HN

Comments (252)

• Menu

  Fischgericht
  There is a reason these kind of things are no longer possible in much of the western world and especially Europe-like US states like California:After the deindustrialization people started to enjoy healthy air and clear water.As always when it comes to "the good old times" or "make great again", your brain will remember very selectively.I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forbidden to swim in it, and if you did, you had weird oily chemicals on your skin that felt unhealthy (burn, itching etc).Back then we had huge production industries upstream, employing thousands of people.Today you can swim in the river without any problem at all. But the industry and the jobs have shrunken a lot, because not polluting the air and water simply is expensive.You can sum this up with: Producing stuff without polluting the environment in most cases is impossible. Reducing the pollution costs a lot of money, and can make your product non-competitive.This is why you outsource to other countries and let them do it, because you simply do not care about them living in a polluted environment. Poison Outsourcing.So, if the US wants production industry again, and want it to be competitive, than have a look on how the environment in the countries you will be competing with looks like, and then to an informed decision if you really want that.I'd pick the clean air and water, and have people poisoned far away that I don't know and can ignore.What would be your choice?
• rswail
  This is whining from someone that doesn't want to be responsible for the externality of pollution that these manufacturing facilities generate.The regulations are to stop the pollution, if you can manufacture without polluting, then you'll comply and be able to manufacture.The problem is that there are other regulatory environments where the people aren't protected from pollution.What would fix that is enforcing the regulations nation wide, then applying tariffs on imported products that don't enforce the same regulations.Net result, more expensive phones, better health and improved environment for the public. In the same way as car pollution was cleaned up.
• Menu

  mparkms
  The creator of the website is the CEO of a battery-powered induction cooktop company. (https://x.com/sdamico)He clearly has an agenda against what he perceives as onerous environmental regulations: https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026536815902208479 https://x.com/sdamico/status/2026552845294792994
• Menu

  daedrdev
  Listen y’all, it’s not just that we aren't letting companies spew chemicals into the air. The permitting and regulatory process is so extremely hostile that even when you want to and are able to do so safely and without emissions, it’s impossible.Instead you have to ship things from out of state and other countries, which generates emissions and pollution itself that might actually be more than local production.Its the same issue as housing. Endless rules and regulations, many of which make no attempt at doing anything but block, cause the wealth of socirty to be siphoned away. An apartment project in LA with permits complete is worth twice as much as one without. How do we see this and expect our economy to do anything except drown in bureaucracy?My advice is dont ever manufacturing anything in CA. They will try and kill your business for simply existing no matter how perfect you are.
• Menu

  mint5
  Oh I didn’t realize pineapple farms were banned in California and Alaska.I thought they hadn’t been built for other reasons over the last decade. But according to this, not being built means banned. TIL!Started reading this site but the massive gaps in logic and reasoning are like nails on a chalkboard.No new fabs being built in CA means fabs are banned?!Okay well fabs are banned in pretty much the whole country then, so why call out California?Just because something isn’t done doesn’t mean it’s banned. Neither is it necessarily bad. There’s a lot of reasons why not to build certain things certain areas - labor cost, earthquake risk, land is more desired leading to higher cost, blah blah blahThat doesn’t mean something is banned. Maybe we should look at making some things easier but this website is just a hit piece and has a clear motivation rather than being a trustworthy evaluation.It’s like those cringy billboards on highway 5 about Gavin newsom and water.Edit —— Complaining that large factories can’t easily be built in dense population centers like the Bay Area means things are banned is weird - who in the right mind thinks a sprawling factory with emissions should go smack dab in the middle of population centers? Why can’t we build a new nuclear plant in Manhattan or maybe an oil refinery on wall street!? Waah waah so outrageous! None were built in the last decade so it’s the outrageous regulations fault! I want my lead battery smelter in downtown Portland but Oregon banned it! Waah waah!Aside that, this site is mostly blaming California regulations for the nationwide manufacturing issues driven heavily by free trade
• Menu

