaffects just about every American household that is not within 100 miles of the West Coast. |
|
|
|
Color me interested. If it works better than Tide, then I know my wife would like it.
Definately works better than Tide. So, what's the cost per load at 2 tbsp per load?
Quite a bit more than Tide. |
|
|
|
How much do you think you could fit in a Medium or Large flat rate USPS Priority Mail box?
I agree with this guy. Have you checked the "If it fits if ships" boxes? Yes, I have. They don't really offer any advantage, because the powder is relatively light and volumous. |
|
|
|
I am more interested in being able to boycott Walmart or other retailers along with the banking system and credit cards than save a few pennies.
Plus, my cups all have scum on them unless I wash by hand because the dishwasher detergent does not actually clean!
I'll see what I can come up with, and I'm certain that a powdered dishwasher detergent would be much more economical to ship; both because it requires even less per load and because I think that I can make it even more concentrated than the clothes detergent, due to the fact that a couple of those sodiums serve no purpose in a dishwasher. As long as I don't need to substitute other ingredients, I can make this stuff very concentrated. |
|
|
|
You could make a small fortune selling "illegal" dishwasher detergent with phosphates in it.
As someone who knows his soap history, I can say this is very true! Phosphate-based soaps were banned for causing algae blooms (and other environmental problems) and nothing since has worked as well. Thinking about it, perhaps using old washing-machine water (with phosphates) in a greywater system, would make excellent water for plants!  (real) lye soap
sodium-chloride
sodium-carbonate (fixed)
sodium-tetraborate
sodium-triphosphate.
All four sodiums are white powders, while the soap looks like shredded American cheese.
I am aware of the value of phosphates. The real question is the bitcoin community aware of the value of phosphates, because they aren't cheap and they aren't in any residential/retail cleaning products (in any significant concentration) anymore. That is what I'm competing with, BTW. If the bitcoin community wants phosphates in their clothes detergent, I have that; and if the bitcoin community wants phosphates in their dishwashing detergent, I can do that too. As I said before, my detergent has five ingredients, all of which serve a particular purpose and only one of which is actual soap. |
|
|
|
|
Okay. Fully wrapped and ready to ship, the remainder of my first batch weighs 4.52 pounds. I checked the major package shippers' websites for quotes, using my own zip code and one chosen for California to get an idea how much it would cost to ship. The cheapest quote that I could get was from UPS Ground for $17.62, but my prior statement about costs says that 4.5 pounds works out to be $14.40, so the actual cost of shipping is going to be the minimum and I'd certainly be taking a loss at anything under a $25 sale. So it looks like I can't compete here with the cost of shipping, which is what I was afraid of.
If anyone is willing to pay 2.5 BTC for my remainder of a batch, just let me know. Otherwise I'm just going to use it myself.
|
|
|
|
I don't meet the post count stipulation but I would be willing to try this in my HE (high efficiency) washer and report back. Asked previously, HE washer is this: http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-an-high-efficiency-washing-machine.htmNormally needs "special" detergent to avoid suds which don't get cleaned off the clothes due to the different agitation, and your washer will get smelly over time if you use regular stuff. I'm sorry. I forgot about this. You'll be at the top of my list as soon as I make another batch. Assuming that I do. |
|
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19439679You know what this looks like to me? KKK in 1950's Mississippi, only wearing all black instead of white. You know what else black people in 1950's Mississippi have in common with Hungarian Roma in 2012? No practical access to defensive firearms. So gun control advocates, why do you hate racial minorities the world over, anyway? I Know! It's a convient "final solution" to the overpopulation problem, right?!
|
|
|
|
Well you can't deny that anarchism has made a pretty bad name for itself with the Dogma of Violence from the past century. Of course, the movement is evolving but the past has a powerful presence.
Also, the fact that anarchists generally would like to reserve the power to hurt other people to themselves and would not give it up to some controlling structure sounds quite dangerous ("I don't care about the laws of the land, the decision what is good or bad lies entirely with me and I reserve the right to use violence to defend my values")
Not that I completely denounce the ideas, but I'm generally careful in declaring support for them.
That said, I think in the next say 10 years, terrorists would still remain mostly Muslim in the eye of the mainstream media. With the small addition of far-right crackpots like Breivik.
