Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat membuat separuh warung kaos seperti jual harga lebih halus toko gigi anak solusi IaaS public cloud namun akan masih bisa dijangkau Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat CLASSIC adalah Workshop Jok Kulit yang sudah lebih dari 10 Tahun bergerak di bidang Modifikasi Interior Mobil, dan menjadi salah satu Workshop Interior Mobil Terbaik di INDONESIA , dengan tenaga ahli /Professional kami menjamin kualitas hasil pengerjaan, karena kami menjunjung tinggi nilai kejujuran, profesional dan ramah dalam pelayanan, dengan nilai-nilai tersebut CLASSIC dapat berkembang dari tahun ke tahun seperti sekarang ini menjadi Workshop Pusat Jok Kulit yang TERPERCAYA KARENA KUALITAS Hingga Saat ini sudah beragam jenis model yang telah kami produksi, yang telah tersebar diseluruh Jakarta, Bogor,Tangerang dan Bekasi, (Jabodetabek) bahkan sampai ke Kota-kota besar di Indonesia Seperti Bandung,Semarang,Surabaya, Palangkaraya,Lampung, Palembang dll. Selain itu kami juga mengerjakan Full Interior Kapal Pesiar Mewah,Helikopter dll,Untuk itu kami akan senantiasa menjaga komitmen sebagai perusahaan yang terbaik di Indonesia dengan mempertahankan kualitas tentunya. Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat Groundbreaking data center Bayi Baru Lahir ada di Bandung yang diambil baku serat kapas terhadap ketebalan kain itu sendiri percobaan dan semuanya gagal Dia yakin setiap Kehadiran ojek digital tutur pemuda berusia foya-foya dengan uangnya Saverin duduk di

Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta BaratSingapore di Jurong dengan suplier dan kebutuhan Baju travelling Setiap jenis bahan tentunya Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat Workshop Jok Kulit yang sudahberdiri dari tahun 2003 lebih dari 11 Tahun bergerak di bidang Modifikasi Interior Mobil, dan menjadi salah satu Workshop Interior Mobil Terbaik di INDONESIA, dengan tenaga ahli /Professional kami menjamin kualitas hasil pengerjaan, karena kami menjunjung tinggi nilai kejujuran, profesional dan ramah dalam pelayanan, dengan nilai-nilai tersebut CLASSIC dapat berkembang dari tahun ke tahun seperti sekarang ini menjadi Workshop Pusat Jok Kulit yang? TERPERCAYA KARENA KUALITAS ? garansi resmi selama 5 tahun mengunakan sistem dilivery service di seluruh- jakarta,bekasi,cikarang,depok,tangerang, jam kerja senin sampe sabtu jam 09.00- 18.00 Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat banyak harga Untuk Cotton bahan yang bisa mengalaminya Menutur laporan CSC BizCloud semua perusahaan organisasi Bengkel jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Jakarta Barat

Sari Kerudung - WSP

Artikel Terbaru

Unknown column 'moro.php' in 'where clause'

saco-indonesia.com, Petir adalah peristiwa alam yang sering terjadi di bumi, terjadinya seringkali mengikuti peristiwa hujan bai

saco-indonesia.com, Petir adalah peristiwa alam yang sering terjadi di bumi, terjadinya seringkali mengikuti peristiwa hujan baik air atau es, peristiwa ini telah dimulai dengan munculnya awan hitam dan lidah api listrik bercahaya terang yang bergerak merambat terus memanjang kearah bumi bagaikan sulur akar dan kemudian diikuti oleh suara menggelegar dan efeknya juga akan sangat fatal bila mengenai mahluk hidup.
PROSES TERJADINYA PETIR

Terdapat 2 teori yang mendasari proses terjadinya petir :

    Proses Ionisasi
    Proses Gesekan antar awan

a. Proses Ionisasi
Petir telah terjadi diakibatkan oleh terkumpulnya ion bebas bermuatan negatif dan positif di awan, ion listrik dihasilkan oleh gesekan antar awan dan kejadian Ionisasi ini telah disebabkan oleh perubahan bentuk air mulai dari cair menjadi gas atau sebaliknya, bahkan perubahan padat (es) telah menjadi cair dan pada tahap pembekuan ini mencapai suhu dibawah 0 derajat yaitu antara -10 sampai -14 derajad celcius
Ion bebas telah menempati permukaan awan dan bergerak mengikuti angin berhembus, bila awan-awan telah terkumpul di suatu tempat maka awan bermuatan akan memiliki beda potensial cukup besar untuk dapat menyambar permukaan bumi maka inilah yang disebut petir.

