Hacker News Reader

Comment by revx | Hacker News Reader

The more I hear about Gore-Tex, (and PTFE and PFOA, the chemicals Gore-tex and other Teflon stuff is created from) the more I think this is one of those chemicals that we'll look back on in 50 years like we now look at leaded gasoline.

Besides being known as deadly to parrots, I think studies (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28913736/) are starting to reveal that there are risks with PTFE and PFOA that need more research.

I try not to be alarmist about chemicals and am generally in favor of scientific progress, but this chemical (similarly to PCBs) seems like one of those "wonder materials" that's great for specific applications that turns out to be terrible for life and the environment as soon as people sit down and actually look at the effects over a long period of time.

View on HN

PFOA I can understand, but PTFE?

Sure, it's toxic to parrots, if you burn the material and it decomposes. But how many materials aren't? Most plastic will produce highly toxic products when burned.

PTFE is produced from tetra-fluoroethylene, which is a gas, doesn't get into water supplies.

And PTFE is very non-toxic. That's why we use it in medical implants.

PTFE is a wondrous material, but:

PFOA was phased out in US and EU AFAIK, but was for a long time used for making PTFE while contaminating water supplies and drinking water. There were many lawsuits in the USA, see links at end. But note that there are many more potentially dangerous PFAS chemicals that are still used in EU and USA (see links).

Also, the PTFE molecule is not a hydrocarbon like most-plastics, it's a fluorocarbon; so you didn't really give a good argument against the idea that people may regret producing a lot of PTFE.

Some links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per-_and_polyfluoroalkyl_subst...

https://theintercept.com/collections/bad-chemistry/

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/10/pfos-pfoa-epa-chemical-c...

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/31/3m-pfas-minnesota-pfoa-p...

Yeah, but they don't buy commercials with happy bongo music and stir FUD about their competition, so how good can it be?

Are you referring to DuPont when you say "they"? I'd assume there would be many producers since PTFE is an old invention (~1940).

I'm referring to the entire chemical industry. This thread is chock full of people saying "Teflon = Bad" when it was manufacturing safety and (maybe) the practice of ignoring warnings and grilling with teflon pans that were bad. It's an amazing material and it would be a shame to see it memed out of existence.

This kind of thing has happened before. If we (USA) hadn't stopped rolling out nuclear in the 80s, we'd be off coal/gas by now, instead of maybe several decades from now after pumping ungodly amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. Anti-vax and anti-fluoride need no introduction. Agrotech probably receives the most hate per unit of actual sin -- it's an odd week that I don't hear someone patting themselves on the back for choosing a product that is almost certain to be worse for the environment because an upscale vendor successfully applied misleading differentiation tactics to convince them of the opposite.

Indiscriminately attacking progress and throwing the baby out with the bathwater has become a national passtime that shows every indication of getting worse before it gets better. Teflon seems to be another instance of this trend.

Well that just messed with my head. For some reason (advertising? confusion? stupidity?) I had thought that Gore-Tex was based on a special weaving technique and use of special acrylic fibres... Wikipedia says `It is composed of stretched polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), which is more commonly known by the generic trademark Teflon.`

Damn....

Ya, I felt truly stupid once I realized Gore-Tex is Teflon. REI is gonna need a makeover once this catches on.

Since learning about micro plastics from fabrics polluting our waterways, I'm keen to find alternatives.

I had an Australian style rain coat (dense weave, regularly reapply wax) as a kid. I couldn't find anything comparable locally.

Meanwhile, I got one of those fisherman jackets. I sweat so much, the only benefit I get is wind protection.

British invented a tightly woven cotton called Ventile for RAF pilots, which is waterproof, windproof and breathes quite well when not wet.

It has some disadvantages, but it's natural, it doesn't burn and it doesn't make funny noises. There are even some certified organic variants made in Switzerland by Stotz. Many manufacturers in Germany, Scandinavia and UK are adding this to some of their jackets, so it's worth looking around.

Else, Paramo has developed a clever cloth called Analogy, which works in a manner similar to animal fur to push rain out and keep you warm. It's not perfect either, and it's based on synthetic fibers, but it doesn't have nasty plastic coatings. It's used by some mountain guides in my region, and when I asked they were quite satisfied.

Ventile, long staple cotton, works by absorbing and swelling with water; "closing" the weave and preventing further water from getting in. However, the inner surface of the fabric is still wet, so your clothes underneath the jacket can still get wet through capillary action. So to mitigate this, oftentimes manufacturers will use two layers of Ventile or put a wool liner underneath the shoulders.

