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.

  • Echo71Niner
    link
    fedilink
    1111 year ago

    WD-40 clarified that their products will comply with these regulations and will still be available in Canada after the ban takes effect.

      • The Barto
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Now what do we do with this rage!? I’m angry and confused now!

        • @jerkface@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I save it for people who suggest using WD-40 as a lubricant. Then I unload 2-3 years of checked rage.

        • @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

    • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      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.

    • @Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      231 year ago

      Don’t you remember when all cars were banned when seatbelts were made mandatory?

      Typical government overreach!

    • @pHr34kY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      Then it would be WD-41.

      “WD” is “Water Dispersant” and the “40” is the sequential number of the fornumation attempt.

        • sik0fewlOP
          link
          fedilink
          171 year ago

          Pretty sure they were making a joke, while also sharing a bit of history on the name.

      • Maeve
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Wondered when someone would bring that up.

    • jadero
      link
      fedilink
      -41 year ago

      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.

      • @schmidtster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

      • Swordgeek
        link
        fedilink
        24 months ago

        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.

      • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        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

        • jadero
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          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.

          • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            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.

  • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    291 year ago

    “What the hell is happening? We must all be sheep,” Mike said.

    I’m glad they found comments from someone intelligent

  • Sir_Osis_of_Liver
    link
    fedilink
    191 year ago

    The Western Standard ? FFS. One of the few publications to make the National Enquirer seem legit.

  • BarrierWithAshes
    link
    fedilink
    151 year ago

    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.

    • IHeartBadCode
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      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.

      • @cobra89@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Lol gotta love that even Harbor Freight even calls WD-40 a lubricant. It’s not a lubricant, it’s a penetrating oil and really a degreaser. If it’s something that needs lubrication you should absolutely use an actual lubricant after using WD-40, E.G. bike chains, door hinges, etc.

        • @Rocket@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Penetrating oil is a lubricant.

          It’s not the kind of lubricant you would want to lubricate your bike chain before a ride with, but there is nothing about lubricant that implies it must be suitable for bike chains.

    • Jay
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      American wd-40 already complies with the new Canadian standard of no more than 25% voc. (The states has 10-15%)

  • @library_napper
    link
    141 year ago

    Downvoted for suggesting using wd40 on a bike chain. Smh

    • @MisterD@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      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.

      • @NeonKnight52@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        “Work it in” is very important! If you don’t, it will splatter everywhere and collect a bunch of dust and turn to gunk!

  • @masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    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.

    • Swordgeek
      link
      fedilink
      14 months ago

      WS isn’t a Russian op, but Derek Fildebrandt is certainly stupid enoughnto be an unwitting tool for them.

  • @Tired8281@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    71 year ago

    Wow, it even says, in this very article, that this is all a lie, but they know people won’t read that far.

    • SokathHisEyesOpen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      That sounds less useful, but if there’s a legitimate concern then I guess that’s what we have to do.

      • Jay
        link
        fedilink
        English
        91 year ago

        You can already buy pump spray bottles of wd-40 since at least the 90’s, and they can adapt the straw.

        besides, Wd-40 in the US already complies with the new Canadian standard. Canada is just slow updating the regulations compared to the states.

        • SokathHisEyesOpen
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          They definitely still sell the aerosol WD-40 in the States. I guess maybe they’re using a different chemical as the propellent?

          • Jay
            link
            fedilink
            English
            6
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Canada’s new regulations calls for no more than 25% VOC. The states enacted the same kind of law years ago, and the wd-40 down there is only at 10-15%.

            So in other words, this new law is still behind the US regulations and we’re only starting to catch up.

  • @LoganNineFingers@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    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

    • Swordgeek
      link
      fedilink
      14 months ago

      Nah, it’s just Derek Fildebrandt rage-farming again. If he could get away with it, he’d write a follow-up blaming Trudeau.

  • roguetrick
    link
    fedilink
    -2
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Jay
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      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

      • @phx@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        -11 year ago

        Except it won’t. A product of the same name but different composition - likely a less effective one - will be available

      • @tinkeringidiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        -71 year ago

        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.

        • sik0fewlOP
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          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.

          • @tinkeringidiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            -21 year ago

            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.

        • @rifugee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          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?

          • @Boxtifer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            61 year ago

            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.

            • Jay
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Oh so that’s what killed the 80’s incredibly flammable hairstyles /s

          • SR98
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            With a fixed hole in the ozone layer…so not sure what their point is lol.