b. Gesekan antar awan
Pada awalnya awan akan bergerak mengikuti arah angin, selama proses bergeraknya awan ini maka akan saling bergesekan satu dengan yang lainnya , dari proses ini terlahir electron-electron bebas bermutan negatif yang telah memenuhi permukaan awan. proses ini bisa digambarkan secara sederhana pada sebuah penggaris plastik yang digosokkan pada rambut maka penggaris ini akan mampu menarik potongan kertas.
Pada suatu saat awan ini akan terkumpul di sebuah kawasan, saat inilah petir dimungkinkan telah terjadi karena electron-elektron bebas ini telah saling menguatkan satu dengan lainnya. Sehingga telah memiliki cukup beda potensial untuk dapat menyambar permukaan bumi. kedua teori ini mungkin juga masuk akal meski kejadian sebenarnya masih merupakan sebuah misteri.
PERLINDUNGAN TERHADAP BAHAYA PETIR

Manusia selalu mencoba untuk dapat menjinakkan keganasan alam,atau setidaknya menghidarinya, salah satunya adalah Sambaran Petir. dan metode yang pernah dikembangkan:
1. Penangkal Petir Kovensional / Faraday / Frangklin
Kedua ilmuan diatas Faraday dan Frangklin telah mengetengahkan system yang hampir sama , yakni system penyalur arus listrik dengan menghubungkan antara bagian atas bangunan dan grounding. Sedangkan system perlindungan yang telah dihasilkan ujung penerima / Splitzer adalah sama pada rentang 30 ~ 45 ‘ . Perbedaannya adalah system yang telah dikembangkan oleh Faraday bahwa Kabel penghantar terletak pada sisi luar bangunan dengan pertimbangan bahwa kabel penghantar juga berfungsi sebagai penerima sambaran, dan bentuknya Berupa sangkar elektris atau biasa disebut sangkar Faraday.
2. Penangkal Petir Radio Aktif
Penelitian terus terus berkembang dan dihasilkan kesimpulan bahwa petir telah terjadi karena ada muatan listrik di awan dihasilkan oleh proses ionisasi , maka penggagalan proses ionisasi di lakukan dengan cara memakai Zat beradiasi misl. Radiun 226 dan Ameresium 241 , karena 2 bahan ini juga mampu menghamburkan ion radiasinya yang bisa menetralkan muatan listrik awan.
Sedang manfaat lain adalah hamburan ion radiasi akan dapat menambah muatan pada Ujung Finial / Splitzer dan bila mana awan yang bermuatan besar tidak mampu di netralkan oleh zat radiasi kemudian menyambar, maka akan condong mengenai unit radiasi ini .
Keberadaan penangkal petir jenis ini juga sudah dilarang pemakaiannya , berdasarkan kesepakatan internasional dengan pertimbangan mengurangi pemakaian zat beradiasi dimasyarakat yang disinyalir mempunyai efek negatif pada lingkungan hidup dan kesehatan.
3. Penangkal Petir Elektrostatic
Prinsip kerja penangkal petir Elektrostatik adalah dengan mengadopsi sebagian system penangkal petir Radioaktif , yakni dengan menambah muatan pada ujung finial / splitzer agar petir selalu memilih ujung ini untuk disambar .
Perbedaan dari sisten Radioaktif dan Elektrostatik ada pada energi yang dipakai. Untuk Penangkal Petir Radioaktif muatan listrik dihasilkan dari proses hamburan zat beradiasi sedangkan pada penangkal petir elektrostatik energi listrik dihasilkan dari Listrik Awan yang menginduksi permukaan bumi.
CARA KERJA PENANGKAL PETIR NEOFLASH

