New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Green" Wax - Page 2

post #31 of 55

Of course Swix isn't going to say that their petrol products are horrible for everything except going fast.  That would put millions of dollars of research to waste.  They want that corner of the market but don't want to crap on their money makers.  I commend them for having the option.

post #32 of 55

Woke up this morning and found an e-mail concerning a debate for greenwax vs. traditional.  What's a protest without a debate, very happy to see it. 

 

Slidecraft- Thanks for the plug, super cool of you!

 

DoctorD-  We are not trying to scare anyone, sorry if we scared you.  We are a performance first company that's not so bad for the enviro.  Our wax is tested on pro's (hence the name protest) before anyone else.  If it's not good enough for them, it's not good enough for you.  8 years of World Cup tech experience, I know how to test a thing or two.  There I bragged about the performance.  Fluoro's will get you a couple of tenths of a second on us, but do us a favor and save it for race day.

 

As for the environment, Slidecrafts article says it all and there are tones more where that came from.

 

Some say this is a gimmick to make money.  I've spent more than I have made on testing, but one day I'd like to make a little.

 

Keep up the debate there is some great reading here:)

 

 

 

post #33 of 55

Nice try at deflecting the issue.  Tell me where there is credible evidence of ski wax in your drinking water as your website states.  Also the statement that "most ski waxes require gas masks to apply with an iron" is not true - also stated on your website.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Protestwax View Post

 

DoctorD-  We are not trying to scare anyone, sorry if we scared you.

 

 



 


Edited by Doctor D - 3/14/11 at 6:44pm
post #34 of 55

Here's a quote from Toko on gas masks for fluoro and general waxing.

 

“We have maintained for years now that people who work with perfluorocarbons should wear a mask and it is not a bad idea to use a mask when hot waxing in general if the room is not well ventilated,” said Ian Harvey, brand manager for Toko wax company, via email. “I recommend a full face mask as they are more comfortable and also keep the eyes clean of dust from waxing.”

 

Most home waxers wax in their homes, in the basement, under their bedroom or kitchen.  Or they do it in their garages, but that is well ventilated in the winter right:)

 

As for drinking water, I know where the run off goes and where the town water shed is.  There is no mystery there.  That's just for my mountain, but most mountain town are built the same.  Maybe ski wax is a small part of it, but it is still part of it.

 

Traditional high end wax and fluoro will always have their place.  Just finished working with Trads at the X-games helped win a gold and silver for Canada Ski Cross.  Time and place my friends.

 

Also don't be shy to sell my wax, it works great and the kids love it.

 

 

 

 

post #35 of 55


RE: Toko quote... Your website says "most" ski wax, by far "most" ski wax does not contain fluoro.  Your website falsely implies that "most" ski wax is dangerous.  The obvious intent is to gain customers by scaring them away from what they are using.  The statement as written is false. 

 

RE: Drinking water... Do you seriously think that drinking water is piped into your house directly from the ponds without purification?  All water, city and bottled, has to meet standards of purity and is tested regularly.  The water is run through all sorts of filters for chemicals and solids, and then purified by other means for bacteria.  You can get the data from your local supplier as to what your water is tested for and what the levels are.  And if you are talking about untreated well water, again, show me a single study that shows a hydrocarbon molecule from ski wax is in the water; water is polar and wax hydrocarbons are non-polar, they don't even mix. 

 

If you were right I would worry a hell of a lot more about runoff from deer feces than ski wax; or are the local animals on your hit list for clean water too?  Oh, don't forget the skunks.

 

"Maybe ski wax is a small part of it, but it is still part of it."

You have ZERO evidence of this - it is all based on your imagination.  Again, a false statement aimed at gaining customers through means other than merit.

 

Like I said deal with people straight up, don't peddle falsehoods based on your imagination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protestwax View Post

Here's a quote from Toko on gas masks for fluoro and general waxing.

 

“We have maintained for years now that people who work with perfluorocarbons should wear a mask and it is not a bad idea to use a mask when hot waxing in general if the room is not well ventilated,” said Ian Harvey, brand manager for Toko wax company, via email. “I recommend a full face mask as they are more comfortable and also keep the eyes clean of dust from waxing.”

