Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing after dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface sampling I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in this case). Amy Siedlecki President The Mold Reporters Inc. Indoor Environmental Consultants Re: Dry Ice - Question and others,Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the viability of spores. So culturing of the "dust" should be negative - as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the particulate debris of the "dust" has increased and perhaps the spores and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to identify as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the existence of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, enzymes and glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still present. Do we know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that blasting techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth rather than just destroy the assumed evidence?Carl GrimesHealthy Habitats LLC-----> 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 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Amy and Group: I personally collected and analyzed dozens of tape lift samples following an extensive remediation using dry-ice blasting, followed by HEPA vac and damp wiping. What I found is that a very high level of spores and hyphal fragments were present on surfaces following these procedures. And from my experience, the level was much higher than when only HEPA and damp wiping is used (does dry-ice blasting embed fungal particles into crevices?). What was disturbing is that the entire bottom side of the exposed subfloor of the second floor (dry ice blasting occurred on the first floor) was saturated in spores and hyphal fragments. The growth did not occur on these surfaces! I can only speculate that the extremely elevated levels of hyphal fragments were a result of the dry-ice blasting process applied to the damaged wood framing and exterior sheathing of the walls. Note: The 2nd floor subfloor had never underwent HEPA or wiping prior to sampling. And after these processes...the darn subfloor still had very elevated spore/hyphae levels! In this case, the remediation contractor was competent and the machine s used were, supposedly, in good order. Cassidy Kuchenbecker s Engineering > > In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing after dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. > > A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface sampling I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in this case). > > Amy Siedlecki > President > The Mold Reporters Inc. > Indoor Environmental Consultants > Re: Dry Ice - Question > > > and others, > > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > viability of spores. So culturing of the " dust " should be negative - > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > particulate debris of the " dust " has increased and perhaps the spores > and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to identify > as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the existence > of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, enzymes and > glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still present. Do we > know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that blasting > techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth rather > than just destroy the assumed evidence? > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC > > ----- > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > 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 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Amy and others, Are you finding identifiable spores left on the original surface or in the " dust " generated that settles elsewhere? Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC ----- > In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing after > dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. > > A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface sampling > I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a > post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I > don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method > correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know > that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of > mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in > this case). > > Amy Siedlecki > President > The Mold Reporters Inc. > Indoor Environmental Consultants > Re: Dry Ice - Question > > > and others, > > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > viability of spores. So culturing of the " dust " should be negative - > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > particulate debris of the " dust " has increased and perhaps the > spores and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to > identify as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the > existence of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, > enzymes and glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still > present. Do we know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that > blasting techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth > rather than just destroy the assumed evidence? > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC > > ----- > > 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. > > > > > > > > > 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 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Carl, Identifiable spores were discovered on the original surface (plywood sheathing). Settled dust was limited in this particular environment due to the employment of efficient HEPA-vacuuming and damp wiping. Amy Siedlecki Re: Dry Ice - Question> > > and others,> > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used?> The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the> viability of spores. So culturing of the "dust" should be negative -> as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the> particulate debris of the "dust" has increased and perhaps the> spores and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to> identify as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the> existence of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins,> enzymes and glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still> present. Do we know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that> blasting techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth> rather than just destroy the assumed evidence?> > Carl Grimes> Healthy Habitats LLC> > -----> > 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. > > > > > > > > > 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 23, 2006 Report Share Posted March 23, 2006 Cassidy, An increase of spores and mycelial fragments was also discovered in my after-dry-ice sampling as compared to the pre-remediation test with the same sampling method and area. Just curious, in your experience, did you recommend that traditional (sanding/HEPA-vacuuming, etc.) methods be conducted to bring the surfaces to an acceptable condition? Amy Siedlecki Re: Dry Ice - Question> > > and others,> > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > viability of spores. So culturing of the "dust" should be negative - > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > particulate debris of the "dust" has increased and perhaps the spores > and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to identify > as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the existence > of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, enzymes and > glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still present. Do we > know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that blasting > techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth rather > than just destroy the assumed evidence?> > Carl Grimes> Healthy Habitats LLC> > -----> > Don, Bill and others interested in media blasting techniques formold > > remediation:> > > > We work with and provide hands-on training for remediation> > professionals in using media blasting techniques. It hasbecome 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 therisk> > of oxygen depletion when working in a confined space (e.g. crawl> > spaces). Oxygen monitors are critical. There is also a skinhazard> > 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 neededbasis 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 twomedia and> > there is an investment cost associated. By using media blasting it> > has made remediation contractors much more efficient. Itdrastically> > 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 weekcan 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 juststarting> > to use this technique and for those who are contemplating using it.> > > > > > Indoor Air Management, Inc.> > > > > > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE:> > This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has notalways been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We aremaking such material available in our efforts to advance understandingof environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy,scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe thisconstitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as providedfor in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributedwithout profit to those who have expressed a prior interest inreceiving the included information for research and educationalpurposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to usecopyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that gobeyond '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 24, 2006 Report Share Posted March 24, 2006 Amy: We tried to HEPA-vac the fragments off, but to no avail. Only intense elbow grease worked. Even then, the remaining fungal levels were curiously high for the effort. For this reason, I wondered if the dry-ice blasting embeds some spores and hyphae into crevices in materials such as oriented-strand board. I do recall that the we had better luck cleaning the studs and floor joists. We didn't try sanding, though that definitely would work. Again, I am very anxious to view tape lifts again after the next dry-ice blast remediation. I am REALLY hoping this was just a fluke due to tech or tool failure. Cassidy Kuchenbecker s Engineering > > > > In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing > after dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. > > > > A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface > sampling I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a > post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I > don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method > correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know > that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of > mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in > this case). > > > > Amy Siedlecki > > President > > The Mold Reporters Inc. > > Indoor Environmental Consultants > > Re: Dry Ice - Question > > > > > > and others, > > > > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > > viability of spores. So culturing of the " dust " should be negative - > > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > > particulate debris of the " dust " has increased and perhaps the spores > > and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to identify > > as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the existence > > of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, enzymes and > > glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still present. Do we > > know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that blasting > > techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth rather > > than just destroy the assumed evidence? > > > > Carl Grimes > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > ----- > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 We are currently using Dry Ice to remediate the underside of roof decks (approx 350,000 sq/ft), as specified by the clients Environmental Consultants (IC). We use top of the line equipment and expierienced technicians. The IC have been taking tape lift samples of all work completed, on a weekly basis. Although everything looks great, visibly, the tape lift results are less than satisfactory. We are currently assisting IC to figure out why, diplomatically, of course. This is not the first time this has happened, and we caution our clients that this remediation method may not be the " silver bullet " that some might have them believe. While set-up costs are not cheap, it is certainly worthwhile to do some pre-project, test areas to confirm if the Dry Ice method is giving you satisfactory results. Shapiro > > > > Amy and others, > > > > Are you finding identifiable spores left on the original surface or > > in the " dust " generated that settles elsewhere? > > > > Carl Grimes > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > ----- > > > In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing after > > > dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. > > > > > > A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface sampling > > > I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a > > > post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I > > > don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method > > > correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know > > > that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of > > > mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in > > > this case). > > > > > > Amy Siedlecki > > > President > > > The Mold Reporters Inc. > > > Indoor Environmental Consultants > > > Re: Dry Ice - Question > > > > > > > > > and others, > > > > > > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > > > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > > > viability of spores. So culturing of the " dust " should be negative - > > > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > > > particulate debris of the " dust " has increased and perhaps the > > > spores and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to > > > identify as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the > > > existence of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, > > > enzymes and glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still > > > present. Do we know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that > > > blasting techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth > > > rather than just destroy the assumed evidence? > > > > > > Carl Grimes > > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > > > ----- > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 25, 2006 Report Share Posted March 25, 2006 , Not knowing your situation, a very light sanding followed by HEPA vacuuming should take care of the surface debris problem. Generally, what your IC sees in the laboratory results is hyphae, cell fragments and a few spores. This in my opinion is not enough to fail the test sample unless there is massive presence of hyphae or spores. I caution all contractors to carefully work with the IC/IH/IEP " before " starting a remediation job. In my projects, I mandate that I write your scope of work (from health and safety, containment, negative air, filtration, remediation and clearance); and how I will be critiquing (micro managing) the success of the remediation project. What I do not want remediation contractors to be a fall guy for - is failure of the job where you now have to go back and redo it, possibly at your cost. That is ridiculous when the project passes your supervisor and the IC/IH/IEP visual inspection. Please understand, I cannot see microscopically, and I would not expect your dry ice treatment technicians to see microscopically either. Therefore, if the IC/IH/IEP has concerns about the laboratory data and they require additional work to be performed, make sure it is understood in your contract that " you " will follow " their " direction in completing additional surface remediation at an additional cost. " Failure " in my book is a four letter word that is not found in my reports when talking about a contractor's remediation projects. If I have questions about the remediation process based on laboratory test data, I always consult with the contractor and review their work procedures, then, I provide a change order scope of work for them to follow that we all can agree on. Moffett Re: Dry Ice - Question We are currently using Dry Ice to remediate the underside of roof decks (approx 350,000 sq/ft), as specified by the clients Environmental Consultants (IC). We use top of the line equipment and expierienced technicians. The IC have been taking tape lift samples of all work completed, on a weekly basis. Although everything looks great, visibly, the tape lift results are less than satisfactory. We are currently assisting IC to figure out why, diplomatically, of course. This is not the first time this has happened, and we caution our clients that this remediation method may not be the " silver bullet " that some might have them believe. While set-up costs are not cheap, it is certainly worthwhile to do some pre-project, test areas to confirm if the Dry Ice method is giving you satisfactory results. Shapiro > > > > Amy and others, > > > > Are you finding identifiable spores left on the original surface or > > in the " dust " generated that settles elsewhere? > > > > Carl Grimes > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > ----- > > > In response to Carl Grimes's question about verification testing after > > > dry ice remediation I thought I'd share my own experience. > > > > > > A few minutes ago I received laboratory results from surface sampling > > > I conducted on plywood sheathing in an attic as part of a > > > post-remediation verification inspection (after dry ice method). I > > > don't know whether or not the contractor used the dry ice method > > > correctly (apparently the dry ice machine is new to him) but I do know > > > that the analysis clearly qualified and quantified several types of > > > mold spores on the post-remediation samples (microscopy analysis in > > > this case). > > > > > > Amy Siedlecki > > > President > > > The Mold Reporters Inc. > > > Indoor Environmental Consultants > > > Re: Dry Ice - Question > > > > > > > > > and others, > > > > > > Question. How do you sample when blasting techniques have been used? > > > The reason I ask is the multiple forces involved should destroy the > > > viability of spores. So culturing of the " dust " should be negative - > > > as in zero? This begs the question for microscopy. However, the > > > particulate debris of the " dust " has increased and perhaps the > > > spores and fragments have been pulverized to particles too small to > > > identify as fungal. In other words, the conventional markers of the > > > existence of mold growth have been destroyed but the proteins, > > > enzymes and glucans, etc responsible for health effects are still > > > present. Do we know (has anyone done the research?) to verify that > > > blasting techniques actually remove/destroy the components of growth > > > rather than just destroy the assumed evidence? > > > > > > Carl Grimes > > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > > > ----- > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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...
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.