Here in Minnesota, a company that makes lead fishing sinkers

[MineralMan]

and battery terminals for car batteries and other lead/acid batteries was shut down. Why? Because workers, who are tested regularly for lead levels in their blood, were apparently carrying lead dust home on their clothing. That has led to some children having higher lead levels in their blood than is acceptable. In some cases, the levels were high enough to threaten the children's health.

So, the state shut the company down, without warning. As many as 600 workers were suddenly without work. After a few days, the company was allowed to restart operations, following changes in safety procedures. But, the shutdown raises some questions that don't have really good answers:

1. Is working with lead always dangerous work?
2. Can lead dust generated by the manufacturing process be transported off-site on clothing?
3. Can people who don't work at that company, including children, be adversely affected?
4. Will the changes in safety measures be followed and overseen adequately?

It is the last question that is the most difficult to answer. The first three questions have "yes" for an answer. The fourth question is one we can't really answer at all, since it depends on cooperation by employers and employees.

The problem, really, is that lead is a toxic metal, but is one that is ideal for use in fishing sinkers and batteries. In fact, all alternatives are quite expensive and uneconomical. Lead is easy to melt, heavy, easy to cast and machine, doesn't corrode in acidic environments, and is a good conductor. That's why it's used for fishing sinkers and battery terminals.

How can a company that makes products of lead adequately protect workers and their families? I don't know the answer to those questions. I'm not entirely sure there is a good answer, really. So, do we allow the company to continue to produce those products, or do we ban their manufacture, if there is no way to guarantee no harm will come to people from the process?

There are lots and lots of businesses that use or make dangerous materials that we find useful in one way or another. What kind of regulations can we create that keeps those businesses operating and paying employees while protecting those employees and others?

[sop]

1. How about showers at work? Then changing into street clothes before going home?

[MineralMan]

2. I'm sure that's already in place.

I would guess that the workers change into clothing supplied by the company to work in the factory, and change back into street clothing they own to go home. A shower would be available, I imagine. However, unless one runs tests, it's hard to say whether every employee showers thoroughly or whether some fake the shower, like some kids in gym class when I was a kid. Lead dust can travel in hair, too, not just in clothing.

It's a really difficult problem for a manufacture to solve. That plant is subject to a lot of inspections and so forth, but the problems still occurred. It's the nature of the business to generate toxic lead dust.

A lot of industries have similar problems, frankly. In some cases, it's not so easy to detect contamination that travels off-site. 3M, for example polluted an aquifer for decades with a chemical that wasn't recognized as a major risk at the time. That has cost them hundreds of millions of dollars, but the cleanup they funded didn't prevent some deaths caused by the pollution.

Everywhere there is a factory, there are problems. Most manufacturing processes produce waste materials that can be problematic. Regulations are important, but only if they are followed and inspections are frequent.

It's a problem that occurs almost everywhere in the country.

[progree]

12. I don't think they have showers, according to a couple of articles I read

but they/I could be wrong.

[Lars39]

5. Clothing is still washed at home or laundromat

Workplace should have showers and clothes issued and turned back in every day, in best case scenario.

[MineralMan]

13. Yes, if it doesn't have showers, it should, and work clothes

should be supplied and laundered on-site or at a commercial laundry. That would help if those things aren't in place.

[Poiuyt]

25. I used to work as an organic chemist and the company would provide work clothes.

At the end of the day, we'd change back into our civies and toss the work clothes into a bin for the uniform company to take to be laundered. We also had shoes that we kept in our locker to be worn in the labs.

[pecosbob]

3. That's a pretty deep topic

This sort of situation is, of course, why federal regulatory agencies exist. This is the nexus formed by public safety, worker safety and environmental concerns, all of which have to be addressed. This is challenging even when our president's cabinet appointees aren't actively trying to dismantle the agencies they currently control. EPA, OSHA, Consumer Products Safety Commission...these are the agencies put in place to protect the people from the one percent...so we don't have melamine in our infant formula.

