[C38] TBT bottom paints are bad actors

Thu Mar 1 12:26:28 EST 2007

Actually TBTs are very damaging to marine life and have been highly 
regulated for this reason since the early 1990's.
Below I have pasted part of the abstract from a typical paper from the 
literature on this phenomenon.
Don
C38 Discreet Charm

D. S. Page, T. M. Dassanayake, E. S. Gilfillan. 1996. Bulletin of 
Environmental Contamination and Toxicology (1996) 56:500-504.
Relationship Between Tissue Concentrations of Tibutyltin and Shell 
Morphology in Field Populations of Mytilus edulis
Abstract
"While tributyltin (TBT) -containing antifoulants have seen widespread 
use in the past, their use has now been restricted in many countries due 
to evidence of adverse effects on marine life (Waldock et al. 1987; Anon 
1994). For example, TBT has been found to be acutely toxic to many 
species of marine invertebrates at very low water concentrations in the 
?g/L - ng/L range (Maguire 1987; Snoeij et al. 1987; Joshi and Gupta 
1992). Concern about the adverse effects on marine life of TBT leaching 
from treated surfaces has resulted in controls on its use in France, the 
UK, the USA and elsewhere. (Waldock et al. 1987). Even though regulation 
has reduced environmental levels of TBT (Waite et al. 1991; Anon 1994), 
localized sources of TBT such as shipyards and commercial ship traffic 
remain
potentially important....." (Abstract continues...)

Tom T. wrote:
> Or you could sail your boat to the Bahamas or some other foreign 
> country and get some tri-butyl tin bottom paint like we used to use 
> here before it was outlawed.
>  
> I don't know if tin was actually really all that dangerous to the 
> environment or did it just last too long and the paint manufacturers 
> lobbied for paints they could sell more of?
>  
> I'm just rambling here but just about every other country still uses 
> tin based paints as far as I know and they seem to have no problem 
> with fish endangerment.  Some American yachts go outside the USA for 
> their bottom painting just to get the outlawed tin based paints.
>  
> Tom Troncalli
> The Renata #95, barnacles and all
> St. Pete, Fla, (warm water home of hull clinging, speed killing, 
> nasty,ugly, hitch hiking ecosystems.)
>  
>  
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Don Strong <mailto:drstrong at ucdavis.edu>
>     *To: *Catalina 38 Listserve <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>     *Sent:* 3/1/2007 9:10:43 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [C38] Bottom paint
>
>     Phil.
>         Wasington's prohibition against in-water scrubbing is
>     interesting. Last time around we got 4 years from our bottom job
>     in San Francisco Bay with Trinidad regular and twice annual diver
>     gentle scrub. It would be interesting to learn the rationale
>     against in-water scrubbing. If it leads to more frequent bottom
>     jobs, it could lead to more pollution unless every site where a
>     bottom job is done is an advanced catchment with well regulated
>     toxics removal and disposal. Even then, more frequent bottom jobs
>     means more toxic paint in land fills.
>         The slime is an issue, indeed. Fast sailing for long periods
>     does reduce it.
>     regards, Don
>
>     Rich West wrote:
>>     I've been really happy with Trinidad SR on my boat in Los
>>     Angeles.  It is much better at reducing slime than the plain old
>>     Trinidad I had on before and it's been lasting very well.
>>      
>>     Are you sure it's a hard paint?  When I touch it with a rag,
>>     clouds of red come off into the water.
>>      
>>     Rich West
>>     Legacy, #360
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     *From:* listserve-bounces at catalina38.org
>>     [mailto:listserve-bounces at catalina38.org] *On Behalf Of
>>     *eyriepg at comcast.net
>>     *Sent:* Wednesday, February 28, 2007 7:59 PM
>>     *To:* Catalina 38 list
>>     *Subject:* [C38] Bottom paint
>>
>>     I have been using Micron CSC ablative copolymer paint for the
>>     last 9 years.  It works well at keeping the barnacles for several
>>     years off but does little to reduce the speed robbing slime.  I
>>     did a test stripe on my rudder about 4 years ago with the same
>>     type of paint with a biocide and could see little difference.  It
>>     is illegal in WA to scrub the bottom in the water and a haulout
>>     and pressure wash are costly.  I am thinking about changing to
>>     Trinidad SR hard paint which is legal to scrub.  Marine growth is
>>     slow here in our cold water.  How effective is it in reducing
>>     slime?  Is there a better alternative?  There have been several
>>     articles in sailing magazines lately about new bottom paints, but
>>     I value your experience more.
>>      
>>     Since I will have to remove all of the ablative paint to use the
>>     modified epoxy or any other non ablative paint, I want to be sure
>>     that it is the way to go.
>>      
>>     Phil Gay
>>     C38 049 Que Linda
>>     Everett, WA
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Listserve mailing list
>>     Listserve at catalina38.org
>>     http://catalina38.org/mailman/listinfo/listserve_catalina38.org
>>       
>
>     -- 
>     Donald R. Strong
>     Professor
>     Section of Evolution and Ecology
>     University of California Davis
>     95616
>     530 752 7886
>         
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Listserve mailing list
> Listserve at catalina38.org
> http://catalina38.org/mailman/listinfo/listserve_catalina38.org
>   

-- 
Donald R. Strong
Professor
Section of Evolution and Ecology
University of California Davis
95616
530 752 7886

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://catalina38.org/pipermail/listserve_catalina38.org/attachments/20070301/f0e31864/attachment-0001.htm>