Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  ..  9    11  
Author: Subject: Looking over the border: EU-Regulations
Σldritch
National Hazard
****




Posts: 250
Registered: 22-3-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 8-5-2018 at 13:14


We are supposed to be mad scientists but scientists none than less, right? Neither philosophy nor morals are scientific. Questioning the nature of political entities through those models is meaningless. Do not ask if states are good or bad but ask why do states exist at all? And maybe we should do that in another thread, not that i am any less guilty.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 8-5-2018 at 16:38


Ph.D. is a Latin abbreviation meaning "doctor of philosophy".....
Latin, Philosophiae Doctor...or Dr.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy

Philosophy - literally, "Love of Wisdom" , synonyms are Thinking, Thought, Reasoning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

Doctor - Latin, literally, "teacher"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctorate

"Doctor" is also originally a synonym for "master" as used by an apprentice student

Philosophy of Science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

"Scientism"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

Logical Positivism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_positivism

Science - from Latin, scientia - literally, "knowledge"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

Demarcation Problem - What is or isn't "science"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem

Uh oh, here is another one that knows more than they should know, and more than they can know, so what shall we do with this one? :D


[Edited on 5/9/2018 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
User13579
Harmless
*




Posts: 14
Registered: 27-2-2018
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 9-5-2018 at 10:49


Quote: Originally posted by Σldritch  
Neither philosophy nor morals are scientific

Have you heard of the term 'natural philosophy'? The word 'scientist' is quite a recent invention -- in fact it was proposed as a joke by a natural philosopher! Philosophy of nature, you see? Scientific theories, after all, are not facts per se, but evolving philosophies which are continually being developed through experimental enquiry. In my worldview nothing can be outside of nature, so certainly human morals could be subjected to the same experimental philosophic enquiry. In fact they are in deed, but I can't remember the name of the field. 'Ethology' comes to mind but I think that's an outdated term.

[Edited on 9-5-2018 by User13579]

[Edited on 9-5-2018 by User13579]

[Edited on 9-5-2018 by User13579]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Σldritch
National Hazard
****




Posts: 250
Registered: 22-3-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 9-5-2018 at 13:02


It seems we are not talking about the same thing, science to me is a model to make other models which is based on some fundamental assumptions which are (if i can remember correctly):

1. The universe is real.

2. We can affect the universe.

3. The universe has predictable behavior.

From these assumptions we can deduce other things and create better scientific models, the culmination of which is modern science. Philosophy can be considered a early scientific meta model. Theoretically there should be some line of reasoning and experiments that lead to our current models but in reality it is more messy as people are not "perfect". Where the word comes from does not really matter. Of course science can mean different things to different people which you have proven very well though also very redundantly.

The point is: approach politics as a any other problem. Do not make dubious assumptions. What i wanted you to do was research political science for your self because i think people are easier to convince if they research their own sources. Especially politics because it is misleading by nature. You seem to have no such reservations though so ill just recommend you De Mesquita's books on politics.

Considering the scientific theory's roots, would not a philosophy forum be fitting? If there is any place on the internet which could have civilized discussion about such topics it should be here. It is too bad political science is so hard to discuss, it is such an interesting subject.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 10-5-2018 at 03:52


Where any word comes from assuredly does matter.

Actual "science" has much more depth and a much broader meaning than the constrained marginal definition that is a common error of many who incorrectly assert what is actually "scientism" (that is a corrupted Newspeak definition of science) is instead supposed to be "science", however what is actual science has a much broader meaning as valued practical "knowledge".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology

Scientific language makes heavy usage of Latin, and to a lesser extent Greek.

Liberty is a derivative of Latin, liber - "free"

Being free from despotic oppression by government is an important aspect of liberty, to pursue science or art or any endeavor.

To recognize and identify correctly that science or any other pursuit of LIBERTY is being obstructed or prohibited by tyrannical and despotic government as part of some grand "social engineering" that DEVALUES liberty for ALL in order to "improve security".....
is NOT "politics".....but is simply stating what is the FACT being observed.