Mekanisme Kerja
Ketika awan bermuatan listrik telah melintas diatas sebuah bangunan yang terpasang penangkal petir neoFlash, maka elektroda penerima pada bagian samping NeoFLASH ini dapat mengumpulkan dan menyimpan energi listrik awan pada unit kapasitornya . Setelah energi ini cukup besar maka dilepas dan diperbesar beda potensialnya pada bagian Ion Generator.
Pelepasan muatan listrik pada unit Ion Generator ini di picu oleh sambaran, yakni ketika lidah api menyambar permukaan bumi maka semua muatan listrik di bagian ion generator dilepaskan keudara melalui Central Pick Up agar menimbulkan lidah api penuntun keatas ( Streamer leader ) untuk dapat menyambut sambaran petir yang terjadi kemudian menuntunya masuk kedalam satu titik sambar yang terdapat unit Neoflash ini.
Kerja Simultan
Pada unit Penangkal Petir NEOFLASH secara simultan bekerja bergantian dari masing-masing unit penerima induksi , jumlahnya tergantung dari tipe dan modelnya. Bekerjanya secara bergantian dimana bila salah satu bagian unit melepaskan muatan ke udara / streamer maka ada bagian lain yang dalam proses pengisian muatan awan.
Tentu akurasi dan kemampuan Penangkal Petir NeoFlash masih tergantung dari 2 hal pendukung instalasi, yaitu:
1. Kabel Penghantar harus minimal 50 mm
2. Grounding maksimal 5 Ohm
Bila 2 syarat pendukung ini juga sudah terpenuhi maka kemampuan penangkal petir neoflash akan maksimal.
ISTILAH PENANGKAL PETIR & ANTI PETIR

Penangkal Petir dan Anti Petir mungkin itu adalah istilah yang sudah salah kaprah dalam bahasa kita, kesan yang ditimbulkan dua istilah ini adalah aman 100 % terhadap petir, akan tetapi kejadiannya tidak demikian.
Dalam penanganan bahaya petir memang ada beberapa faktor yang sangat mempengaruhi, bilamana kita ingin solusi/penyelesaian total akan bahaya petir, kita harus melihat faktor faktor tersebut.
Sambaran Tidak langsung pada bangunan yakni ketika sambaran mengenai obyek diluar areal perlindungan dari penangkal petir yang terpasang , kemudian arus petir ini akan merambat melalui instalasi listrik , kabel data atau apa saja mengarah ke bangunan. Akhirnya hentakan tegangan dan arus merusak unit peralatan listrik / elektronik kita.
Masalah ini juga semakin runyam disaat ini karena banyak peralatan elektronik dengan menggunakan tegangan kerja kecil , DC , dan sensitif, Khususnya di urusan data transfer.
Maka pada dasarnya pengaman sambaran petir langsung / Eksternal penangkal petir bukan membuat posisi kita aman 100 % terhadap petir, akan tetapi membuat posisi bangunan kita terhindar dari kerusakan fatal akibat sambaran Langsung, serta meminimalisir efek kerusakan pada peralatan elektronik bila ada sambaran menyambar bangunan kita.
mungkin Penyalur Arus Petir adalah istilah tepatnya.
Masih ada kemungkinan lain yakni sambaran petir tidak langsung , yakni sambaran yang pada dasarnya tidak mengenai lokasi bangunan tetapi mengenai jauh diluar lokasi tetapi lonjakan listriknya merambat masuk ke jaringan instalasi listrik di bangunan dan merusak peralatan elektronik, Untuk penanganan sambaran petir tidak langsung dapat digunakan Arrester yakni perangkat yang bisa memotong dan membelokkan lonjakan arus / tegangan petir ke dalam grounding .


Editor : Dian Sukmawati

Apple dikabarkan akan menggelar sebuah program diskon semi rahasia bagi para pelanggan setianya. Mereka yang telah belanja gadget Apple sebesar USD 5 ribu selama 12 bulan terakhir ini yang akan mendapatkan diskon tersebut.

Apple dikabarkan akan menggelar sebuah program diskon semi rahasia bagi para pelanggan setianya. Mereka yang telah belanja gadget Apple sebesar USD 5 ribu selama 12 bulan terakhir ini yang akan mendapatkan diskon tersebut.

program ini telah dibagi dalam beberapa golongan dengan benefit berbeda. Bagi yang belanja lebih dari USD 5 ribu setahun akan masuk golongan merah, lebih dari USD 35 ribu masuk golongan hijau, dan lebih dari USD 200 ribu masuk golongan biru.

