<p><!--StartFragment--><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">I have to admit I am skeptical.  Intelligent people have been claiming the benign environmental nature of chemically preserved wood for over 50 years – including products using creosote, penta, and CCA – and each of these products lead to superfund clean-up sites.  So the industry’s record is not good in terms of understanding the nature or risk of these kinds of products.  I still remember a conversation I had back in the late 1980’s with a professor at a well know university, as he confidently espoused the benefits of the product since the materials were permanently chemically bonded to the wood.  I asked “IF the chemicals are permanently bonded, why is there only a 50 year guarantee, and why does wood appear to eventually rot?"  He didn’t have an answer.  ACQ has not been without its problems either.  As CEO of a company that has sold a lot of ACQ, I know the devil’s in the details and there is a LOT of ACQ product in place without appropriately protected fastening systems.  Any product that needs “special” fasteners - different than are historically the case -  is a challenge.  It doesn’t mean it can’t work – it just means it is potentially problematic.  I do not have enough detail about the new osmose product to have an opinion at the moment but, the test is: are you required to where gloves and a mask when working with the product?  In general, and in my experience, IF it is toxic to work with it becomes toxic to the environment.</span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana,Helvetica,Arial;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> - Doc</span></span></span></p> <p><!--EndFragment--></p>