OK nanotech guys ... Samsung SilverCare and environmentalists

[weunice]

Samsung has come under fire for using a nanotech device in their washers that introduces Silver ions Ag+ into the wash cycle to kill bacteria. I am curious if anyone here knows if the use of nanotech would do anything specific that should cause concern.

My understanding is that the process Samsung uses simply produces silver ions. They kill bacteria. Environmentalists are concerned. The EPA has told Samsung they have a year to provide test data indicating it is safe for the environment.

Other than the method used (nanotech process of some sort) is this really any different than processes used in water treatment plants and to disinfect swimming pools? If not, why all the fuss over the nanotech technology and no fuss over existing technology that accomplishes the same thing that has been in place for decades?

[atobulldog]

Them dang capitalists are messing with them there warshing machines in the shed. Where do they get off puttin silver iods in our warshing water. Cement ponds are one thing, but warshing machines, I don't think so. What if some of them silver iods get in my beer cans when we run outa fridge space?

Simple answer: Its global warming.

[dawg80]

You mean "climate change."

[FishingBack]

Shouldn't the EPA have a list of substances that are "bad" for the environment?

[randerizer]

Not really sure why it is any worse for the environment than alternative silver-based processes. I guess you could make the argument that it is harder to filter the smaller stuff back out? Then again, I don't really see that as a problem, especially if they meet spec on how much silver goes out in wastewater. Silver ions stick to lots of amine-based materials, though, as well as to silica, etc., so it shouldn't really be to difficult to find a way to "trap" them before release.

Honestly, one can argue that the use of nanotechnology (relative to other silver-based processes) is better for the environment, simply because you can get by with so much less silver in the process (surface-to-volume considerations) and still get the same amount of benefit.

[weunice]

Not really sure why it is any worse for the environment than alternative silver-based processes. I guess you could make the argument that it is harder to filter the smaller stuff back out? Then again, I don't really see that as a problem, especially if they meet spec on how much silver goes out in wastewater. Silver ions stick to lots of amine-based materials, though, as well as to silica, etc., so it shouldn't really be to difficult to find a way to "trap" them before release.

Honestly, one can argue that the use of nanotechnology (relative to other silver-based processes) is better for the environment, simply because you can get by with so much less silver in the process (surface-to-volume considerations) and still get the same amount of benefit.

The Samsung SilverCare supposedly solves the stinky front loader issue (a problem reported by folks I know who have the LG) because it kills all the bacteria in the wash. It also reduces the energy normally used for hot water by 92% and it supposedly eliminates the need for bleach. Initially I was considering it FOR its green aspects then I read the environmental concerns and over time started thinking they were suspect. I am thinking that there are some folks who are not aware of how the process works confusing "nanosilver" (a Samsung term) with some newfangled material that is different than Ag+ which is actually what the process produces.

The only gripe I can see is if there is a biproduct of the process that I am not aware of OR if they are exceeding standards (from what I have read they are not). Watch me buy it and find out they are firing large volumes of crazy weird stuff out the thing ..

[randerizer]

The Samsung SilverCare supposedly solves the stinky front loader issue (a problem reported by folks I know who have the LG) because it kills all the bacteria in the wash. It also reduces the energy normally used for hot water by 92% and it supposedly eliminates the need for bleach. Initially I was considering it FOR its green aspects then I read the environmental concerns and over time started thinking they were suspect. I am thinking that there are some folks who are not aware of how the process works confusing "nanosilver" (a Samsung term) with some newfangled material that is different than Ag+ which is actually what the process produces.

The only gripe I can see is if there is a biproduct of the process that I am not aware of OR if they are exceeding standards (from what I have read they are not). Watch me buy it and find out they are firing large volumes of crazy weird stuff out the thing ..

Might want to handwash your underwear for a while after you purchase the thing, just in case. Woudn't want to get any of that nanosilver stuff where it doesn't belong.

In all seriousness, it's probably just another example of the environmentalists finding something new to argue about. As long as they are coming in within environmental limits, I don't see what the big deal is.

[WWDog]

I am not a Nano type but I did buy a Samsung washer and dryer. I considered the silver ion one but opted for the regular high efficiency. The washer works great and the smell can be easily avoided by leaving the door ajar with a towel or something to let it dry. Also wiping the rubber gasket after washing helps. We have used that method and the washer has never smelled in the 1 1/2 years we have had it. As far as the killing bacteria in the clothes, I don't own one so I wouldn't know but the washer does a very good job. If you are concerned about bacteria and the silver, look into the steam washers. The steam washers do use more energy though.

[RealityCheck]

Shouldn't the EPA have a list of substances that are "bad" for the environment?

They should, but the list those kooks are trying to enforce now includes things that are "good" for the environment.

The EPA is all about control and very little about protection.

[hoppinmad]

Shouldn't the EPA have a list of substances that are "bad" for the environment?

They do...as conservatives, me and you are on the list.

[Guisslapp]

They do...as conservatives, me and you are on the list.

lol