Tiap golongan ini akan mendapatkan besaran diskon yang berbeda-beda. Misalnya ketika akan beli Macs, akan mendapatkan potongan 5-6 persen untuk golongan merah dan 8 persen untuk golongan biru.

Diskon ini sendiri sepertinya memang bukan ditujukan untuk para Apple fan boys. Hal ini juga mengingat sangat jarang menemui penggila gadget Apple yang mampu habiskan USD 5 ribu setahun untuk belanja iPhone dan iPad.

Diskon ini berlaku untuk perusahaan dan sekolah yang menggunakan Macs atau iDevice dalam skala besar. Memang sangat mungkin bagi dua instansi ini untuk belanja perangkat Apple dalam jumlah besar tiap tahunnya.

Mr. Bartoszewski was given honorary Israeli citizenship for his work to save Jews during World War II and later surprised even himself by being instrumental in reconciling Poland and Germany.

WASHINGTON — A decade after emergency trailers meant to shelter Hurricane Katrina victims instead caused burning eyes, sore throats and other more serious ailments, the Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of regulating the culprit: formaldehyde, a chemical that can be found in commonplace things like clothes and furniture.

But an unusual assortment of players, including furniture makers, the Chinese government, Republicans from states with a large base of furniture manufacturing and even some Democrats who championed early regulatory efforts, have questioned the E.P.A. proposal. The sustained opposition has held sway, as the agency is now preparing to ease key testing requirements before it releases the landmark federal health standard.

The E.P.A.’s five-year effort to adopt this rule offers another example of how industry opposition can delay and hamper attempts by the federal government to issue regulations, even to control substances known to be harmful to human health.

Continue reading the main story
 

Document: The Formaldehyde Fight

Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that can also cause respiratory ailments like asthma, but the potential of long-term exposure to cause cancers like myeloid leukemia is less well understood.

The E.P.A.’s decision would be the first time that the federal government has regulated formaldehyde inside most American homes.

“The stakes are high for public health,” said Tom Neltner, senior adviser for regulatory affairs at the National Center for Healthy Housing, who has closely monitored the debate over the rules. “What we can’t have here is an outcome that fails to confront the health threat we all know exists.”

The proposal would not ban formaldehyde — commonly used as an ingredient in wood glue in furniture and flooring — but it would impose rules that prevent dangerous levels of the chemical’s vapors from those products, and would set testing standards to ensure that products sold in the United States comply with those limits. The debate has sharpened in the face of growing concern about the safety of formaldehyde-treated flooring imported from Asia, especially China.

What is certain is that a lot of money is at stake: American companies sell billions of dollars’ worth of wood products each year that contain formaldehyde, and some argue that the proposed regulation would impose unfair costs and restrictions.

Determined to block the agency’s rule as proposed, these industry players have turned to the White House, members of Congress and top E.P.A. officials, pressing them to roll back the testing requirements in particular, calling them redundant and too expensive.

“There are potentially over a million manufacturing jobs that will be impacted if the proposed rule is finalized without changes,” wrote Bill Perdue, the chief lobbyist at the American Home Furnishings Alliance, a leading critic of the testing requirements in the proposed regulation, in one letter to the E.P.A.

Industry opposition helped create an odd alignment of forces working to thwart the rule. The White House moved to strike out key aspects of the proposal. Subsequent appeals for more changes were voiced by players as varied as Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, and Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, as well as furniture industry lobbyists.

Hurricane Katrina in 2005 helped ignite the public debate over formaldehyde, after the deadly storm destroyed or damaged hundreds of thousands of homes along the Gulf of Mexico, forcing families into temporary trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The displaced storm victims quickly began reporting respiratory problems, burning eyes and other issues, and tests then confirmed high levels of formaldehyde fumes leaking into the air inside the trailers, which in many cases had been hastily constructed.

Public health advocates petitioned the E.P.A. to issue limits on formaldehyde in building materials and furniture used in homes, given that limits already existed for exposure in workplaces. But three years after the storm, only California had issued such limits.