  burkaman
  The Grandfatherd-in section is incredibly misleading. Look at the Semiconductor Fabrication section, for example. The implication is that these are the only fabs in the state, they wouldn't be able to get new permits today, and the red dots indicate that it would be "effectively impossible" to open any other ones. In fact (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat...) there are at least 18 fabs in California, and these are just two random examples of particularly old ones. Obviously they couldn't reopen under the same permits they got in the 60s, why would anyone expect that to be the case?
• Menu

  blintz
  They are playing a bit fast and loose with the word "banned".> Your smartphone contains materials processed through semiconductor fabrication, chemical etching, metal anodizing, glass tempering, and electroplating — none of which you could start a new facility for in California without years of litigation.I agree that we should make it easier to do things, specifically by decreasing the amount of litigation involved in doing stuff. But the risk of a bunch of litigation isn't a ban, right? I get that it's trying to be attention-grabbing, but calling it a ban when it's not just sort of confuses the issue.
• anon
  undefined
• Menu

  beachtaxidriver
  As a resident who likes to breathe clean air and drink clean water, none of that seems all that bad.I guess there should be an ability to do this farther from the population centers though.
• Menu

  yardie
  Interesting website."Semiconductor Fabrication (7nm/5nm)The main processor requires ultra-clean rooms, toxic gases (arsine, phosphine), and chemical etching. No new fabs have been built in CA in over a decade. Intel, TSMC, and Samsung all build elsewhere."Phosphine is pretty nasty stuff. California was full of EPA Superfund sites when the government got stuck with cleaning up all the toxic waste. Politicians and voters went, "Eff that!" after manufacturers left the state, but left their barrels of shit behind.
• clarionbell
  You could make similar site about much of Europe to be honest.It seems to me that there is a fundamental disconnect, between what society needs to function and what some societies are willing to tolerate. Almost everything we take for granted, like potable water, air conditioning, personal computers or long distance transportation, relies on industries generating some sort of externalities.Regulating these industries is necessary. But we have reached the point, where the regulation makes many of them almost impossible. This has several effects.First, the society is now dependent on delivery of these dirty products. This is obviously problematic if there is a major crisis that disrupts supply chains, or if those who manufacture them are no longer willing to deliver.Second, working class collapses. Manufacturing jobs are one of the more stable available. They are generally unionized, or are conductive to unionization. This is unlike service sector jobs. White collar professions can mostly cope. But those who were already disadvantaged find themselves in an even worse position.Third, the externalities move in locations with less oversight. This can, obviously, cause greater pollution and environmental degradation globally. Further, delivery of the manufactured goods across great distances adds to carbon footprint. This, again, leads to greater environmental toll.Taken together, benefits of overregulating "polluting" industry to oblivion, are at best local and temporary.I would also like to note, that the collapse of manufacturing jobs can be easily linked to increased political radicalization.That being said, it's not all gloom and doom. I firmly believe, that as the impacts of this approach are felt more and more, there will be a push for sensible deregulation. Europe is already leading the way, weakening or delaying some of the more absurd regulation schemes.[1][1] https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulat...
• edgarvaldes
  Let's be honest: People have no problem polluting elsewhere as long as they can consume the final product without suffering the consequences. TFA isn't important to the people of California.
• kylecazar
  It's interesting, but is there some conflation of regional restrictions with the state of California?Example: cites automotive paint shop restrictions as the quintessential example of what you can't do in CA, and qualifies it with a specific Bay Area regulation.
• yellow_lead
  > A modern auto paint shop emits volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during primer, base coat, and clear coat application. The Bay Area AQMD makes permitting a new paint shop nearly impossible. This is THE classic example of what you can't do in CA.Banned in California.. wait, I meant the Bay Area.
• wiskinator
  The site would be better if it linked to the actual regulation that prohibits each type of business instead of just making the claim “0 new factories of this type have been built”.
• Menu

