Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 We’re dry ice blast cleaning in South Florida. We find it faster than traditional methods and far more effective. Recently we blasted a 4 unit rental property in 2 long days with 2 guys. If we would have used the sanding and wire brush method we would have been there probably 10 days with 3 full time guys. This dry ice blasting is proving to be a great investment for my company and I couldn’t imagine not passing a clearance after blasting a property. It’s great to hear that insurance industry professionals are investigating blasting. I haven’t run into one single insurance adjuster in South Florida that has even heard of Dry Ice Blasting let alone encouraged us to use the latest technology in mold remediation. I had an adjuster tell me last Friday that he would only approve payment for mold removal if we used traditional NYC guidelines of sanding and wire brush scraping then wet wipe down even if dry ice blasting was more effective. I showed him the Dry Ice blasting information on greater spore removal and that it’s in Xactimate but he was unimpressed. This is the same brilliant adjuster commented when I pointed out mushrooms growing out of the wall and he said he thought they were wires for an old kitchen clock. The up front equipment cost is high but the results are amazing. That’s my 2 cents; I hope everyone has a great day. Earl Evoy Florida Emergency Services www.flemergencyservices.com From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of emmachastaineef Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 5:49 PM To: iequality Subject: Dry Ice A couple of our insurance partners are asking about dry ice blasting as a method of cleaning wood in the mold remediation industry. Can anyone comment on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 You mean 'sandblasting' with dry ice, while HEPA filter vaccumning it immediately, right? It seems to me to be far superior to scraping, sandblasting, glass ball blasting, etc, - and especially biocides, because all the other methods would seem to be prone to leaving toxic, often concentrated mycotoxin residues - as well as still-viable spores that could trigger new mold growth. The insurance companies don't want to be hit with another claim in another three or four years on the same building.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 I have cleared a house remediated by this method. I found the results to be very acceptable, based on visual cleanliness, air samples, surface samples, and surface moisture content. The contractor said it was very cost effective, and I believe they have used it elsewhere. Unfortunately, I was not able to monitor CO2 levels during the blasting process. I think there is an asphyxiation risk in small spaces. Don Schaezler, Ph.D., P.E., CIH ETC Information Services, LLC Cibolo, Texas earl_evoy@... wrote: > > We’re dry ice blast cleaning in South Florida. We find it faster than > traditional methods and far more effective. Recently we blasted a 4 > unit rental property in 2 long days with 2 guys. If we would have used > the sanding and wire brush method we would have been there probably 10 > days with 3 full time guys. This dry ice blasting is proving to be a > great investment for my company and I couldn’t imagine not passing a > clearance after blasting a property. > > It’s great to hear that insurance industry professionals are > investigating blasting. I haven’t run into one single insurance > adjuster in South Florida that has even heard of Dry Ice Blasting let > alone encouraged us to use the latest technology in mold remediation. > > I had an adjuster tell me last Friday that he would only approve > payment for mold removal if we used traditional NYC guidelines of > sanding and wire brush scraping then wet wipe down even if dry ice > blasting was more effective. I showed him the Dry Ice blasting > information on greater spore removal and that it’s in Xactimate but he > was unimpressed. This is the same brilliant adjuster commented when I > pointed out mushrooms growing out of the wall and he said he thought > they were wires for an old kitchen clock. > > The up front equipment cost is high but the results are amazing. > > That’s my 2 cents; I hope everyone has a great day. > > Earl Evoy > > Florida Emergency Services > > www.flemergencyservices.