 

Most home waxers wax in their homes, in the basement, under their bedroom or kitchen.  Or they do it in their garages, but that is well ventilated in the winter right:)

 

As for drinking water, I know where the run off goes and where the town water shed is.  There is no mystery there.  That's just for my mountain, but most mountain town are built the same.  Maybe ski wax is a small part of it, but it is still part of it.

 

Traditional high end wax and fluoro will always have their place.  Just finished working with Trads at the X-games helped win a gold and silver for Canada Ski Cross.  Time and place my friends.

 

Also don't be shy to sell my wax, it works great and the kids love it.

 

 

 

 



 

post #36 of 55

I think you need to read the quote a little more closely.  I also think you should do your research before posting, as PFOA's make it through filtration systems and this is why they are showing up in breast milk.  I am not trying to scare anyone and this is why I don't state all the little details on the Protest site.  The environmental part of the site is one of the last buttons and the majority of the site is based on how the wax performs and where it has been used.  I hope you don't run your store as ill knowledged and stubborn as your posts.  I think you should stop before you make yourself look bad.  Looks like I may be kicked off this forum.

 

As for Doctor D's customers, please keep buying from him.  His products are sharper than him.

post #37 of 55

Correction: one of the reasons why they are showing up in breast milk.

Sorry

post #38 of 55

Again, facts derived from your imagination.  The cited sources of PFOA's in breast milk are cookware and other common consumer products, not drinking water (or ski wax).  The only link to ski wax and PFOA's in blood is with World Cup wax techs.  If that is a good enough reason for you then say it specifically on your website, don't extrapolate the facts to "most" ski wax is bad; it's not true.

 

And for your false and misleading environmental claims on your website being a minor part, it seems like it must be a selling point because the customer that promoted your product here cited 2 things, quality and the fact that it won't get in your drinking water.  Don't say you're not responsible for what others say because you are the direct and sole source of the misinformation.

 

It is possible to promote your product without printing false information on your website. 


Edited by Doctor D - 3/15/11 at 6:28am
post #39 of 55

oh wait, here's another article.  Sure the drinking water evidence isn't hard but it's on it' way.

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/ski-wax-chemicals

It's pretty obvious what they will find.

Anyway I am tired of the same circle, for those that care wax with protest.  For those that don't, wax with something else.

post #40 of 55

Your link is the one I refer to and it has already been discussed on this forum elsewhere - it's nothing new.
 

Your statement, "Sure the drinking water evidence isn't hard but it's on it' way", is flat out laughable.  I can say that about anything.

 

Lastly, again the only discussion on PFOA's is here.  The website states "most" ski wax is bad and doesn't mention PFOA's.  There are no PFOA's in "most" ski wax.  All I'm saying is don't advertise your product with false statements.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slidecraft View Post

oh wait, here's another article.  Sure the drinking water evidence isn't hard but it's on it' way.

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/ski-wax-chemicals

It's pretty obvious what they will find.

Anyway I am tired of the same circle, for those that care wax with protest.  For those that don't, wax with something else.



 


Edited by Doctor D - 3/15/11 at 6:53am
post #41 of 55

How is "green wax" different from simple parafin and other nonflouro wax?

post #42 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

How is "green wax" different from simple parafin and other nonflouro wax?



It makes more green...since all these "green" products, cars included, typically cost more than the conventional variety.

post #43 of 55

The ski wax in the water supply issue was looked at a few years ago when Wachusett Mountain (MA) proposed a modest trail expansion. The individuals against the expansion tried every way to stop it, including an in depth testing of the run off from the ski area. Specifically, they were looking for wax from skis/boards, and lubricants from the groomers in the run off. The base of Wachusett is surrounded by lakes that supply drinking water for the nearby communities, and Boston.

 

Wachusett has a large competitive race program, both adult and junior, so you know those skiers are using HF race wax on a daily basis. Wachusett also sees around 400,000 + skier visits per year from the general public, and grooms all trails twice per day.

 

After extensive testing they found nothing, repeat nothing in the run off concerning HF or hydrocarbon wax or lubricants from the groomers.

 

MassDEP confirmed the tests and stated the runoff was clean snowmelt.