  wewtyflakes
  So no new car paint shops or oil refineries? I'm okay with that.
• jey
  I wonder if there's a law+econ analysis of comparing the current framework (regulations and upfront permitting) vs having the regulations but then enforcement via combination of randomized gov't inspections and private lawsuits. The motivation would be to allow things to move faster while also requiring the same degree of compliance, but without the massive red tape upfront with administrators having no real incentive to approve projects or move fast. One obvious downside is that it effectively creates an economic incentive to try and skirt the law and/or find loopholes, but that arguably exists to the same degree in the existing system.
• Menu

  ortusdux
  They lost me at "vacuum deposition - impossible" without justification. As far as processes go it's one of the safest (everything happens in a sealed vacuum chamber). Maybe the solvents used to clean prior to coating?
• rising-sky
  Probably helpful to add why, otherwise this is just seems intended to trigger biases
• culi
  Now compared that to this map of superfund sites and the pollutants they've left in our soils and groundwater. Statistically speaking, an average American lives within 10 miles of one of these sitesall sites: https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/EPA::epa-facility-registry-s...npl sites: https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=...Also funnily enough, the first place I checked from this site's list of facilities that have been grandfathered in led to this finding> Lehigh Hanson's Permanente cement plant in Cupertino, CA, is permanently closing following thousands of environmental violations and over 80 years of operation. The plant was a major source of air pollution and discharged toxic selenium into Permanente Creek.Not being able to build a destroyer in California seems like a small price to pay for an ecosystem not poisoned
• Menu

  raziel2701
  Are other states building all this manufacturing/semiconductor capacity? I think it's an overall USA thing, we just don't do manufacturing anymore because it's cheaper to do it in another country.Not sure what the point of the website is. To me it looks like a bad faith argument. The secular trend in the US has been to increase margins by moving manufacturing to other countries.The tariffs are certainly not making it easier to manufacture domestically.
• daneel_w
  At least the New Republic is clean and healthy... on paper...
• a3w
  I claim BS: labs can operate with these and more dangerous chemicals.Top of the list is "sulfuric acid baths". The correct disposal of sulfuric acid is "dilute with water", or if about metal dissolved in it, yeah treat as waste to be cleaned up or compacted and stored into eternity at a cost. So even after skimming, this seems agenda driven, not a fact sheet.This seems like a "we cannot do it cost efficiently, so we claim it is impossible since China underbids us"
• inigyou
  So most of these are just saying "you can't do this because they won't let you dump your waste in the river" and some are just "nobody's doing this in California yet"What if you ... don't dump your waste in the river? Is it legal if you dispose of your waste properly?
• Menu

  phyzix5761
  "Grandfathered in"? Isn't that how you create monopolies?
• ixtli
  This kinda makes me wanna move to CA. someone should take these list items and make a map of those fabs in the US so we can avoid moving near them.
• paxys
  Half the states in the country are actively deregulating all of this stuff. Why not take your factories there? California is anyways too expensive.
• Menu

  taeric
  I confess I don't know what to make of this. Without seeing the reasons why these are banned, what is the point? Would be like lamenting how you can't use asbestos. Sure, but is that necessarily a bad thing?
• Menu

  bigyabai
  > California has outsourced its industrial base while still consuming the products.America did that. If it was just California then they could import iPhone parts from Alabama, but they don't do that do they?
• seb1204
  Is this a lobbying initiative?Surely the answer is not let's just allow to pillage, pollute and extort again to build a car, ship or phone.I like clean air, and rivers. They are good for every being.
• jameson
  I don't want to make a mess in my yard but I don't care if your yard is a mess and I'll buy itWhy not invest in ways to make these processes more eco friendly?
• chung8123
  My favorite banned in CA is the "off roster" handguns that the police can buy and sell to the people of CA at a markup.
• anon
  undefined
• Menu