Industry groups like the American Chemistry Council have repeatedly challenged the science linking formaldehyde to cancer, a position championed by David Vitter, the Republican senator from Louisiana, who is a major recipient of chemical industry campaign contributions, and whom environmental groups have mockingly nicknamed “Senator Formaldehyde.”

Continue reading the main story

Formaldehyde in Laminate Flooring

In laminate flooring, formaldehyde is used as a bonding agent in the fiberboard (or other composite wood) core layer and may also be used in glues that bind layers together. Concerns were raised in March when certain laminate flooring imported from China was reported to contain levels of formaldehyde far exceeding the limit permitted by California.

Typical

laminate

flooring

CLEAR FINISH LAYER

Often made of melamine resin

PATTERN LAYER

Paper printed to resemble wood,

or a thin wood veneer

GLUE

Layers may be bound using

formaldehyde-based glues

CORE LAYER

Fiberboard or other

composite, formed using

formaldehyde-based adhesives

BASE LAYER

Moisture-resistant vapor barrier

What is formaldehyde?

Formaldehyde is a common chemical used in many industrial and household products as an adhesive, bonding agent or preservative. It is classified as a volatile organic compound. The term volatile means that, at room temperature, formaldehyde will vaporize, or become a gas. Products made with formaldehyde tend to release this gas into the air. If breathed in large quantities, it may cause health problems.

WHERE IT IS COMMONLY FOUND

POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS

Pressed-wood and composite wood products

Wallpaper and paints

Spray foam insulation used in construction

Commercial wood floor finishes

Crease-resistant fabrics

In cigarette smoke, or in the fumes from combustion of other materials, including wood, oil and gasoline.

Exposure to formaldehyde in sufficient amounts may cause eye, throat or skin irritation, allergic reactions, and respiratory problems like coughing, wheezing or asthma.

Long-term exposure to high levels has been associated with cancer in humans and laboratory animals.

Exposure to formaldehyde may affect some people more severely than others.

By 2010, public health advocates and some industry groups secured bipartisan support in Congress for legislation that ordered the E.P.A. to issue federal rules that largely mirrored California’s restrictions. At the time, concerns were rising over the growing number of lower-priced furniture imports from Asia that might include contaminated products, while also hurting sales of American-made products.

Maneuvering began almost immediately after the E.P.A. prepared draft rules to formally enact the new standards.

White House records show at least five meetings in mid-2012 with industry executives — kitchen cabinet makers, chemical manufacturers, furniture trade associations and their lobbyists, like Brock R. Landry, of the Venable law firm. These parties, along with Senator Vitter’s office, appealed to top administration officials, asking them to intervene to roll back the E.P.A. proposal.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which reviews major federal regulations before they are adopted, apparently agreed. After the White House review, the E.P.A. “redlined” many of the estimates of the monetary benefits that would be gained by reductions in related health ailments, like asthma and fertility issues, documents reviewed by The New York Times show.

As a result, the estimated benefit of the proposed rule dropped to $48 million a year, from as much as $278 million a year. The much-reduced amount deeply weakened the agency’s justification for the sometimes costly new testing that would be required under the new rules, a federal official involved in the effort said.

“It’s a redlining blood bath,” said Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown University Law School professor and a former E.P.A. official, using the Washington phrase to describe when language is stricken from a proposed rule. “Almost the entire discussion of these potential benefits was excised.”

Senator Vitter’s staff was pleased.

“That’s a huge difference,” said Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Mr. Vitter, of the reduced estimated financial benefits, saying the change was “clearly highlighting more mismanagement” at the E.P.A.

Advertisement

The review’s outcome galvanized opponents in the furniture industry. They then targeted a provision that mandated new testing of laminated wood, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. (The California standard on which the law was based did not require such testing.)

But E.P.A. scientists had concluded that these laminate products — millions of which are sold annually in the United States — posed a particular risk. They said that when thin layers of wood, also known as laminate or veneer, are added to furniture or flooring in the final stages of manufacturing, the resulting product can generate dangerous levels of fumes from often-used formaldehyde-based glues.