 

If it makes one feel better to use a green wax, and the performance is acceptable, then by all means do it. But the notion than skiers/boarders are placing large amounts of synthetic wax into the ecosystem is pretty thin based on the Wachusett tests.

 

post #44 of 55


The hydrocarbon base (or paraffin type molecules) are biodegradable by design, so that they break down in the environment.  The source can be plant based or synthetic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

How is "green wax" different from simple parafin and other nonflouro wax?



Excellent post Kirk. Directly addresses (and closes) the issue.

post #45 of 55

Here's one thing I know for sure:  contamination issues in the enviroment are 100% about concentrations/buildup.  You see, in trace amounts you breathe in, drink, and eat poisons and toxins of all varieties... many on the ppb (part per billion) level, some higher.  Some things, like heavy metals, can theoretically build up in your system over time, but they are laregly unavoidable.  Other things are stored in fat, some things not at all (last two sentences are somewhat tangential)

 

Anyway, if you consider the (is it billions?) of gallons of H20 that make up the snowpack at a ski resort, even trace amounts of flouro wax "skied-off" onto the snowpack would represent such a small concentration in that huge pool of H20 that is wouldn't present a problem.  Miniscule amounts of wax from what is already scraped and brushed well = not a problem.

 

Now, what would be an issue is if a wax company dumped drums and drums of their organic waste streams, daily, into local rivers. 

 

 

 

Not to say something totally random, but somewhat related to this issue:  if you are going to use 100% flouro overlay blocks (such as the cera f turbo series), please use nitrile gloves to handle the wax and treat it as a poison.  I'm not sure what the HMIS health number is for those waxes, but they are certainly not healthy (I only bring this up because the technician in the SwixSchool video on applying flouro blocks handled the stuff with his bare hands, and I feel strongly that is a bad thing to be demonstrating to those who want to learn how to do it properly).

 

(sorry if any of this is repeat; I didnt' read any replies)

post #46 of 55

While I'm all for everyone doing incremental small steps and choices to be more environmentally conscious, reducing petroleum reliance/impacts and take continuous action as a lifestyle, the idea of 'Green Wax' being significant relative to the overall wasteful sport and infrastructure of skiing and snowboarding is like a sparrow's fart in a hurricane....especially relative to paraffin wax. It's a perfect option, however for those who like to do the simplest thing to 'feel like they are being green' while ignoring real and larger choices with vastly larger environmental impacts. There is clearly a market for this product as a result.

 

A pet peeve of mine is those playing the 'green card' that muddies the water so the inherent ignorance of the market really doesn't know what makes a true difference versus token gestures. Tokenism has been a constant thorn in my side relative to recycling, energy efficient and solar design issues for decades. (A south facing window in a high volume, 10,000 sq. ft. house full of endangered wood species does not make the house 'green'. Recycling one soda can is not 'saving the planet'. An electric car charged by a coal-fired power plant is not a clean solution.)

 

There are so many far more substantial individual and area changes that would make more of an environmental differences than splitting hairs on glide wax choices, ie:

  • carpooling ONCE versus driving an hour or two to the area
  • owning fewer skis, boots, etc and stretching the usable life of your gear
  • don't groom the runs as often
  • clear cutting forests for runs and adding more lifts
  • major developments and large 2nd homes
  • etc, etc

 

The BS meter in my mind went to super sensitive when I read the following, coupled with the interesting timing of newbies sidecraft and Protestwax tag teaming on this and the Protestwax thread. What is your relationship with one another?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protestwax View Post
 Our wax is tested on pro's (hence the name protest) before anyone else.


 BSmeter.gif th_dunno-1[1].gif

 

Regardless, (and I did receive your email request for reselling Protest Wax) I am not opposed to the idea and concept of carrying plant based waxes, but producing plant products do still require petroleum products in their planting, harvesting, processing, storage. packaging and transport, along with irrigation and are not without their environmental costs, which in my view reduces the real differences in environmental costs of 'green wax' versus hydrocarbon waxes.

 

Simply put, the green factor, though commendable, is over stated and very small, IMO....especially relative to the inherently ungreen sport of skiing and snowboarding.