Those who value "cultural diversity" and "political correctness" as some kind of utopianist "enlightenment" to be prioritized and prized so highly that a great LOSS of individual LIBERTY is simply the FAIR PRICE that must be PAID BY ALL in order to facilitate and accommodate what is a truly INCREDIBLE and PREPOSTEROUS "theory" of utopianist social engineers who literally "bet the farm" that mutually exclusive ideologies can be FORCED to "coexist" .....will happily FORFEIT all of their individual LIBERTY to THE STATE as their "price to be paid" and "ethical duty" to "society".
Those "good citizens" of THE NEW WORLD ORDER will become good little drones in the hive mind collective of PC clones who no longer are able to exercise free thought or free action, because
they have become sycophant adherents in the global PC cult and
every LIE it teaches has become adopted by the BRAINWASHED as their own noblest VIRTUE and HIGHEST TRUTH.

That is the "cultural hegemony" that Antonio Gramsci identified. It is also the Orwellian FACT that is too much upon the entire world as a dystopian reality in the present time. The mechanism by which this dystopianism has been implemented is PROPAGANDA which has instead of being correctly identified as advocacy has been misidentified as "knowledge". So much of what too many people "think they know" is pure propaganda they have incorrectly counted as being knowledge. After all, it is what they were "taught" and "learned" well to "believe", without ever testing or confirming what was complete propaganda and was adopted as their "ethic".

Those who DO NOT accept such "social engineering" are refuseniks who are the individuals who more highly value LIBERTY and refuse to comply with the COLLECTIVE. Any authentic virtue is theirs. Such refuseniks are the PATRIOTS and the honorable men.

Statists and their sycophant hive mind following are actual CRIMINALS of a sort that have been around since the beginning of the world, having the same grand utopianist schemes which have been burned down every time they appear throughout history.

[Edited on 5/10/2018 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-5-2019 at 22:42


New Draft: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/wh...

Please read page 19 number 6 and 7 and have the new list in mind: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/wh...

Updated Links for the outlook:

CoRAP
https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/evaluation/c...

RMOA
https://echa.europa.eu/understandng-rmoa

PACT
https://echa.europa.eu/pact

bj68
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1015
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 23-5-2019 at 03:12


It's time to stop being a member of the general public and make a business.

I suppose a Youtube channel about science and experimentations would be enough. The licenses for the public will certainly be even harder to obtain than in the UK.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 24-5-2019 at 01:27


Quote: Originally posted by Herr Haber  
It's time to stop being a member of the general public and make a business.

I suppose a Youtube channel about science and experimentations would be enough. The licenses for the public will certainly be even harder to obtain than in the UK.


Can be a solution, but with a business, the question is, what restrictions will be made from the authorities?

E.g. storage of chemicals or that your equipment is "state-of-the-art" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_the_art#Tort_liabilit... which is mostly not the case, if you use "used" equipment.
I know from some chemistry boards people with home laboratories which are very nicely equipped, they have GC, HPLC, fume hood, fire proof storing cabinets and other stuff. But none of that labs will be approved from the authorities, if one of that guys registers a business, because it is not "state of the art".

The other point is that if you have a business the whole REACH-Complex and here in Germany TRGS https://www.baua.de/EN/Service/Legislative-texts-and-technic... kicks in....included inspections from TÜV, fire police, factory inspectorate (Gewerbeaufsichtsamt). Will be a difficult way and honestly I have my doubts that authorities will accept this and not to try to find reasons to shut down the business forcefully, because for them this is a red rag.

bj68
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1015
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 24-5-2019 at 05:00


True, but I am interested in the status of "independant researcher" which is a blanket word here.
I've been looking and looking for a catch and found none.

Maybe other countries have similar status.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 7699
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 24-5-2019 at 07:27


If these new regulations become active, then of course they are quite annoying for doing experiments, but they do not make things impossible. Most annoying is the limit of 15% H2SO4. For many experiments, however, this concentration is OK, and if you need higher concentrations for a specific experiment you can boil down a little of the acid and increase its concentration. You can even go to 90+ % concentration if you have good pyrex glassware. By boiling down 100 ml of acid you can make nearly 10 ml of such concentrated acid.

These rules prevent someone making large amounts of explosives from gallons of 96% H2SO4 or 65% HNO3, but they still allow me to do experiments on a small scale (milliliters) with concentrated acids because I can make these from the dilute acid. Making a little concentrated HNO3 is possible from boiled down H2SO4 and e.g. KNO3.