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > *On Behalf Of *emmachastaineef > *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2006 5:49 PM > *To:* iequality > *Subject:* Dry Ice > > A couple of our insurance partners are asking about dry ice blasting > as a method of cleaning wood in the mold remediation industry. > > Can anyone comment on this? > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Hello Emma: Well, it certainly can be done, however it would be rather like using an howitzer to go pheasant hunting. I really cannot think of any applications of CO2 blasting that could not be done far more inexpensively and quicker and as effectively as more reasonable techniques. Cheers, Caoimhín P. Connell Forensic Industrial Hygienist www.forensic-applications.com <SMALL> (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.) AMDG </SMALL> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Emma Of all the blast cleaning systems, I prefer dry ice. Having said that, I have reservations about the use of blast systems being used in mold remediation especially CO2 in confined spaces or in containment. The following is a copy of a column that I wrote sometime ago for ICS magazine. It addresses blast systems in general with some specific comments about CO2. (my personal opinions) Blast cleaning is a group of cleaning methods in which abrasive media particles are introduced into an air (or sometimes water) stream, which is then directed at a surface to clean it. There are many media types in use, including soda (sodium bicarbonate), as you mentioned. Media types include steel grit, water ice chips or flakes, plastic chips, walnut shells, dry ice, sponges embedded with a variety of media, and others. In this article, we will first discuss the characteristics of blast cleaning in general, and then those of two specific media. Air pressure, volume, and the distance the media has to travel to the surface after injection all significantly affect the aggressiveness of blast cleaning methods, as do the density, hardness, weight, size and other characteristics of the media used. The ability to adjust these many variables individually makes blasting an extremely versatile system of cleaning. Some blast methods are so gentle they can remove graffiti from painted surfaces without damaging the paint beneath. Others are so aggressive that they can deeply " profile " a steel plate surface for better paint adhesion. Two main uses for blasting have gotten a lot of attention recently in the cleaning/restoration industry. These are: removing charred wood and smoke residue from framing after a fire, and removing mold growth from wood framing (and sometimes other surfaces) during mold remediation. In both applications, blasting is very effective at thoroughly cleaning the intricate surfaces which are so labor- intensive to sand, scrape or wire brush manually. When media blasting is used for these purposes, we should keep in mind what blasting actually does. Most blast media will do a great job of removing char, smoke or mold growth from wood framing. However, when the contaminant comes off the surface, it does not disappear. Instead, it aerosolizes and creates worker exposure levels that probably exceed those created by any other method of cleaning. High-pressure water washing is similar in many ways to blast cleaning methods, using the water stream itself as a " blast " media. Air washing is a method of cleaning that is essentially blast cleaning without any media. Both, like blasting, do an excellent job of aerosolizing particles from a surface, although air washing is often ineffective if the particles are adhered to the surface. Air washing, using a variety of delivery mechanisms, is often used as a component of air duct cleaning. The aerosolization caused by blasting is not always a problem. For instance, if mold remediation is done outdoors or in an unenclosed space such as a structure that has not yet been closed in, the mold spores are able to just disperse. This assumes unprotected people are far enough away as to not be endangered and that contaminants are not being drawn into a building. Contents can be effectively and safely cleaned using blast methods either outside or in a true laminar airflow cleaning chamber. There is another possible problem when blasting is used for mold remediation or for cleanup of other types of potentially hazardous particles. Most mold spores are 1–2 micrometers and larger. Thus they can be effectively removed from the air by HEPA filters (99.97% efficient at 0.3 micrometers) in respirators, vacuums and air filtration devices. It has been speculated that the harsh mechanical action of blasting may break apart mold spores into smaller particles, some of which are likely to be smaller than 0.3 micrometers. Since this kills the spore, there is no chance that it could cause an infection. However, the primary health effects of mold are allergic and perhaps toxic, not infectious. These effects are not reduced by being broken into very small particles. If this speculation is correct, these particles could pass right through HEPA filtration, potentially creating exposure and cross-contamination issues. Similar problems could perhaps arise when blasting is used to remove lead paint or other hazardous contaminants. Most common media types, such as sand, are overly aggressive for the purposes mentioned above and cause unacceptable appearance or even structural damage to wood surfaces. Almost all media types, such as sodium bicarbonate ( " soda " ), leave a large amount of used media that must be cleaned up, in addition to the removed contaminants. Some media, such as plastic chips and sponges with embedded abrasives, are designed to be recycled to