Also, once thoroughly soaked through, it will take just as long to dry as regular ol' cotton. This is why Stotz still treats their version, EtaProof, with DWR.

I think Ventile is great, but I think it's better suited for situations where you'll return to a heated shelter at the end of the night.

> RAF pilots

AKA people not exposed to the elements most of the time.

They did not have pressurised cabins (mostly) in ww2, it gets damm cold in a bomber at altitude.

If your plane goes down in the middle of a battlefield, you'll need a good coat...

You're kind of fucked in that case regardless, and waterproof jacket will be the least of your concerns. All you have is a small handgun.

Pilots spend most of their time flying over either friendly territory or open water. Assuming they survive the crash intact, cold is overall their #1 threat.

Wanted to add that a bunch of planes from back then didn't have sealed, heated cockpits like we know today.

The vast majority of military cockpits aren't pressurized even today.

Yes, they are (F-16 most commont)[1] (F-16 pressurized)[2]. It's just not enough to avoid needing additional air supply to prevent hypoxia.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_A... 2. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/73143/is-the-f-...

I didn't clarify Ventile was created to increase their chances of surviving if shot down in the North Sea.

I think there are already alternatives. Dyneema fiber is superior to GoreTex in almost any way but price (I have ultralight backpacks made of the stuff and are amazing). Moreover, they are more resistant to UV light than other polymers, lowering the chance they end up as microplastics.

If, instead, you are looking for waxable gear, have a look at Fjällraven G-1000 series of products. They cost a penny, but they are ultra sturdy and, in general, top-notch outdoor gear. Moreover Fjällraven should be one of the more environmental friendly brands for technical gear ATM.

Dyneema fabrics aren't breathable at all are they? That seems to be gore-tex's main selling point over other waterproof fabrics.

You are correct, but I believe there were experiments about having micropores to let moisture escape. Also, I think it can be loosely wooven to have some degree of breathability. I think nobody invested in it yet with regards to clothing because prices would go through the roof.

So it is not really an alternative! :)

Look for Swedish outdoor brand Fjällräven, their G1000 material is waxed cotton. Not the cheapest but they are high quality and wil last.

I have a couple of pants made from G-1000, and I really like it's properties (light, durable, will not retain much water, can be made water-repellent with wax), but it actually is made from 65% polyester and 35% cotton [1].

[1] https://www.fjallraven.com/uk/en-gb/about-fjallraven/materia...

Thanks, I should have double-checked.

They have a few different versions now, but the key to the membrane is that it’s really thin. It’s not like most average Joes can make their own even if they buy a bunch of PTFE pellets. It’s also overkill for most people and daily life, but Gore Tex (or some of the newer competitors) is worth it when backpacking or biking; you don’t want to carry the weight of a waxed canvas jacket for a long trip.

Try the North face Thermoball line of jackets. I put mine through all manner of environmental abuse this year and it performed extremely well.

The materials all seem pretty boring sounding.

Is there any reason why aerogel (e.g. PyroGel) hasn't caught on as an insulation for winter jackets? The demos look pretty impressive: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Ig8rW80uk

The first jackets using Aerogel as insulation are just hitting the market. https://www.patagonia.com/product/mens-das-parka/85350.html?... is one example. The previous version of this jacket is a cult favorite; curious to see what reviews of the new Aerogel version look like.

As far as i remember, people wearing clothes with this type of insualtion had problems with overheating.

However things may have changed since then

https://www.outsideonline.com/1919251/forget-down—aerogel-in...

Interesting. I was wondering since I've felt cold in almost every Gore-tex jacket I have worn. Also it would seem to me that using a really thin layer of the aerogel stuff could prevent overheating, keep warm while being stupidly thin and impressive.

Gore-Tex is not meant to insulate unless you're talking about just the bare skin feel against the inside of the jacket. Some Gore-Tex jackets had a mesh liner which helps alleviate that cold surface feeling (and protect the teflon layer).

If you're interested in insulation for high-exertion activities, Polartec Alpha is now the bee's knees.

Without special treatment aerogel would be damaged by movement and moisture that is common with a jacket. It’s also very costly to produces compared to other insulating materials.

All the aerogel I've ever seen has been super fragile and flaky. It didn't even last as a desk ornament, let alone sewn into clothes.

I also to seem to recall that it is, like REALLY bad to inhale particles of, similar to stuff like asbestos

Waxed canvas is used a lot for woodworking aprons. I'd look for a waxed canvas rain coat.