Edit* We've been going through a similar situation with light bulbs in recent years as changes have been made for efficiency and safety. I am sure that this sent seismic shocks through the industry as each change was adopted and likely a lot of people were put out of work. The changes had to be made regardless of the pain inflicted. I think that has always been our government's general guideline at any rate, to do the least harm. We will certainly have to face difficult choices related to climate change in short order, so, some are going to take it on the chin...probably mostly the poor and disenfranchised.

[MineralMan]

4. Interestingly enough, as soon as the company was shut down,

it's employees showed up to protest the shutdown at the State Capitol. Most of them were immigrants, from many different groups. They wanted to go back to work, so they could support their families.

So, a "solution" to the problem was quickly found and the plant reopened, just a few days after being shut down. I predict the problems will recur, and that not much change will actually take place.

The Republicans work very hard to reduce the amount of regulation on companies. That has been a major push of the Trump administration, which has been turning over regulatory processes to the companies themselves whenever possible.

And then, there are the workers, who need the jobs and the pay they earn from them. I do not know the pay scale at the "Water Gremlin" factory that had the lead problems. I would guess it's typical of small factory jobs in Minnesota, which is not all that high. But, people have to feed, house and clothe their families, so...

The equation isn't a simple one.

[sop]

6. Some states are looking at regulating indoor gun ranges for lead dust and particles

Medical and poison control officials are seeing an increase in indoor firing range–related lead poisoning, resulting from faulty ventilation systems or inadequate cleanup of lead dust. Indoor range employees and frequent shooters, like law enforcement officers, are inhaling the lead dust emitted when the firearm is discharged, or ingesting lead from contaminated hands or surfaces.

[MineralMan]

7. Lead has been poisoning people for a long, long time.

First it was paint and plumbing. Now we're talking about lead dust. Well, as long as we're using lead, it will continue to poison some people. Trouble is, there isn't a great substitute for that very useful metal. In reality, what will happen is that the factory in question will end up being shut down, and sinkers and battery terminals will be made in China or in some other country. Is that a good thing? I don't think so, actually. It's just pushing the problem onto others.

[TwilightZone]

8. Considering that lead poisoning has been a known issue for ages...

I'm a bit surprised that the questions weren't already asked and well-answered. Maybe they were and this particular company wasn't meeting regulations. That seems the most likely reason for the shutdown.

Lead is heavily regulated in a variety of industries. In states like SD, lead is known to cause damage to wildlife and has been regulated in hunting ammunition for decades.

[Blue_true]

9. I am somewhat familiar with things that can be used.

If lead particles are getting on people, the particles have to be dust or small residue from machining.

That type of stuff is easy to control.

The first control procedure is to figure out where the particulates are being generated. Based upon the info you gave, I would look at two things. First, if there is machining (polishing, cutting), the machinery needs to be put in an enclosure that has one of two features, the enclosure is either exhausted with exhaust vents at any point near people, or the enclosure can have a blanket of air flowing from it's top. I would go for an exhausted enclosure since that makes it easier to trap and filter out the particulates. If the particulates are coming from die-cast lead parts being released from the die, that should be enclosed like the machining case and the die must be moved either in an enclosure or not at all.

The second control procedure would be to have downflow of air everywhere people are. If the downflow rate is sufficient, there is no way people can breath in lead particles. Also, all lead workstations must be below the nose height of the shortest employee. The air downflow can be swept into filters. The most advanced method of this is called HEPA filtration, but those systems are expensive. A cheaper method would be to install large industrial ceiling fans at the ceiling level and have a vacuum system drawing the air out at floor level.

What I would do if I owned the place is build a special room where activities that generate lead dust are done and put lots of the controls that I listed above there. Employees that work there would have to wear Tyvex suits that cover them head to the bottom of their feet no skin exposed and no seams that lead to their clothing exposed, and they must wear breathing protection. Before they exit the room they would have to stand in a timed air-hurricane, with all their protective gear on. Once out of the air-hurricane, they would go to an area to change into their street cloths to go to lunch or home. If they go back into the room, they would need to don new safety equipment. Tyvex suits are not common, but they also are not terribly expensive to buy, they are regularly used by people that do hazmat work.