make their use cost- effective. Recycling may be feasible for fire restoration uses, but according to IICRC S520 recycling of media used for mold remediation is not advisable, as it is not known whether present methods of recycling are adequate to remove mold contaminants effectively. So for mold remediation, these " recyclable " types of media should only be used once, which usually makes them prohibitively expensive. Yet another potential disadvantage of blasting is that concentrated air pressure at the point of contact with the surface being cleaned has significant potential to force air, media and entrained contaminants through building penetrations into uncontaminated areas, even if the work area is kept under negative pressure. Most blasting methods require a considerable investment in equipment and a significant amount of time to set up, which means that their use is a lot less efficient on smaller jobs. Safety precautions necessary with any blast method may include eye, face, and respiratory protection. Most blast methods are very noisy, so hearing protection must be used. The two most widely used media for restoration and mold remediation are soda and dry ice. We'll discuss these two individually. Soda blasting is very effective at removing char, smoke residue and mold growth from framing without causing excessive damage to the wood. This is because the soda media is very soft. Unfortunately, soda blasting produces a tremendous amount of very fine dust and leaves a lot of debris from the expended media that can be difficult and time-consuming to clean up. It has a fairly high production rate. Dry ice blasting is certainly the most unusual of the blast media. It uses pellets or shavings of dry ice (solid CO2) as a blast media, which eliminates some of the disadvantages of other media. Unlike other media, dry ice sublimates (goes from a solid to a gas without passing through a liquid phase) on impacting the surface being cleaned. When it goes from a solid to a gas, it tends to spread out across the surface of the material which causes a " shearing " effect that efficiently removes contaminants from the surface while causing little if any surface damage. For certain types of contaminants, such as oils and waxes, thermal shock also contributes to the cleaning effect. As the blast media becomes a gas and dissipates, only the contaminants removed from the surface are left to be cleaned up. Highly efficient removal of contaminants, minimal surface damage and no media residue to clean up seem to make dry ice blasting the ideal mold remediation method. However, dry ice blasting has all the disadvantages of blasting in general, with the exception of a media waste stream, and it has some very serious and specific safety concerns. These can all be overcome, but you should plan before using this cleaning method. Dry ice blasting methods vary considerably. Some use prepared pellets, while with others the machine generates its own pellets or flakes from blocks of dry ice. Dry ice media is significantly more expensive than most others, inherently inconvenient and potentially hazardous to handle. Some methods have a much higher production rate than others. The amount of dry ice used varies from as little as ¼ pound per minute to more than 10 pounds per minute. The surface temperature of dry ice is -110°F, more than adequate to cause serious damage to human skin. Heavy gloves should always be worn when handling dry ice or its containers. Use tongs when handling dry ice blocks. CO2 gas is 1.56 times as heavy as air. Since it fills up a space from below, it displaces oxygen and can potentially create a highly hazardous reduced-oxygen atmosphere. High concentrations of CO2 gas also have direct health effects, even if the oxygen level remains adequate. Containment may limit ventilation enough that excessive levels of CO2 may build up. Keep in mind that such a high-volume blast system adds a tremendous amount of air to the space (as propellant), in addition to the CO2. To maintain appropriate negative pressure differentials, you may have to significantly increase your volume of exhaust air. We attempted to find some information on CO2 levels that are typically generated during dry ice blasting. We were unable to find any information that would allow us to report exposure levels. However, in small areas or confined spaces, especially one that is below grade, such as a crawlspace, these issues could become critical. The OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for CO2 gas is 5000 ppm (0.5%) for an eight-hour time-weighted average; 40,000 ppm (4%) is the Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) concentration. Engineering controls, such as exhaust fans (HEPA filtered if the air being exhausted is or may be contaminated) at ground level may be able to keep it below these levels, if properly used. Supplied-air or self-contained (SCBA) respirators must be used if engineering controls do not keep levels below the PEL. Continuous monitoring of CO2 levels, at least in confined