I don’t know about general purpose jackets but in the motorcycling world waxed cotton is still used by some manufacturers. Check this one out: https://www.revzilla.com/motorcycle/merlin-yoxall-wax-jacket

> (dense weave, regularly reapply wax)

Barbour?

Or Belstaff. Even Aigle makes pretty good waxed jackets on occasion.

But one of the best materials for rain is still... wool.

I have had several wool coats and none of them have been at all rain repellent. I’ve also worn many pure wool jumpers and hats in the rain, again none of them holding off anything more than the lightest drizzle.

What sort of wool is good for keeping off the rain?

Edit: Wearing (only) a damp wool jumper is fine if you’re up a mountain and it’s not too windy or freezing cold, but I’d still prefer to be dry!

Not the GP, so not sure what he was specifically talking about, but wool is known for retaining its insulative value even when wet.

Yes, you're wet, but you're still warm.

Many outdoorsmen prefer this to the uncertainty of being able to keep their gear dry.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about. By thick rainy weather I love nothing more than a coarse knitted woolen sweater and a heavy tweed jacket. It's warm, breathable and I'll never stay so long under the rain that it's soaked.

As far as strictly waterproofing goes, you do need coating or some hybrid material with PU weaved in. IMO it's more useful as a wind barrier than anything else.

This is why you always use layers with wool closest to the skin.

Gore-Tex has always been way overrated. It's willingness to debond with relatively little use, destroys its long term utility. There are better waterproof linings that will last. Ventilation can be provided by openings in the garment.

You might be thinking of something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driza-Bone ?

Barbour maybe - but is expensive and you need to get the knack of applying the wax.

There's always boiled wool. ;-)

A very similar product to what you are thinking of does exist - it's called Ventile. It is basically pure cotton woven extremely tightly making it waterproof. It has been around since the 1920s and is still used to make coats today.

Yep, the science is in. Lead, asbestos, DDT, PCBs, and PTFE/PFOS/PFOA.

3M Scotchgard (spray-on water-repellent for materials) was mostly PFOS, now it's PFBS.

Hipora, OTOH, is silicon-based. SympaTex is polyester-based.

On another note: I felt extremely stupid paying $300 for a Columbia Elite running rain jacket with Gore-Tex, with a lifetime warranty and bought from their store in Seattle, that subsequently disintegrated into god-knows-what and they wouldn't honor it. Never again: Gore-Tex or Columbia.

Comparison table of water-resistance and breathability of water-resistant fabrics:

https://www.sierra.com/lp2/waterproof-guide/

Everything will kill you, in sufficient quantities. The question is whether its use outweighs the risks, and I'd venture to say PTFE if called upon to settle accounts has done the world more good than harm.

That's likely true now, but we have a problem if the harm (pollution) accumulates each year and doesn't go away. Eventually it may exceed the good.

If you could snap your fingers and erase the environmental impact Goretex has had on the world, it would be the environmental equivalent of squishing a single ant. Yes, you did something but that something was ultimately pointless on a global scale.

If you’re not an alarmist, don’t wring your hands over Goretex. It is nothing like leaded gasoline.

The modern world is the blight on the environment. We just like it too much to ever change. We’d rather think Goretex or not separating glass from plastic or using/not using canvas shopping bags (depending on how contrarian you’re feeling) is the culprit. But really it’s us and how we like to live.

We should enjoy this ride while it lasts.

See for example the small town of Hoosick Falls, New York where PFOA poisoned the water supply.

Many sources, but here's one https://pfasproject.com/hoosick-falls-new-york/

Also in Parkersburg, where the resulting long legal battle was portrayed in the movie Dark Waters last year. Another great addition to the genre of "Mark Ruffalo investigative thrillers".

> Besides being known as deadly to parrots

Everything we know about this is anecdotal. But it seems true.

It's not hard to put a pan in a lab with a bird and see what happens. But no one will it seems.

Science is going backwards, we just sit around eating Kentucky Fried Chicken talking about how ethical we are.

And other than the fact we should never use anecdotal evidence when it's so easy to check, we also have no idea what temperatures it happens at or how bad it really is.

So it's hard to know if this is just crazy talk or something real.

As a parrot owner, this is true. It's a huge scare in the community because it's one of those facts not well known by even moderately-experienced/-researched owners.

It's almost a guaranteed kill to a parrot when heated. Very dangerous stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com