My guess is all those changes can be done with an initial investment of $500,000-$1.5 million. The state can help the company finance if needed, that protects jobs.

[MineralMan]

16. I don't know the details of that factory. So, I'm not sure

what's in place there and what's not. I also don't know what operations are responsible for creating the lead dust.

[Blue_true]

18. Has the company been around for a while?

There are more modern ways to manufacture fishing line weights without lead. On battery posts it is somewhat more complicated, because like you pointed out, modern battery posts corrode and that can cause problems over time.

[GopherGal]

29. I have background with a reverse problem

...without doxxing myself, I'll say that I have some experience in chemical/microbiological environments. The standard procedures are pretty much as you describe, down to the Tyvek "bunny-suits" with booties. These are worn over street clothes or scrubs. They serve kind of a dual purpose in both preventing the workers from tracking IN contaminants and keeping them from tracking things OUT. We're talking lines on the floor that have to be stepped over as you pull on another pair of covers over your shoes so that nothing that touches the ground on the "outdoor/dirt" side of the line also touches the ground on the "clean/process chemicals/microbes" side of the line. Showering not required (at least where I've worked -- that might differ for lead particles), but additional layers of protection that are added along the way in (and shed on the way out) to control what's tracked where.

It's certainly possible to add some protection to prevent exposures outside the workplace, but it's not without costs in time/inconvenience for all the gowning/de-gowning, and expenditures for purchase and disposal or cleaning of the protective wear, equipment for control of airflows, etc.

[Blue_true]

31. Lead toxicity has been known since the 70s, I believe.

Any company that doesn't have procedures in place to protect workers is inviting disaster on many levels.

Prevention costs are always less. It generally costs a lot more to care for workers that have been made ill in a calously structured work environment, that is beyond lawsuits and regulatory fines.

Tyvex suits and booties come in big bags. It costs maybe $10 per suit-up, so clearly it doesn't make sense to suit up all manufacturing employees, but in my experience that is not necessary, typically jobs that involve high-level safety risks involve less than a relatively small number of employees that have direct exposure to hazards, enclosures can eliminate exposure of other workers to those hazards.

[moondust]

10. 4. OSHA?

Isn't that kind of what they do?

[Blue_true]

19. Seems like someone dropped the ball.

It is not like lead toxicity is a new problem.

[d_r]

11. Why are

They Still making lead sinkers?

[MineralMan]

15. Because lead is cheap, and easy to melt and cast.

That's why. So far, lead sinkers are still legal. Most anglers sort of treat them as disposable, so losing a sinker is not a big deal. Other metals are available for fishing weights, but cost much, much more, so anglers tend to opt for the lead ones.

They should probably be made illegal, given the danger to wildlife, but so far they have not, at least in many states.

Battery terminals, on the other hand have been made of lead since almost forever, due to lead's corrosion resistance around battery acid. Other metals could be used, but they'd cost more and probably be less suitable for that particular use.

[d_r]

20. I thought they were

Already illegal

[Triloon]

17. Because people still buy them. I'm an avid fisherman and can't tell how many hundreds of pounds

Of lead I have left in rivers lakes and salt just from getting snagged and breaking off the line. So these days I just use very small cotton bags full of shoreline sand for sinkers. They work just fine, if a little less accurate for casting. If they get snagged on something I've only lost a few cents of cotton and have not left a lump of toxic metal in the water. I have used rocks too, and that's fine, but you can adjust the weight using the sand.
The whole industry of lead sinkers should disappear. The alternatives are not all more expensive. The best alternatives are almost free. It will be tough about the loss of jobs, but some things are more important.

[Blue_true]

21. Why don't you use the brass versions? Or steel in plastic housing?

Both are pretty cheap. Two of my brothers fish and I honestly have not seen them use lead weights in years. My dad used lead, but lead toxicity was not well known then.

[Triloon]

28. brass and steel are good

tin is also quite good, heavy cheap and non toxic. Titanium too, but its expensive. I'm appreciating more and more the ethic of leaving nothing behind that wasnt there before. Broken off plastic fishing line is still a problem. But in using the little bags of sand if they get wedged in the rocks you can give them a couple hard strikes and they tear open and empty the sand, freeing all the gear for recovery. This is fishing on sea jetties where the rocks are a constant problem.