No, not quite. The main reason that violence is associated with anarchism (particularly in Europe) is because Karl Marx theorized that a true communist society was impossible so long as the capitalist society remained stable, thus a stage requiring the violent destruction of the capitalist system is required. From this perspective, anarchists are not seeking a stable society sans-government (or even sans-capitalism per se) they are actively seeking an unstable society in the hopes that insability and unrest will provoke the masses to react by seeking out an alternative social structure since "capitalism has failed". Of course, they expect that capitalism will fail with a little push, but it never has before. In the long run, most European anarchists (and many American anarchists of similar stripe) are actually marxists, whether they realize it or not. Many don't, since many are just young punks looking for a reason to break stuff and set building ablaze. Conflict is the natural state of mankind; peace requires effort, and therefore is not the natural state of mankind. A true free market encourages peaceful trade, both at the individual level and the international level; and therefore discourages warfare. It's a pity that we haven't had anything close to a true free market in this country since at least 1913. Bitcoin's greatest promise (IMHO) is to bring back such free markets, first in an online setting then everywhere, in everything that we do simply by permitting us to ignore the state if we wish. An entire world interacting in tiny, niche markets that extend the world over, in a System D fashion, cannot be regulated any more effectively today than a tax on tea in 1776 or a tax on whiskey in 1791. |
|
|
|
|
Alright, I've been neglecting my business here too long. So far, I have made exactly one batch, from which a few samples have been sent. I have taken the remainder of that batch, and poured it into a cleaned & dried plastic coffee can. The large size you can get from Sam's Club. It's not quite full. I've taped it up, and intend to weigh it. I'm not sure exactly how much a fluid ounce (one washload) of this mixed power actually weighs, but I intend to offer it at the BTC equal to 20 cents per ounce or actual shipping costs, whichever is greater. This is a little more than what Gain costs per washload at my local WalMart; but 1) I think my stuff is better (although I might be biased) and 2) there is bound to be more washloads than ounces. If it all works out okay, I'm going to start ordering my materials in more economical volumes; as well as work on a dishwasher formula.
|
|
|
|
A borderline-homicidal Caucasian is more likely to kill a Negroid than he is to kill another Caucasian, considering primal xenophobia and all.
Seriously, dude; where did you pull that bullshit from? |
|
|
|
But less restrictive than ten, no? Do you think that supports your position?
No. I somewhat padded my answer, and I wanted to see if you gonna fall for it too. I can't recall a state that is more restrictive than Liechtenstein. Liechtenstein is about as restrictive as California, which is like the most restrictive state. You can try to argue about open carry, but Liechtenstein has restrictions also, and California allows open carry in unincorporated areas. 40 states are shall issue. 11 states are may issue, with few shall issue in practice. I am not sure what are you trying to prove to me? That gun control reduces crime? I'm not really trying to "prove" anything, but it does show how much culture matters. And cali is not the most restrictive from a legal perspective, that honor goes to Wisconsin, Illinois or the District of Columbia, all of which (until very recently) are no-issue states. Cali is a may-issue state, but has more restrictive 'valid reasons' than Liechtenstein according to the link I referenced, because Cali doesn't honor "personal protection" as a legitimate cause unless you're a member of the state justice apparatus already, such as a prosecutor. Granted, I could get a shotgun in Cali for inside my own home, and I can't determine if that is the case in Liechtenstein, but all of these comparisons are apples to oranges, due to variations in local culture and demographics. Both San Fransico & Detroit are very liberal politcally, and have very restrictive gun regulations, with populations well in excess of Leichtenstin; but while San Fran is about as dangerous as my own mid-sized mid-eastern city (which is to say, not very dangerous) Detroit is one of the most dangerous places on Earth. There is no definitive evidence that gun control has any non-neglible effect on crime, and all the evidence in the world that it does have an effect on the legal availability of firearms and only the legal availablilty of firearms. We can both produce plenty of studies that confirm our biases, no doubt. What you guys seem to lack ability to do is justify why? By what logic do you guys justify subjugating my daughter to her armed rapist? Maybe gun control would exchange the rapist's primary weapon from a handgun to a legth of iron pipe or a knife, but what consolation is that? So that I can say at her funeral, "at least he didn't shoot her"? Even if gun control laws did suppress overall crime rates, who are you to deny my daughter her basic human right of self-preservation? |
|
|
|
So much big fail. A country that is more restrictive than 40 states. LOL But less restrictive than ten, no? Do you think that supports your position? Notablely less restrictive than the Swiss, which is a country with one of the highest rates of gun possesion in the world. It's not the restrictiveness of guns laws that is the determinate factor, but the availabilty of same. The core flaw in gun control logic is that laws passed by governments automaticly have the intended effects on the availabilty of firearems. The Swiss deliberately arm thier entire population, teach them to use them, and then expect them to abid the publicly defined use of them. This is the very definition of "a well regulated militia". For that matter, the framers of the Constitution got the idea from the Swiss. But if you think that, should some violent nutjub takes his weapon into the twon square and stars popping pedestrians, that the guy who opened his ammo box and shot that nutjob has to worry about being prosecuted for opening his sealed box, you're deluded. |
|
|
|
So much big fail. A country that is more restrictive than 40 states. LOL But less restrictive than ten, no? Do you think that supports your position? |
|
|
|
No cheating, google searching or wikipedia is not allowed. Any guesses?