The only really difficult thing is nitromethane. We should accept that experimenting with this will be beyond reach of most home chemists.

Of course, I would prefer the system they use in the US, where people can buy certain chemicals (like KClO3 or KClO4), but only limited quantities (IIRC max. 1 lb per year). If limits of e.g. max. 1 liter per year would be used for the concentrated acids, then things would be easier for genuine hobbyists, but as I said above, the regulations do not make experimenting impossible, they only make it less convenient. A really determined hobbyist does not stop experimenting ;)

I have a double feeling with this kind of regulations. In an ideal world we would not need such things, but recent history has proven that unfortunately there are mad people around who use all kinds of materials for killing people. If a certain regulation makes this very hard or impossible, then that is a good thing. Unfortunately there is some collateral damage in the sense that people who use these materials for legit purposes are affected as well and experience inconveniences in doing what they like.





The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at https://woelen.homescience.net
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
phlogiston
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1350
Registered: 26-4-2008
Location: Neon Thorium Erbium Lanthanum Neodymium Sulphur
Member Is Offline

Mood: pyrophoric

[*] posted on 24-5-2019 at 15:34


Considering that the concentration of sulphuric acid in lead-acid batteries is around 30% (w/w), a 15% limit is surprising. Anyone with a car would be in violation. The previous limit was 40% IIRC, which made more sense in that respect.
I find the 4% limit on nitric acid especially inconvenient myself.
I enjoy refining precious metals, and 4% is useless for dissolving base metals or making aqua regia. I now have resort to alternatives, which result in much more (toxic) waste and higher expenses.
As Woelen says, an annual limit on any chemical seems like a great system. It restricts access to dangerous quantities of certain chemicals, yet allows for smal scale experimentation. But the EU seems to have chosen this path, it expect it will be extremely difficult to accomodate this in future legislation.




-----
"If a rocket goes up, who cares where it comes down, that's not my concern said Wernher von Braun" - Tom Lehrer
View user's profile View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 27-5-2019 at 04:45


The problem with boiling down or concentration of weak acids, is the fact, that (so far I see) there is no exceptional regulation for small amounts and according to the new draft there should made no exemption see:

Quote:
(6)Members of the general public should not be able to acquire,
introduce, possess or use those explosives precursors at concentrations at or above certain limit values.
However, it is appropriate to provide for members of the general public to be able to acquire, introduce, possess or use some explosives precursors above that concentration limit for legitimate purposes, only if they hold a licence to do so.

(7) Licences may only be provided for substances in concentrations not exceeding the upper limit set by this Regulation. Above that upper limit, the risk in relation to the illicit manufacture of explosives outweighs the negligible legitimate use by the general public of these explosives precursors, for whom alternatives or lower concentrations can achieve the same effect.


That means your lab book, your notes and even your products can used against you...

See how it works e.g. in Austria:

Quote:
Members of the general public are not allowed to acquire, introduce, possess or use those explosives precursors at concentrations above the limit values.


https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/wh...

If you get caught in Austria the fine will be minimum 500 Euro and the items (plus equipment) will be sized and destroyed.


Edit: and if you have a firearm licence (or other licences), you should think twice....


BJ68

[Edited on 27-5-2019 by BJ68]

[Edited on 27-5-2019 by BJ68]

[Edited on 27-5-2019 by BJ68]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
woelen
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 7699
Registered: 20-8-2005
Location: Netherlands
Member Is Offline

Mood: interested

[*] posted on 27-5-2019 at 09:38


I boil down small quantities and do experiments on a ml-scale. Do you really think that someone, who makes 10 ml or so of concentrated acid from standard available materials and uses that up in small-scale experiments will get caught by police?

Similarly, I made a small quantity of KClO3 from KCl by means of electrolysis (see my webpage on a miniature chlorate cell, useful for making chlorates on a mini-scale of tens of grams on a desk, not suitable for making kilos of it). I still have some 40 grams around of this.