[Blue_true]

32. Okay, I see why you made the choice that you did. Good idea. nt

[sop]

26. Lead shot (for shotgun shells) was outlawed for waterfowl hunting in 1991

The USFWS issued its first lead-ammunition ban in 1991, which eliminated the use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting nationwide. The ban was intended to eliminate dangerous lead levels in bodies of water that are often the source of public drinking water. Lead is still widely used for upland hunting, shooting sports, and fishing.

[hunter]

14. We got rid of lead in gasoline. We got rid of lead in paint.

Since July, California hunters are no longer allowed to use lead ammunition.

There are alternatives to lead fishing sinkers and lead batteries.

The problem we have in the U.S.A. is supporting displaced workers.

It's a good thing when industries harmful to the environment and human health are shut down.

All the lead I was exposed to when I was a kid certainly didn't do me any good.

[jpak]

22. We banned lead fishing sinkers here in Maine years ago

The new ones work fine - and they are not expensive.

And our loons are safer for it.

[llmart]

24. I think it's been banned in Michigan for years also.

I knew a guy who worked in automotive who used to steal the lead wheel weights at the shop all the time. He'd melt them down to make bullets. This was not a once in awhile occurrence. He also used to take anyone's old auto battery and get the lead out of it and melt it down for the same reason. He'd sit at a table for hours inhaling that lead smoke from the melter. No surprise that he now has multiple health problems.

[eppur_se_muova]

23. Its use in lead/acid battery cores is not just a matter of cheap, easy to mold, etc.

It's related to the electrochemical properties of lead, and it takes a *lot* of research to find alternatives, because there are so many demands that need to be met simultaneously. Because lead has such a high atomic weight, lead-acid batteries have poor energy density, but that doesn't really matter for applications where a reliable, high-capacity, multiply-rechargable battery is necessary. So despite that undesirable property, and the dangers of working with lead, they have occupied the transportation starter battery niche for decades.

People have sought alternatives to lead-acid for years, and it's worth noting that a nickel-iron battery -- the Edison Cell -- has been around for more than a century, and performs very well for certain jobs. But lead-acid displaced it in almost all other applications because it has some properties which render it less practical in other ways, including more than just cost.

It's very hard to find a battery material that has suitable electrochemical potentials, appropriate mechanical properties (in both oxidized and reduced forms), safety, and cost, simultaneously. Those who work in this field can list all kinds of little things that can go wrong, that nonspecialists would never guess at, but which can be fatal to a prospective battery design. It's like Jinga for engineers. If only the Periodic Table had a little finer "grain" to it -- say there were fifty elements in every row -- maybe we'd have more easy options to choose from. But it isn't, and we don't. So we work with stuff we wouldn't otherwise use. Mercury is insidiously toxic, but used to be used in certainly small cells. Silver is prohibitively expensive for most applications, but still used in some very small cells. Cadmium is toxic, so Ni-Cd batteries were eventually phased out in favor of NiMH. Nickel has its own (mild) toxicity, but in a lot of other ways, NiMH is a winner, and it's used in many EVs. In terms of power density, it's fairly competitive with Li-ion, but Li-ion is taking an increasing market share. But lead-acid still dominates at the bottom line.

I think your last para kind of answers itself -- look to other hazardous industries -- say, mercury miners -- and ask what kind of safety precautions are adequate there. I know mercury miners are monitored continuously, and carry nothing out of the facility that has been down in the mine, except their bodies (which are stripped naked every return to the outside world, and IIRC briefly baked under a sunlamp with a voluminous flow of air, while exercising vigorously to flush Hg vapor from their respiratory systems). But there have to be regulations -- "self-policing" is as ridiculous as it sounds.

[Kurt V.]

27. Exposure to lead must last decades for its most adverse effects. but when levels reach

Unacceptable levels, sure that needs attention.

[hunter]

30. What happens in places with no regulation and enforcement...