Almost every Canadian has a spray can of WD-40 in the garage, but that’s about to change.
You use it to fix just about anything that needs a little lubrication, squeaky hinges, rusty bolts and even your bike chain.
Update: Thanks to @Sbhinclusion for sharing this press release from WD-40, which states that they will become compliant with th new regulation.
WD-40 clarified that their products will comply with these regulations and will still be available in Canada after the ban takes effect.
But my rage-bait headline!
Now what do we do with this rage!? I’m angry and confused now!
I save it for people who suggest using WD-40 as a lubricant. Then I unload 2-3 years of checked rage.
Hey! Look at this guy! He seems angry too! You should believe and vote for him so you’re less confused!
In America, said angry man is almost always in favour of tax and service cuts for Citizens United reasons. In Canada, the angry man is aping the American angry men because the border is apparently theoretical.
The article literally says that as the last paragraph despite having wasted hundreds of words describing absolutely nothing before that.
I wouldn’t trust anything ever published by this outlet. This is intentional disinformation.
Sensationalist bullshit headline.
The formulas will change to meet the new standards….
Don’t you remember when all cars were banned when seatbelts were made mandatory?
Typical government overreach!
Then it would be WD-41.
“WD” is “Water Dispersant” and the “40” is the sequential number of the fornumation attempt.
I’ve got at least 3 formulations in the shed. All called WD40
No it’s not.
WD-40 may have referred to the formulation at one time, now it’s just marketing.
Pretty sure they were making a joke, while also sharing a bit of history on the name.
Wondered when someone would bring that up.
As if there aren’t other ways to apply lubricants.
And WD40 isn’t so much a lubricant as much as a cleaner.
And a Water Displacement formula. (WD)
Learned this the hard way, fucked up my Bones Reds longboard wheel bearings.
It’s main use as a lubricant is a mid level penetrative fluid.
You know, like spray bottles.
Or oil cans
What’s wrong with a kiss, boy? Hmm? Why not start her off with a nice kiss? You don’t have to go leaping straight for the aerosol like a bull at a gate. Give her a kiss, boy.
-Monty Python, probably
OH HERE WE GO, BUDDY, HERE WE GO. C’MON, SQUARE UP OR YOU’LL GET ONE IN THE NOSE!
I’m torn as to whether to agree with you or not. On the one hand, people who aren’t taking the time to parse the headline are certainly getting worked up. On the other hand, the headline accurately represents the ban in that the current formulation of WD-40 will be banned in aerosol form. If they want to sell that formulation in plain cans or Non-aerosol spray bottles, they are free to do so.
Wd-40 has more than one aerosol product, others already meet the standards, so the headline is just plain false right off the bat.
Adding even non-compliant to the headline would go a long way and basically fox everyone of your concerns.
Ok, fair enough.
It’s the Western Standard, so of COURSE it’s a bullshit sensationalist headline. That’s what they do; and that’s ALL they do.
They’re a right-wing lapdog publication.
The past paragraph of the article literally says that all WD-40 products will remain on the shelves, they’re literally just tweaking their can formulation
Sorry, I should have been more clear. My “torn” was with regard to whether I agreed that it was a “sensationalist bullshit headline” when it was almost perfectly accurate in what was being banned: the aerosol. It missed the bit about “current formulation”, though, hence my being torn.
It’s current formulation is still legal with other delivery mechanisms, so there is a bit of nuance. As much as I dislike clickbait, I also don’t except a headline to provide nuance.
What’s unclear to me, and part of why this is a garbage article, is whether the VOCs from WD-40 are a result of the aerosolization of the WD-40, or a result of the VOCs in the propellent gas. I believe it’s the latter in which case they can literally just replace them with nitrogen as the propellent to have essentially the exact same delivery mechanism.
Anecdotally, I bought one of these cans of WD-40 with a spray pump like 10 years ago just because it was all the store had and have never had an issue with it. I’ve never come across an application where I’m just spraying WD-40 like a can of spray paint where I need the continuous flow.
“What the hell is happening? We must all be sheep,” Mike said.
I’m glad they found comments from someone intelligent
“I thought this was a joke,” Mike (no last name given) from Canmore said on outdoorsmenforum.ca.
It’s Mike, from Canmore. What else did you expect?
Load the chicken cannon!
The Western Standard ? FFS. One of the few publications to make the National Enquirer seem legit.
I love how “Mike from Canmore” provides most of the unvalidated spooge in that thing.
Downvoted for suggesting using wd40 on a bike chain. Smh
If you use wd40 on bike chain:
- Wipe away as much wd40 as you can
- use motor oil of any grade and work it in
If you leave the wd40 in the chain, the chain will rust and /or cease up.
“Work it in” is very important! If you don’t, it will splatter everywhere and collect a bunch of dust and turn to gunk!
WD is a cleaning agent. You have to replace the oil afterwards. I like Phil Wood Tenacious Oil.
Literally from the article:
"“It has recently come to our attention that false information is circulating online that WD-40® Brand products are being banned in Canada,” WD-40 stated.