spaces, is required to ensure worker safety. According to the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, " Exposure to 10% for 1.5 minutes has caused eye flickering, excitation and increased muscle activity and twitching. Concentrations greater than 10% have caused difficulty in breathing, impaired hearing, nausea, vomiting, a strangling sensation, sweating, stupor within several minutes and loss of consciousness within 15 minutes. Exposure to 30% has quickly resulted in unconsciousness and convulsions. Several deaths have been attributed to exposure to concentrations greater than 20%. Effects of CO2 can become more pronounced upon physical exertion, such as heavy work. " Blast methods of cleaning are extremely versatile and potentially have many uses in the restoration and remediation industries. However, inherent characteristics can cause undesired side effects if not adequately addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Jim I appreciate your comments. I have often wondered about the same issues. I recently watched a local firm using a blasting system to get mold off of sheathing. The process was not very fast and it created a considerable amount of dust and debris. The dust cloud was so great that had to exceed the PEL for nuisance dust. My thought at the time was that it sure will take alot of time to clean this up. And they were only wearing N95 filtering facepiece respirators while they were doing it. OH well! Good article Ed > > Emma > > Of all the blast cleaning systems, I prefer dry ice. Having said > that, I have reservations about the use of blast systems being used > in mold remediation especially CO2 in confined spaces or in > containment. > > The following is a copy of a column that I wrote sometime ago for ICS > magazine. It addresses blast systems in general with some specific > comments about CO2. (my personal opinions) > > > Blast cleaning is a group of cleaning methods in which abrasive media > particles are introduced into an air (or sometimes water) stream, > which is then directed at a surface to clean it. There are many media > types in use, including soda (sodium bicarbonate), as you mentioned. > Media types include steel grit, water ice chips or flakes, plastic > chips, walnut shells, dry ice, sponges embedded with a variety of > media, and others. > > In this article, we will first discuss the characteristics of blast > cleaning in general, and then those of two specific media. > > Air pressure, volume, and the distance the media has to travel to the > surface after injection all significantly affect the aggressiveness > of blast cleaning methods, as do the density, hardness, weight, size > and other characteristics of the media used. The ability to adjust > these many variables individually makes blasting an extremely > versatile system of cleaning. Some blast methods are so gentle they > can remove graffiti from painted surfaces without damaging the paint > beneath. Others are so aggressive that they can deeply " profile " a > steel plate surface for better paint adhesion. > > Two main uses for blasting have gotten a lot of attention recently in > the cleaning/restoration industry. These are: removing charred wood > and smoke residue from framing after a fire, and removing mold growth > from wood framing (and sometimes other surfaces) during mold > remediation. In both applications, blasting is very effective at > thoroughly cleaning the intricate surfaces which are so labor- > intensive to sand, scrape or wire brush manually. > > When media blasting is used for these purposes, we should keep in > mind what blasting actually does. Most blast media will do a great > job of removing char, smoke or mold growth from wood framing. > However, when the contaminant comes off the surface, it does not > disappear. Instead, it aerosolizes and creates worker exposure levels > that probably exceed those created by any other method of cleaning. > > High-pressure water washing is similar in many ways to blast cleaning > methods, using the water stream itself as a " blast " media. Air > washing is a method of cleaning that is essentially blast cleaning > without any media. Both, like blasting, do an excellent job of > aerosolizing particles from a surface, although air washing is often > ineffective if the particles are adhered to the surface. Air washing, > using a variety of delivery mechanisms, is often used as a component > of air duct cleaning. > > The aerosolization caused by blasting is not always a problem. For > instance, if mold remediation is done outdoors or in an unenclosed > space such as a structure that has not yet been closed in, the mold > spores are able to just disperse. This assumes unprotected people are > far enough away as to not be endangered and that contaminants are not > being drawn into a building. Contents can be effectively and safely > cleaned using blast methods either outside or in a true laminar > airflow cleaning chamber. > > There is another possible problem when blasting is used for mold > remediation or for