Uh Vatican? The smallest country? Monaco after? The vatican doesn't issue weapons permits, so no. Not Monaco either. |
|
|
|
|
Vampire, I don't think that you know what a militia is.
Quick quiz, gun banners! Which European nation fits this description?
"...carrying a firearm in plain view in a public place is allowed without a permit, with some restrictions..."
"...an understanding of firearms safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practial training course is not required for a firearms license"
emphasis is mine
"...private possesion of handguns (pistols and revolvers) is permitted under license..."
"...annual homicides by firearms total
2008: 1
2007: 0
2006: 0
2005: 0"
No, that was not per 100,000 or some such, that was total.
This nation would be considered a "may issue" state if it was here in the US, per this data point...
"Applicants for a gun owners license in (redacted) are required to prove genuine reason to possess a firearm, for example hunting, target shooting, collection, personal protection, security"
Additionally, this particular nation is consider to be by some to be the closest example of a libertarian state in our modern world, including by hardcore libertarians such as Lew Rockwell fellows.
No cheating, google searching or wikipedia is not allowed. Any guesses?
|
|
|
|
I'm thinking about submitting this to their site, but this looks like a potential candidate for a printable gun: http://heizerfirearms.com/Good God man! Those are too expensive for what they are! You can get a BondArms derringer for less than that thing! http://bondarms.com/ |
|
|
|
Furthermore, the 'ban' on importation or manufacture of full-auto weapons are, in fact, not a complete ban. There are exceptions, some of them notable. For example, a FN P-90 is on my wishlist, but falls under the aforementioned importation ban. Except for policemen. But once it's been imported for a cop, and said cop has owned it for a period of time (2 years, IIRC) then a standard Class III transfer & ATF tax stamp is all that is required for that cop to sell that firearm to any other citizen with the correct permit to buy one. I do not believe that such a process is actually legal. I'm gonna need a link on that. First off, I do not believe policeman can "own" fully automatic weapons. They are treated as any other citizen under these laws. They may be issued one by a department but they do not own it and can not sell it. Second, it is my understanding that no fully automatic manufactured after 1986 can enter the legal market as per FOPA. I'd be interested if you could provide links to show otherwise. All this took was one google search for the term "can cops buy automatic weapons?". This one looks like it's illegal to do this in cali, but the cops do it anyway. http://calcoastnews.com/2011/12/peace-officers-buying-and-selling-assault-weapons/I'm not finding directly applicable data on actual full auto weapons, but this is loosely related... "Q: Are SAWs and LCAFDs marked “Restricted law enforcement/government use only” or “For export only” now legal to sell to civilians in the United States? Yes. SAWs and LCAFDs are no longer prohibited. Therefore, firearms with the restrictive markings are legal to transfer to civilians in the United States, and it is legal for non-prohibited civilians to possess them. All civilians may possess LCAFDs." http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/saws-and-lcafds.htmlI can't find any current data on an import ban for automatic weapons, not even on teh BATF site. Are you sure you are not thinking of the assault weapons ban? That has expired. |
|
|
|
|
The two terms have been largely the same in the minds of the general public for decades.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