“This is not a true statement. Although there are currently regulatory changes taking place in Canada, we have been aware of these regulatory changes and have been preparing for them for some time.”"
Course this might create a black market of American WD-40 but that will depend on how much the formula is changing.
WD-40 used to come in big cans before it was an aerosol. And there has been spray bottles of it for some time too.
From what I remember, WD-40 is just mineral oil plus some hydrocarbons. The aerosol version is just so that tiny target straw works well, but you can literally just spray it on the work area and “rub” it in as it’s a penetrating oil for water displacement. In fact, I’m pretty certain that’s what the WD stands for, water displacement.
deleted by creator
American wd-40 already complies with the new Canadian standard of no more than 25% voc. (The states has 10-15%)
lol then it’s literally nothing, nice
Why read and post trash like this?
It’s clearly an outlet trying to spread misinformation to make people angry at the government. It’s probably either a Russian op and if not it’s a bunch of people stupid enough to be tools of a Russian op.
But, it uses the .news TLD! That means it must be good journalism!
WS isn’t a Russian op, but Derek Fildebrandt is certainly stupid enoughnto be an unwitting tool for them.
Wow, it even says, in this very article, that this is all a lie, but they know people won’t read that far.
No it won’t.
I imagine in 2025 you’ll buy aerosol WD-40 from some guy in a trench coat at 4x the price
Sounds like it will be a fairly seamless transition!
Thanks. I’ll add that to the post.
I’ll probably just by the non-aeresol spray bottle! Seems like some of the commenters on the article would take you up on it, though.
I can live without aerosol WD40, but you can be sure I am stocking up on brake parts cleaner!
The cynic in me wonders if this was staged by WD. It pretty well ensures that everyone will be flocking to buy what’s left on the shelves before it changes it to a non aerosol in 2024. Up until this point I hadn’t even heard of this but now I myself am tempted to grab a can or two
Nah, it’s just Derek Fildebrandt rage-farming again. If he could get away with it, he’d write a follow-up blaming Trudeau.
Folks are very much underestimating how much this formula change will make the product useless. VOCs are the active ingredient in WD-40. They are what makes it work. Penetrating oil is a VOC because solvents are what allow it to penetrate. It’s why WD40 has such a distinctive smell. Their alternative formulation will be garbage.
In the end people will be making their own with starter fluid and acetone which will likely be exempt from the ban despite being VOCs.
Edit: Folks seem to think it’s the propellant that’s what’s being regulated. It’s not. It’s the volitile organic compounds that allows it to penetrate. Seems they’re mostly reducing them instead of banning them, which we’ve already done in many states.
To be honest I don’t find wd-40 all that great to start with, there are better options, although usually pricier. But I don’t think it’s near as bad as you’re making it out to be.
The states pushed a similar law through years ago, and The wd-40 sold in the states already complies with the new Canadian laws of less than 25% (It has 10-20% as per https://files.wd40.com/pdf/sds/specialist/canada/english/wd-40_specialist_spray_stay_gel_lubricant_can_ghs_sds.pdf ) and there hasn’t been any problems with its effectiveness.
Oh look, another round of straw banning to make idiots feel better without actually solving anything.
It’s a clickbait headline designed to anger people who can’t be bothered to actually read past the title. They’re not banning wd-40 and it will still be available after 2024
Except it won’t. A product of the same name but different composition - likely a less effective one - will be available
Why would it be any less effective? WD-40 sold in the U.S. already complies with Canadian new voc rule of no more than 25%
I read it. They’re banning VOC in spray cans, as if aerosol cans are suddenly to blame for smog. More political noise to appease the uneducated while accomplishing nothing of substance. Look at the shiny birdy, kids, and pay no mind to the industrial processes behind the curtain.
We already played this game in the 80s, when hair spray was supposedly causing the hole in the ozone layer. Look where it got us.
A shrinking ozone hole? https://www.nasa.gov/esnt/2022/ozone-hole-continues-shrinking-in-2022-nasa-and-noaa-scientists-say
You think that’s a bad thing?
We already played this game in the 80s, when hair spray was supposedly causing the hole in the ozone layer. Look where it got us.
We banned CFCs and now there’s no hole in the ozone layer. Seems like a success to me. I wish it were as easy to get rid of our dependencies on fossil fuels.
Yeah, but it wasn’t the hair spray that did it, as the marketing would have had us all believe. It was banned (and enforced) from industrial processes, and far more importantly, trade partners also needed their own bans. The trade angle made the rule go global almost overnight, and thus it was effective.
Canadas new rule is everything but that, and therefore is useless.
We already played this game in the 80s, when hair spray was supposedly causing the hole in the ozone layer. Look where it got us.
I don’t understand this. Where did it get us?
Guess we got no hair spray?
Their logic is the same as “cigarettes are fine because other things cause lung cancer too”. Guess they would rather see everything banned all at once or nothing at all.
Oh so that’s what killed the 80’s incredibly flammable hairstyles /s
With a fixed hole in the ozone layer…so not sure what their point is lol.