cleanup of other types of potentially hazardous > particles. Most mold spores are 1–2 micrometers and larger. Thus they > can be effectively removed from the air by HEPA filters (99.97% > efficient at 0.3 micrometers) in respirators, vacuums and air > filtration devices. It has been speculated that the harsh mechanical > action of blasting may break apart mold spores into smaller > particles, some of which are likely to be smaller than 0.3 > micrometers. Since this kills the spore, there is no chance that it > could cause an infection. However, the primary health effects of mold > are allergic and perhaps toxic, not infectious. These effects are not > reduced by being broken into very small particles. If this > speculation is correct, these particles could pass right through HEPA > filtration, potentially creating exposure and cross-contamination > issues. Similar problems could perhaps arise when blasting is used to > remove lead paint or other hazardous contaminants. > > Most common media types, such as sand, are overly aggressive for the > purposes mentioned above and cause unacceptable appearance or even > structural damage to wood surfaces. Almost all media types, such as > sodium bicarbonate ( " soda " ), leave a large amount of used media that > must be cleaned up, in addition to the removed contaminants. > > Some media, such as plastic chips and sponges with embedded > abrasives, are designed to be recycled to make their use cost- > effective. Recycling may be feasible for fire restoration uses, but > according to IICRC S520 recycling of media used for mold remediation > is not advisable, as it is not known whether present methods of > recycling are adequate to remove mold contaminants effectively. So > for mold remediation, these " recyclable " types of media should only > be used once, which usually makes them prohibitively expensive. > > Yet another potential disadvantage of blasting is that concentrated > air pressure at the point of contact with the surface being cleaned > has significant potential to force air, media and entrained > contaminants through building penetrations into uncontaminated areas, > even if the work area is kept under negative pressure. > > Most blasting methods require a considerable investment in equipment > and a significant amount of time to set up, which means that their > use is a lot less efficient on smaller jobs. > > Safety precautions necessary with any blast method may include eye, > face, and respiratory protection. Most blast methods are very noisy, > so hearing protection must be used. > > The two most widely used media for restoration and mold remediation > are soda and dry ice. We'll discuss these two individually. > > Soda blasting is very effective at removing char, smoke residue and > mold growth from framing without causing excessive damage to the > wood. This is because the soda media is very soft. Unfortunately, > soda blasting produces a tremendous amount of very fine dust and > leaves a lot of debris from the expended media that can be difficult > and time-consuming to clean up. It has a fairly high production rate. > > Dry ice blasting is certainly the most unusual of the blast media. It > uses pellets or shavings of dry ice (solid CO2) as a blast media, > which eliminates some of the disadvantages of other media. > > Unlike other media, dry ice sublimates (goes from a solid to a gas > without passing through a liquid phase) on impacting the surface > being cleaned. When it goes from a solid to a gas, it tends to spread > out across the surface of the material which causes a " shearing " > effect that efficiently removes contaminants from the surface while > causing little if any surface damage. For certain types of > contaminants, such as oils and waxes, thermal shock also contributes > to the cleaning effect. As the blast media becomes a gas and > dissipates, only the contaminants removed from the surface are left > to be cleaned up. Highly efficient removal of contaminants, minimal > surface damage and no media residue to clean up seem to make dry ice > blasting the ideal mold remediation method. > > However, dry ice blasting has all the disadvantages of blasting in > general, with the exception of a media waste stream, and it has some > very serious and specific safety concerns. These can all be overcome, > but you should plan before using this cleaning method. > > Dry ice blasting methods vary considerably. Some use prepared > pellets, while with others the machine generates its own pellets or > flakes from blocks of dry ice. Dry ice media is significantly more > expensive than most others, inherently inconvenient and potentially > hazardous to handle. Some methods have a much higher production rate > than others. The amount of dry ice used varies from as little as ¼ > pound per minute to more than 10 pounds per minute. > > The surface temperature of dry ice is -110°F, more than adequate to > cause serious damage to human skin. Heavy gloves should always be > worn when handling dry ice or its containers. Use tongs when