Several European countries have banned copper-based paint and several more are monitoring it for toxicity. California’s Senate Committee on Environmental Quality will now consider whether to follow their lead when they hear SB 623 [Kehoe] on Monday, May 2.
SB 623 prohibits the use of copper-based anti-fouling paints on recreational boat hulls. The bill would impose a January 1, 2015 ban on the sale of new boats with copper-based paint, and a January 1, 2019 ban on the use or application of copper-based paint.
Proponents of the bill say the recreational industry hurts itself by relying on a toxicity model. Copper-based paint is considered effective because it kills marine life, which is not only harmful in an obvious way but it encourages resistant strains of fouling that can further degrade marine life. They propose the industry switch to a non-toxic model. The money spent could stimulate innovation in technology and therefore significantly reduce long-term costs to boat owners by preserving the health of marine life for the recreational water industry.
Opponents to the bill argue that they are unable to find alternatives as inexpensive, effective and convenient as toxic paint that they are familiar with. These same opponents do not offer to bear the cost of the clean up from toxic paints, so from the start they do not offer a balanced view of total expenses. The toxic paints are thus considered by them as inexpensive and convenient because they do not account for clean up costs — testing, monitoring and preserving marine health.
The University of California Cooperative Extension Coastal Resources offered the following documentary in 2003 with an overview of the issues including the numerous non-toxic alternatives that have been available for more than five years:
 English |
Español |
As I wrote in 2007, nature already has many examples of innovation around anti-fouling in the water. Dolphin-skin paint was introduced to the International A-Class Catamaran fleet, for example. This bill offers an interesting look at the reasons to move away from primitive toxicity as a control/countermeasure and towards a more holistic risk management model.