  Take8435
  What about "Things banned in Texas"? or "Idaho"?This has 70 upvotes within 30 minutes. This feels like an astroturf.
• givemeethekeys
  How do the new manufacturing startups in the Bay Area and El Segundo deal with these limitations?
• Menu

  parl_match
  A lot of these are stretches or remove nuance. I get the point they are trying to make, but it's a lot weaker than they think and undermined by their own "hero" example: painting cars in California> A modern auto paint shop emits volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during primer, base coat, and clear coat application. The Bay Area AQMD makes permitting a new paint shop nearly impossible. This is THE classic example of what you can't do in CA.Ah yes, the Bay Area, famously "all of California". And on top of that, the restrictions are mostly in highly populated areas.
• CodinM
  The author equates "you need a permit, which you obtain by making proof you follow the law and best practices re: handling dangerous substances" with "BANNED!!!!!!".I dislike how misleading and emotionally targeted this is and I understand the hate we get as tech people if this is the best we can do.
• 01100011
  CA is currently importing gas from Bermuda via the Panama Canal:https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/02/16/gasoline-starved-cali...I appreciate some of the arguments here about pushing pollution outside the state, but this is madness.
• mark242
  I love that "The Grandfathered In" section. Here's just one sample of a place that presumably this stupid website wants to keep up and running:https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2025-10-04/chevron...The guy who made this site is selling a $7k stove? Good luck with that, my dude.
• Menu

  bitwize
  Got a new one. In California—the only place that matters in tech—all operating systems must implement age verification by Jan 1, 2027. Which means this is coming to a computer near you, worldwide.
• 201984
  But don't you get it? We're moving up the value chain to things only WE can do.
• Menu

  crawshaw
  Lot of things could be added to this list. Good luck getting permission to start a hospital, or permission to mine/refine anything with a slightly messy process (e.g. rare earth metals). You can't build a new port. The California Coastal Commission won't let you open a new hotel anywhere on the water. You can't even keep a bar open late in San Francisco.
• OkayPhysicist
  The claim that aluminum anodizing is "banned in California" because of the sulfuric acid waste it produces is patently absurd. There are no shortage of labs, factories, and more in California that use sulfuric acid, and they all figure out how to dispose of their waste without going "fuck it, YOLO it into the river".
• thereisnospork
  A lot of people on this site clearly have never tried doing anything in California that involves more infrastructure than a laptop. Can easily be 18 months or more to get a permit to 'do things the right way'. If they'll even deign to give you one.
• goodluckchuck
  California can do a lot to private companies, but the supremacy clause allows the federal government to do what it wants. If a business wants to engage in these illegal-in-California practices, they could partner with the federal government.Edit: Now that I’m doing the research a partnership isn’t even needed, just a contract. Which makes sense, the feds cannot hire a private individual to do what would be illegal for them to do themselves… conversely, a company who is contracted to do federal business also enjoys supremacy by virtue of acting for the feds.
• nphardon
  honestly, you couldn't even build your own house.
• Menu

  themafia
  The newest thing I've seen:"compostable - except in CA"
• ranger_danger
  Guess we can add free (from age verification) operating systems to that list now as well.
• Menu

  georgemcbay
  As a Californian:1) They forgot to list Kid Rock (https://x.com/GovPressOffice/status/1969256868364095868)2) Good, I'm glad this toxic shit is banned.3) I wish people that constantly complained about California's regulations/taxes/politics would just quietly see their way out rather than obsessively whine about it. Enjoy Texas/Florida/wherever you go. We'll be ok without you.
• anon
  undefined
• mrbluecoat
  Is hosting a website in California banned? /shttps://check-host.net/ip-info?host=bannedincalifornia.org
• dayyan
  [flagged]
• Menu

  observationist
  They just really, really want to be European.Just look at what they've done about rebuilding the Palisades, and the nonsense they've perpetrated, allowing people to live and build in places that are completely impossible to make safe to live because of incredibly stupid bureacratic policy conflicts. And then the staggering mismanagement of water resources, allowing huge tax breaks and claims on water rights to giant corporations, then completely taxing and running out farmers and landowners with legacy rights, making it impossible for them to live there.At least if they drive everyone productive out of the state, the environment will be pristine.It's like some insanely scaled up version of gentrification, but in the most aggressively, offensively stupid way possible. California is a tasteless joke.