handling > dry ice blocks. > > CO2 gas is 1.56 times as heavy as air. Since it fills up a space from > below, it displaces oxygen and can potentially create a highly > hazardous reduced-oxygen atmosphere. High concentrations of CO2 gas > also have direct health effects, even if the oxygen level remains > adequate. Containment may limit ventilation enough that excessive > levels of CO2 may build up. Keep in mind that such a high-volume > blast system adds a tremendous amount of air to the space (as > propellant), in addition to the CO2. To maintain appropriate negative > pressure differentials, you may have to significantly increase your > volume of exhaust air. > > We attempted to find some information on CO2 levels that are > typically generated during dry ice blasting. We were unable to find > any information that would allow us to report exposure levels. > However, in small areas or confined spaces, especially one that is > below grade, such as a crawlspace, these issues could become critical. > > The OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for CO2 gas is 5000 ppm > (0.5%) for an eight-hour time-weighted average; 40,000 ppm (4%) is > the Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) concentration. > Engineering controls, such as exhaust fans (HEPA filtered if the air > being exhausted is or may be contaminated) at ground level may be > able to keep it below these levels, if properly used. > > Supplied-air or self-contained (SCBA) respirators must be used if > engineering controls do not keep levels below the PEL. Continuous > monitoring of CO2 levels, at least in confined spaces, is required to > ensure worker safety. > > According to the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and > Safety, " Exposure to 10% for 1.5 minutes has caused eye flickering, > excitation and increased muscle activity and twitching. > Concentrations greater than 10% have caused difficulty in breathing, > impaired hearing, nausea, vomiting, a strangling sensation, sweating, > stupor within several minutes and loss of consciousness within 15 > minutes. Exposure to 30% has quickly resulted in unconsciousness and > convulsions. Several deaths have been attributed to exposure to > concentrations greater than 20%. Effects of CO2 can become more > pronounced upon physical exertion, such as heavy work. " > > Blast methods of cleaning are extremely versatile and potentially > have many uses in the restoration and remediation industries. > However, inherent characteristics can cause undesired side effects if > not adequately addressed. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 I've never actually used dry ice blasting on project, but I have spoken to manufacturers and others who have. It works less on the abrasiveness of the dry ice particles and more on localized supercooling of the target surface, which then microcracks and causes surface material to flake off. I think it is a fairly gentle way to remove the outer few microns of a target material, and cleanup is minimal. I do worry, however, that the particles can be very small and may take time to settle out, as they are not trapped in a matrix of the blasting material. Also, there is the previously mentioned problem with confined spaces. I would never recommend using this in an unventilated crawlspace, for instance, unless supplied air was available (which is generally more expensive, and insurance carriers hate that). I have been involved with baking soda blasting, which worked very well. I prescribed it in a low, unventilated crawlspace with severe mold growth on nonstandard (read: irreplaceable) wood framing. The regular sand-and-scrub would have taken something like 60+ man-hours (if it even worked) instead of the 6 or so that soda blasting did. Soda blasting is less abrasive than sand and easier to clean up (though still perhaps more difficult than CO2). Plus, you don't have the same problems with displacing oxygen and abraded debris is generally caught up in the baking soda stream for easy vacuuming. A. Walsh MS Dry Ice A couple of our insurance partners are asking about dry ice blasting as a method of cleaning wood in the mold remediation industry. Can anyone comment on this? FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Mr. Connell I beg to differ. I've seen this method (dry ice blasting) used many times, and it has distinct advantages over other methods - particularly speed and effectiveness. Cost is often about the same (materials cost offsets time savings). Haven't heard from you in awhile. Are you still (as you told me some time ago when you where frequently posting to this Group) playing "the devil's advocate" simply to stir debate? Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health Wichita Kansas -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of Fiosrach@...Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:46 AMTo: iequality Subject: Re: Dry IceHello Emma:Well, it certainly can be done, however it would be rather like using an howitzer to go pheasant hunting.I really cannot think of any applications of CO2 blasting that could not be done far more inexpensively and quicker and as effectively as more reasonable techniques.Cheers,Caoimhín P. ConnellForensic Industrial Hygienistwww.forensic-applications.com<SMALL> (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.) AMDG </SMALL> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Hello, Dry ice works well for some projects. I rec. that the contractor increase filtered air exchange and that a HEPA filtered Neg air intake be very near (2 to 3 feet) the site of blasting. The PSI is very high at the blasting point and can pressurize the work area. Cleanup is a very big chore if they are not moving enough air. The CO2 levels have not been a problem because they need to move so much air. Like all things, you need to do it right. Works great in the hard to get to areas but project needs to be large enough to cover mobilization costs. Bradley Harr MS, CHMM, CMC Sr. Environmental Scientist Summit Environmental, Inc. 795 S. Orchard St. Boise, Idaho 83705 web: summitenviroinc.com email: bdharr@... Dry Ice A couple of our insurance partners are asking about dry ice blasting as a method of cleaning wood in the mold remediation industry. Can anyone comment on this? FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Don, We have found the same to be true. I just got off the phone with Mold and Moisture Management Magazine (www.moldmag.com) and they told me they are running a story in the next issue on this topic. Bill > >Reply-To: iequality >To: iequality >Subject: Re: Dry Ice >Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 22:00:25 -0600 > >I have cleared a house remediated by this method. I found the results to >be very acceptable, based on visual cleanliness, air samples, surface >samples, and surface moisture content. The contractor said it was very >cost effective, and I believe they have used it elsewhere. >Unfortunately, I was not able to monitor CO2 levels during the blasting >process. I think there is an asphyxiation risk in small spaces. > >Don Schaezler, Ph.D., P.E., CIH >ETC Information Services, LLC >Cibolo, Texas > >earl_evoy@... wrote: > > > > We’re dry ice blast cleaning in South Florida. We find it faster than > > traditional methods and far more effective. Recently we blasted a 4 > > unit rental property in 2 long days with 2 guys. If we would have used > > the sanding and wire brush method we would have been there probably 10 > > days with 3 full time guys. This dry ice blasting is proving to be a > > great investment for my company and I couldn’t imagine not passing a > > clearance after blasting a property. > > > > It’s great to hear that insurance industry professionals are > > investigating blasting. I haven’t run into one single insurance > > adjuster in South Florida that has even heard of Dry Ice Blasting let > > alone encouraged us to use the latest technology in mold remediation. > > > > I had an adjuster tell me last Friday that he would only approve > > payment for mold removal if we used traditional NYC guidelines of > > sanding and wire brush scraping then wet wipe down even if dry ice > > blasting was more effective. I showed him the Dry Ice blasting > > information on greater spore removal and that it’s in Xactimate but he > > was unimpressed. This is the same brilliant adjuster commented when I > > pointed out mushrooms growing out of the wall and he said he thought > > they were wires for an old kitchen clock. > > > > The up front equipment cost is high but the results are amazing. > > > > That’s my 2 cents; I hope everyone has a great day. > > > > Earl Evoy > > > > Florida Emergency Services > > > > www.flemergencyservices.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > > *On Behalf Of *emmachastaineef > > *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2006 5:49 PM > > *To:* iequality > > *Subject:* Dry Ice > > > > A couple of our insurance partners are asking about dry ice blasting > > as a method of cleaning wood in the mold remediation industry. > > > > Can anyone comment on this? > > > > > > > > > > > >FAIR USE NOTICE: > >This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always >been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such >material available in our efforts to advance understanding of >environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, >and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of >any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US >Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material >on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a >prior interest in receiving the included information for research and >educational purposes. For more information go to: >http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use >copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond >'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Don, Bill and others interested in media blasting techniques for mold remediation: We work with and provide hands-on training for remediation professionals