Hair spray one of 88 everyday products in the crosshairs of Utah air pollution regulators

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • dustmagnet heber city, UT
    April 9, 2013 2:27 p.m.

    "The new rule seeks to reduce emissions from products like hair spray, carpet cleaner, air fresheners and brass polishers by 7,932 tons a year in Utah's counties that are out of compliance with federal clean air standards."
    But lets NOT mention the industrial/corporate pollution going on by Rio Tinto, the refineries, and other various corporations in the SLC area! Why is it that the open burning of hazardous waste is NEVER mentioned?! Why is it that NO ONE is suggesting contained burning with air scrubbers instead?

  • Million Bluffdale, UT
    April 2, 2013 7:00 a.m.

    I just got back from China. Beijing doesn't allow license plates ending with 0 and 5 to drive on Mondays, 1 and 6 on Tuesday and so on or a heavy fine and points against their license is the fine. To drive in Shanghai you have to pay $12,000 for the right to buy a license plate. I think us Americans would fight such mandates over here. However I would welcome some better air here in Utah and giving up fireplaces, diesel fumes, hair spray and dryer sheets would be a good first step not limiting our freedom too much. Some early morning walks with my dogs causing sneezing in both of us from diesel trucks and heavy dryer sheet usage is something I could do without. Pollution is pollution, no matter the source. Little by little we sink our ship.

  • RunAmuckMom Salt Lake City, UT
    April 2, 2013 3:45 a.m.

    There has to be some hidden agenda. Common sense will tell you that what consumers can't get on the shelf they will get on the internet or they will pick up what they need in the next county and bring it home. It's still hard to imagine that "hair spray", "window cleaner", and things mentioned is causing more environmental and physical harm by consumers than say something like cigarettes or those big stinky black smoke expelling trucks on the roads. Maybe they way they're being manufactured is part of the problem not they way they are consumed. This one really makes me want to say "HMMMMM, what's up doc"?

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 1, 2013 5:51 p.m.

    It’s ironic that Primatene Mist was banned by the FDA because all those maniacal asthmatics were spraying nasty stuff into the air each time they used it to breath.
    Now, asthmatics must drive (spewing more pollutants) to a hospital (rather than the neighboring pharmacy) or die: Because there are no emergency over-the-counter options left.
    The new US prescription inhalers don’t work as well and millions of the old propellants are still used in most every other country.

    I am all for vigorously cleaning up Utah air – but not with greenwash that is actually counterproductive

  • applesnoranges24 Logan, UT
    April 1, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    @yeah but...

    "this past winter should have taught us that we have air pollution problems during the winter, and we know we have ozone problems in the summer."

    Do you truly believe the ozone magically repairs itself in the winter and we only have ozone problems in the summer?

    I digress, discontinuing "environmentally unfriendly" hair spray is not going to have a huge effect on the environment. The combination of all 88 of these things? Maybe, but being able to enforce even half of them is not going to work. I live close to the Idaho and Wyoming borders, I can buy my hair spray there.

    Already there are restrictions on burning fires on "red air" days, but I personally witnessed first hand this winter that the police cannot enforce it - only the health department can. And, of course, the health department's mission is to "educate."

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    April 1, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    A lot of gasoline is being burned in Utah. But most of the gasoline is combusted in the engine. The leftover hydrocarbons are mostly burned up in the catalytic converter, so the hydrocarbon emissions from cars are probably pretty small. Now if someone drives to work they don't emit too much HCs. But if they use up a can of hairspray, it will generate HCs.

    Someone, I hope, did a calculation on the total amount of hair spray being put into the air along the Wasatch front. One person's can is not going to affect everyone. How many tons of cans are being sold in all the stores everyday? It may be a big number.

  • Western Rover Herriman, UT
    April 1, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    All the other commenters missed the fact that today is April Fools' Day, when newspapers traditionally publish stories full of balderdash. I mean, the government would never *really* think of micromanaging our lives to this extent, for reasons built on questionable research. When have they ever done anything like that before?

    Uh, actually...never mind.

  • Yeah but South Jordan, UT
    April 1, 2013 7:30 a.m.

    Isn't armchairQBonthehill making Mr. Karmazyn's point exactly? In areas where these restrictions are already in effect, manufacturers have already got plenty of options available. The state isn't saying "no hairspray;" they're saying just use stuff that won't hurt the environment. This past winter should have taught us that we have air pollution problems during the winter, and we know we have ozone problems in the summer. The state is doing everything they can to reduce our pollution, and when you look at the sources of pollution, the majority of our pollution comes from the fact that we have millions of people living and driving and heating their homes and spraying their hair in a bowl. Like it or not, our beautiful mountains are both a blessing and a curse - and inversions and high pollution levels are the curse.

  • armchairQBonthehill Salt Lake City, UT
    March 31, 2013 8:00 p.m.

    Not sure about the so-called "research" Karmazyn has done. I was in D.C. a few months back and didn't see the hair-spray section of the grocery store shelf empty. Rather, there were still plenty of cans of aerosol spray cans available. I'm no expert about the other states but the stores were still selling it and the hair boutiques were still open for business as usual. Also, not sure about his mathematical calculations about tonnage of dangerous particulate . . has he done a econometric analysis of sales of these "dangerous" products and calculated how much each 24 oz. can contributes? And how does he know all of these products sold in Utah stores were consumed in Utah, perhaps they are used by Hill AFB or other airline personnel?

  • Informed Voter South Jordan, UT
    March 31, 2013 4:46 p.m.

    What a croc. Always more regulations. The effect of hairspray, if there is a negative one, is so infinitesimal that it would be laughable if it wasn't that some zealots think they can actually affect the atmosphere and save the world from destruction.