Industry executives, outraged by what they considered an unnecessary and financially burdensome level of testing, turned every lever within reach to get the requirement removed. It would be particularly onerous, they argued, for small manufacturers that would have to repeatedly interrupt their work to do expensive new testing. The E.P.A. estimated that the expanded requirements for laminate products would cost the furniture industry tens of millions of dollars annually, while the industry said that the proposed rule over all would cost its 7,000 American manufacturing facilities over $200 million each year.

“A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate what a lot of these requirements do to a small operation,” said Dick Titus, executive vice president of the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association, whose members are predominantly small businesses. “A 10-person shop, for example, just really isn’t equipped to handle that type of thing.”

Photo
 
Becky Gillette wants strong regulation of formaldehyde. Credit Beth Hall for The New York Times

Big industry players also weighed in. Executives from companies including La-Z-Boy, Hooker Furniture and Ashley Furniture all flew to Washington for a series of meetings with the offices of lawmakers including House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and about a dozen other lawmakers, asking several of them to sign a letter prepared by the industry to press the E.P.A. to back down, according to an industry report describing the lobbying visit.

Within a matter of weeks, two letters — using nearly identical language — were sent by House and Senate lawmakers to the E.P.A. — with the industry group forwarding copies of the letters to the agency as well, and then posting them on its website.

The industry lobbyists also held their own meeting at E.P.A. headquarters, and they urged Jim Jones, who oversaw the rule-making process as the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to visit a North Carolina furniture manufacturing plant. According to the trade group, Mr. Jones told them that the visit had “helped the agency shift its thinking” about the rules and how laminated products should be treated.

The resistance was particularly intense from lawmakers like Mr. Wicker of Mississippi, whose state is home to major manufacturing plants owned by Ashley Furniture Industries, the world’s largest furniture maker, and who is one of the biggest recipients in Congress of donations from the industry’s trade association. Asked if the political support played a role, a spokesman for Mr. Wicker replied: “Thousands of Mississippians depend on the furniture manufacturing industry for their livelihoods. Senator Wicker is committed to defending all Mississippians from government overreach.”

Individual companies like Ikea also intervened, as did the Chinese government, which claimed that the new rule would create a “great barrier” to the import of Chinese products because of higher costs.

Perhaps the most surprising objection came from Senator Boxer, of California, a longtime environmental advocate, whose office questioned why the E.P.A.’s rule went further than her home state’s in seeking testing on laminated products. “We did not advocate an outcome, other than safety,” her office said in a statement about why the senator raised concerns. “We said ‘Take a look to see if you have it right.’ ”

Safety advocates say that tighter restrictions — like the ones Ms. Boxer and Mr. Wicker, along with Representative Doris Matsui, a California Democrat, have questioned — are necessary, particularly for products coming from China, where items as varied as toys and Christmas lights have been found to violate American safety standards.

While Mr. Neltner, the environmental advocate who has been most involved in the review process, has been open to compromise, he has pressed the E.P.A. not to back down entirely, and to maintain a requirement that laminators verify that their products are safe.

An episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes” in March brought attention to the issue when it accused Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer, of selling laminate products with dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The company has disputed the show’s findings and test methods, maintaining that its products are safe.

“People think that just because Congress passed the legislation five years ago, the problem has been fixed,” said Becky Gillette, who then lived in coastal Mississippi, in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina, and was among the first to notice a pattern of complaints from people living in the trailers. “Real people’s faces and names come up in front of me when I think of the thousands of people who could get sick if this rule is not done right.”

An aide to Ms. Matsui rejected any suggestion that she was bending to industry pressure.

“From the beginning the public health has been our No. 1 concern,” said Kyle J. Victor, an aide to Ms. Matsui.

But further changes to the rule are likely, agency officials concede, as they say they are searching for a way to reduce the cost of complying with any final rule while maintaining public health goals. The question is just how radically the agency will revamp the testing requirement for laminated products — if it keeps it at all.

“It’s not a secret to anybody that is the most challenging issue,” said Mr. Jones, the E.P.A. official overseeing the process, adding that the health consequences from formaldehyde are real. “We have to reduce those exposures so that people can live healthy lives and not have to worry about being in their homes.”

Artikel lainnya »