in using media blasting techniques. It has become one of the more common methods for mold removal from wood framing and concrete surfaces and it is very successful. There are limitations regardless if you are using dry ice or baking soda and wanted to share what we have found. Although there is less clean-up time associated with dry ice, there are some other significant limitations. The main one being the risk of oxygen depletion when working in a confined space (e.g. crawl spaces). Oxygen monitors are critical. There is also a skin hazard and the appropriate PPE must be worn. There are also limitations with the availability of this medium because it needs to be ordered and delivered on an as needed basis for each job. That becomes a bigger issue when working in hot / humid climates and being able to maintain the integrity of the ice. There have also been some challenges with finding vendors to provide the media. The size of the ice pellets will also affect the finished appearance of the surface. Meaning the larger the pellets, the deeper the dimples left in the wood surface. Soda blasting (baking soda) obviously generates more dust and debris which increases clean-up time and efforts. But some of the advantages are that there are minimal health and safety risks. The media can be maintained, stored and used on an as needed basis for projects. It is generally easier to find a vendor for this medium and it is less expensive than dry ice. The surface of the blasted materials are smoother and have a like-new appearance. The equipment requirements are different for each of the two media and there is an investment cost associated. By using media blasting it has made remediation contractors much more efficient. It drastically reduces the costs because it decreases the amount of labor needed. What it would take for a crew of 5 to do in a period of a week can be done in 1 day with a crew of 2 or three. Typically, labor is the greatest cost factor in remediation projects. I hope that this information is helpful to those of you just starting to use this technique and for those who are contemplating using it. Indoor Air Management, Inc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Group, One of the more interesting advantages of Dry Ice Treatment to smoke and soot contaminated surfaces; there is no noticeable smoke odor in most cases. I asked a cryogenic scientist about this fact and he feels it has to do with temperature and the physical means of removing residue. Moffett From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of rlaiam@... Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 4:29 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: Dry Ice Don, Bill and others interested in media blasting techniques for mold remediation: We work with and provide hands-on training for remediation professionals in using media blasting techniques. It has become one of the more common methods for mold removal from wood framing and concrete surfaces and it is very successful. There are limitations regardless if you are using dry ice or baking soda and wanted to share what we have found. Although there is less clean-up time associated with dry ice, there are some other significant limitations. The main one being the risk of oxygen depletion when working in a confined space (e.g. crawl spaces). Oxygen monitors are critical. There is also a skin hazard and the appropriate PPE must be worn. There are also limitations with the availability of this medium because it needs to be ordered and delivered on an as needed basis for each job. That becomes a bigger issue when working in hot / humid climates and being able to maintain the integrity of the ice. There have also been some challenges with finding vendors to provide the media. The size of the ice pellets will also affect the finished appearance of the surface. Meaning the larger the pellets, the deeper the dimples left in the wood surface. Soda blasting (baking soda) obviously generates more dust and debris which increases clean-up time and efforts. But some of the advantages are that there are minimal health and safety risks. The media can be maintained, stored and used on an as needed basis for projects. It is generally easier to find a vendor for this medium and it is less expensive than dry ice. The surface of the blasted materials are smoother and have a like-new appearance. The equipment requirements are different for each of the two media and there is an investment cost associated. By using media blasting it has made remediation contractors much more efficient. It drastically reduces the costs because it decreases the amount of labor needed. What it would take for a crew of 5 to do in a period of a week can be done in 1 day with a crew of 2 or three. Typically, labor is the greatest cost factor in remediation projects. I hope that this information is helpful to those of you just starting to use this technique and for those who are contemplating using it. Indoor Air Management, Inc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.