I also have HClO4 and NH4ClO4, which can be purchased, although they are expensive. When I use these in experiments, such as making transition metal salts with a non-coordinating counter-ion, then I do not throw away the waste. I add some KCl and then KClO4 precipitates, almost quantitatively. It's a pity to discard the precious perchlorate, hence my recycling. It also is better for the environment to give the waste a second life, and it can be used for some little fun demos. At the moment I think I have a few tens of grams of recycled KClO4.

I recycle quite a few chemicals, giving reagents a second life in non-critical but funny demos, e.g. for kids, in order to make them fascinated about the subject of science and technology.



[Edited on 27-5-19 by woelen]




The art of wondering makes life worth living...
Want to wonder? Look at https://woelen.homescience.net
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 27-5-2019 at 21:24


Quote: Originally posted by woelen  
I boil down small quantities and do experiments on a ml-scale. Do you really think that someone, who makes 10 ml or so of concentrated acid from standard available materials and uses that up in small-scale experiments will get caught by police?

Similarly, I made a small quantity of KClO3 from KCl by means of electrolysis (see my webpage on a miniature chlorate cell, useful for making chlorates on a mini-scale of tens of grams on a desk, not suitable for making kilos of it). I still have some 40 grams around of this.
[Edited on 27-5-19 by woelen]



Directly not, if you think at "caught in the act", but if you get a "home visit" with search warrant e.g. because you triggered a red flag with some chemical orders and they find nothing, then it´s very likely that they use this things to justify the search warrant otherwise they have to pay compensation.
Know one case in Germany, where the guy got a house search. because he had ordered HF over the internet. They found nothing illegal, but they insisted to scan his computer for pirated material (illegal software) to get some accidental discoveries, which can be prosecuted in Germany.

The other point is, that I have a bad feeling with this lists (and the other things REACH and Co.), because they will be expanded and the supply of chemicals more and more restricted for the general public and this tendency has to be combated.

bj68
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Schleimsäure
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 146
Registered: 31-8-2014
Location: good ole Germany
Member Is Offline

Mood: Probably

[*] posted on 16-6-2019 at 14:56


With the burocrats in Brussels in 10 years you will need a license to buy table salt.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Pumukli
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 620
Registered: 2-3-2014
Location: EU
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 17-6-2019 at 01:46


"this tendency has to be combated"

Yeah.
And who will do the combatting and how? :(
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Herr Haber
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1015
Registered: 29-1-2016
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 17-6-2019 at 04:08


Quote: Originally posted by Pumukli  

Yeah.
And who will do the combatting and how? :(




ud8l.jpg - 29kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hiperion42
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 75
Registered: 24-8-2009
Location: european mainland
Member Is Offline

Mood: overwhelmed

[*] posted on 6-10-2019 at 07:50


Quote: Originally posted by BJ68  
New Draft: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/wh...

Please read page 19 number 6 and 7 and have the new list in mind: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/wh...


The draft was dated 04/2018 and it would apply 1 year after publication.

Any guess on the effective implementation timeline?

greetings

[Edited on 6-10-2019 by hiperion42]




.....ejuu....................................................................Ffg..............................g.............
View user's profile View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 28-12-2020 at 13:11


At least the german authorities made a complete ban for all precursor chemicals, WITHOUT the option for private citizens to get a permit to use higher concentrations which are called "3. Upper limit value for the purpose of licensing under Article 5(3)". That means for nitric acid the highest concentration is 3%, for sulfuric acid 15%.....see "2. Limit value" in
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

Here are the two drafts in german:

http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/235/1923565.pdf

Addition changes: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/241/1924122.pdf

The "interesting" § is §13....in short: The preparation, use, possession of the chemicals with higher concentrations as mentioned in Point "2. Limit value" can be penalized with financial penalty or imprisonment up to 3 years.

bj68
View user's profile View All Posts By User
valeg96
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 228
Registered: 6-4-2014
Location: Italy
Member Is Offline

Mood: Moodless

[*] posted on 28-12-2020 at 13:26


The next step is going to be a EU-wide ban on compounds with free chlorine, like NaClO, Ca(ClO)2, ClO2 and so on. I can bet my ass on that; bleach is already virtually impossible to find in Germany.

After all, you can make chlorine bombs with those.

