There are a lot of ways for me to be wrong given I’m not a chemist; the point, to misuse a famous quote, is that safety requires me to be wrong about every concern and danger only needs you to be wrong once. So far we’ve not got enough stuff for any hazards in any of the components to rise to the level of significance, and indeed they may just be fine even at the level we need to use them; but in the 1930s I think I could say the same of CFCs?

Scale matters, and while I’m optimistic about batteries etc., I want us to solve problems rather than ignore them — we can only do that by being open about them, and I’ve seen enough occasions where others have claimed risks “don’t exist at all” to be more comfortable with a claim of “1% risk” than of “0% risk”.

> I don't think you need to worry about arson in China.

I’m more concerned with the effect than the cause, the cause was a mere suggestion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7FXeaahRsg