 

Good luck with your products and I do hope you keep it real and people make real green choices based on good information and not hyped BS.


Edited by Alpinord - 3/16/11 at 9:05am
post #47 of 55

This is a fabricated debate that violates Epicski's terms of service.  Protestwax and Slidecraft are sock puppets and have been banned.  We consider the dishonesty of posting under false pretenses as a sock puppet among the most egregious violations on this forum.

 

 

Quote:
Epicski Terms of Service
Do not register multiple posting accounts in order to gain an advantage in a debate or dispute. EpicSki will not tolerate "sock puppets".  This offense will result in a ban at the IP level. If you lose your password or have other issues, use the Contact Us form to request assistance.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protestwax View Post

Woke up this morning and found an e-mail concerning a debate for greenwax vs. traditional.  What's a protest without a debate, very happy to see it. 

 

Slidecraft- Thanks for the plug, super cool of you!

 

DoctorD-  We are not trying to scare anyone, sorry if we scared you.  We are a performance first company that's not so bad for the enviro.  Our wax is tested on pro's (hence the name protest) before anyone else.  If it's not good enough for them, it's not good enough for you.  8 years of World Cup tech experience, I know how to test a thing or two.  There I bragged about the performance.  Fluoro's will get you a couple of tenths of a second on us, but do us a favor and save it for race day.

 

As for the environment, Slidecrafts article says it all and there are tones more where that came from.

 

Some say this is a gimmick to make money.  I've spent more than I have made on testing, but one day I'd like to make a little.

 

Keep up the debate there is some great reading here:)

 

 

 



 


Edited by Cirquerider - 3/16/11 at 5:08pm
post #48 of 55

But where can I learn more about this amazing product?

 

 

irony.gif

post #49 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

But where can I learn more about this amazing product?

 

 

irony.gif

 

 

Don't take this wrong...Tech Talk JONG!  th_dunno-1[1].gif
 

 

post #50 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post



 

 

Don't take this wrong...Tech Talk JONG!  th_dunno-1%5B1%5D.gif
 

 

 

Oh Geeze.
 

 

post #51 of 55

I'm jealous that he offered wax to Terry to resell and not me!  Is there a website where can I file a formal ProTest?!

Rules.gif

post #52 of 55


Maybe this is clear to you, but I am not much of a board term vet.  Does sock puppet indicate that they are the same person and you concluded this because of them pretending to not know each other and having the same IP address? 

 

If so, very cool of you to go the extra mile to figure that out for us to keep the place tidy.  I imagine that sort of thing happens a lot on the intertubes. 

 

If not, any further explanation would be enlightening. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post

This is a fabricated debate that violates Epicski's terms of service.  Protestwax and Slidecraft are sock puppets and have been banned.  We consider the dishonesty of posting under false pretenses as a sock puppet among the most egregious violations on this forum.

 


EDIT: ha ha!  ProTest . . . Very funny DoctorD.  I have no idea WHY they didn't choose you!  Completely random I suppose. . .

 

post #53 of 55

Same IP, same cookies, same computer processor, same browser, same same same person or collusion on the same Mac computer.


Edited by Cirquerider - 3/16/11 at 10:26pm
post #54 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post

This is a fabricated debate that violates Epicski's terms of service.  Protestwax and Slidecraft are sock puppets and have been banned.  We consider the dishonesty of posting under false pretenses as a sock puppet among the most egregious violations on this forum.

 

Sigh.....see pet peeve above relative to pretending to be and sell 'green'......dishonestly. nonono2.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor D View Post

I'm jealous that he offered wax to Terry to resell and not me!  Is there a website where can I file a formal ProTest?!

Rules.gif


Jealous? You should be proud that he knew you were smarter than me. wink.gif

post #55 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post

Same IP, same cookies, same computer processor, same browser, same same same person or collusion on the same Mac computer.


The perfect criminal!  Very funny.  Also pretty pathetic that he is trying this schtick at other forums as well as your link indicated.  I'll say a prayer to the White Mistress of the Eastern Sierra in honor of your strong moderation skills.  She is a worthy and benevolent goddess. 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tuning, Maintenance and Repairs