Funny thing is, a good chemist could probably turn anything into a dangerous device. Just quietly blow a bunch of chromatography silica gel into a building's ventilation system and enjoy everyone getting lung cancer after 30 years. Will they ban sand for personal use? I guess it's going to be hard to recall all european beaches before 01/01/2030.

[Edited on 28-12-2020 by valeg96]





View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
dawt
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 73
Registered: 9-5-2016
Location: EU
Member Is Offline

Mood: fluorescent

[*] posted on 30-12-2020 at 02:48


Quote: Originally posted by BJ68  
Here are the two drafts in german:

http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/235/1923565.pdf

Addition changes: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/241/1924122.pdf

The "interesting" § is §13....in short: The preparation, use, possession of the chemicals with higher concentrations as mentioned in Point "2. Limit value" can be penalized with financial penalty or imprisonment up to 3 years.

bj68


Shit.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
teodor
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 661
Registered: 28-6-2019
Location: Heerenveen
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 30-12-2020 at 04:21


What I don't see and what I expect to see in the documents is reference to some analysis how this ban can impact society. They say "we eliminate such and such dangers" and I can find references to actual cases of terrorism if I have a patience/use a search and follow links. It is good. But it is "pros" section. Where is "cons" section in the analysis? Of course everybody will vote to support "pros" if he don't see any "cons".

And it looks unprofessional like the people who made the document have no idea what is it about.

What I see is just some trend to ban chemicals . By some reason they like to ban chemicals. Everybody respect you if you ban. You don't know what to do with terrorism in the country but surely you know that people don't need any chemicals.

[Edited on 30-12-2020 by teodor]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
BJ68
Hazard to Self
**




Posts: 94
Registered: 12-3-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 30-12-2020 at 05:50


Quote: Originally posted by teodor  
Where is "cons" section in the analysis?


It´s very easy....please read (7) in https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...
which notes: [...]For some restricted explosives precursors at concentrations above the limit values provided for in this Regulation, there exists no legitimate use by members of the general public.[...]

But e.g. in the book "Colouring Bronzing and Patination of Metals A Manual For Fine Metalworkers, Sculptors And Designers" you fill find recipes which are using potassium/sodium chlorate, ammonium nitrate, hydrigen peroxide for this purpose.....

So the phrase "there exists no legitimate use by members of the general public" is simply a lie.....and if you take ohther things etching of copper or making silver nitrate for photography you need concentrated acids and that is a legitimate use for the chemicals....even for members of the general public.....



Etching.jpg - 189kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
valeg96
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 228
Registered: 6-4-2014
Location: Italy
Member Is Offline

Mood: Moodless

[*] posted on 30-12-2020 at 07:28


Quote: Originally posted by teodor  

And it looks unprofessional like the people who made the document have no idea what is it about.


Since when the average bureucrat in Bruxelles is professional, competent and/or educated? Except for a few folks, most of them are elected among the very same ignorant scum that fills our national parliaments.

The EU has brought us amazing environmental, food safety, work laws, stuff that many national governments would have never bothered to deal with (or, think about the utter lack of workers' rights in the US compared to here). But also a load of bullcrap.

[Edited on 30-12-2020 by valeg96]





View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Fyndium
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1162
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 30-12-2020 at 08:49


Still, the restrictions are trivial to circumvent by simply getting a business number. I don't see this as a big deal as in most countries it should be just filling out a single paper. I just guided a couple of friends getting one for their online gaming stuff.

Someone from Germany cited that they need some sort of business chamber approval, but I highly doubt that just getting a simple company with vat number filing would need such a mess. Perhaps, distributing hazardous materials could need some special stuff, but at least in here it only concerns the storage and handling of them, but the quantities are way beyond any reasonable measure to stress with. For sulfuric acid, for example, the limit is 5 tons.

In UK, if you establish an official license for some sort of hazmat, unscheduled visits may result, but likely purchasing the stuff as company should not be an issue without such licenses, as they concern the public.

And then there are these certain suppliers that can get you most anything in decent prices, probably only excluding pharmaceuticals and energetics. There will be new grey market for these reagents for various uses, since they now command a much higher price.

[Edited on 30-12-2020 by Fyndium]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  ..  9    11  

  Go To Top