[Greenbuilding] Radioactive VOC's RE: Radionuclies in water...

[Carmine Vasile]

Dear Gordon: Thank you for your input. Unlike Canada, America has thousands of radionuclide sources; including hundreds of Listed DOE Facilities covered by the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Act (EEOICPA). Since 2000, nuclear weapons workers covered by the EEOICPA -- or their heirs -- have collected billions in compensation; not a dime was paid those living in their radioactive fallout zones and above their radioactive groundwater plumes -- which are also loaded with VOCs.
    The latter was discussed on this Forum in the July 2009 email below by Keith Winston & Andy Pace, for example, yet few consider health effects of mixtures of VOCs & Radon fumes --- and the US EPA has yet to set an drinking water MCL for Radon --- THE 2nd second leading cause of lung cancer. 
   Here on Long Island, NY we have VOC/Radon fumes emanating from soil, compost, dumps, ground & drinking water -- yet the EPA grants enforcement waivers. An Argonne National Lab report "Radiological and Chemical Fact Sheets to Support Health Risk Analyses for Contaminated Areas" indicates Radon-222 is continually emitted from Radium-226, which has a half life of 1600 years; Radon-220 from Radium-228, which has a half life of only 5.8 years. The specific activity of Ra-226 is one Curie per gram, compared to 160 for Ra-228, 160,000 for Rn-222 & 930 million for Rn-220.
   Therefore, every fume-plume from radioactive dumps or compost containing Ra-226/228 and VOCs will emit radioactive VOC's. 
Yours truly,
Dr. Carmine F. Vasile
gfxtechnology.com

Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 12:26:58 -0600
To: Greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org
From: ghowell at hme.ca
Subject: [Greenbuilding] Radionuclies in water...





===========

 From a colleague with EPCOR Water in Edmonton:


Health Canada publishes guidelines for radionuclides and EPCOR must
ensure they are met. As far as I know we don’t do radionuclide tests in
house; the samples are sent to external labs (probably to the SRC). The
official statement in last year’s report is:

 

EPCOR performs monitoring and testing well above the minimum required by
the regulatory approval. For example, Health Canada recommends 155
samples be collected from the distribution system each month for
bacteriological testing for a city the size of Edmonton. However, on
average, 234 samples were collected monthly. In 2011, the EPCOR Water
Laboratory carried out more than 113,000 tests on 100 parameters (47
inorganic/physical, 47 organic and 5 microbiological) for Edmonton water.
Another 5,000 tests were done on 222 additional parameters (211 trace
organics and eight radionuclides) by external commercial
laboratories.

EPCOR EnviroVista Champion Report 2011 Page 11 of 34. 

 

Most concerns I’ve read about are related to radon in ground water
sources. I’m not aware of any such issues in the Edmonton area.

=========== 


+Gordon Howell


_______________________________________________ 
> Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:53:49 -0500
> From: andy at safebuildingsolutions.com
> To: keith at earthsunenergy.com
> CC: greenbuilding at listserv.repp.org
> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] VOC's: further remblings
> 
> Keith,
> 
> This is a topic I've been screaming about to deaf ears for quite a long
> time. I'm glad it's starting to surface again. According to the EPA, a
> volatile organic compound is classified as any carbon-based chemical that is
> readily vaporized at room temperature, that can react with nitrogen and UV,
> thus creating smog. However, when the EPA created the VOC regs, they gave
> specific exemption to several chemicals that are still carbon-based, but do
> not react to create smog. Ammonia and butyl acetate are two of the more
> common ones. Anyway, when paint companies use these and similar chemicals
> in their formulas, they can have the VOC test results show that the paint is
> Zero VOC less exempt compounds. Otherwise known as, "Calculated VOC".
> 
> The term "odorless paint" actually refers to the process of adding another
> set of chemicals to paint to act as masking agents. Some of these
> ingredients also act as formaldehyde precursors, which are undetectable in a
> liquid state, but actually chemically react to create formaldehyde once the
> curing process starts. Keep in mind, odorless mineral spirits is still
> mineral spirits! Just because it no longer has the usual solvent smell
> doesn¹t mean that its no longer dangerous. But for some reason, we humans
> have this innate desire to connect the strength of smell to a danger level
> or lack thereof. 
> 
> Regarding the MSDS... An MSDS only has to list hazardous chemicals that make
> up more than 1% of the volume of the entire formula. In essence, a paint
> company can put in several formaldehyde precursors, chemical masking agents
> and biocides, and not have to list any of them because individually they are
> less than 1% of the volume. If an ingredient is part of a "proprietary
> blend", it doesn't have to be listed either.
> 
> For human health concerns, the VOC level of a product is not important. The
> TOXICTY of the ingredient, whether its a VOC or not, is important. Oranges
> are not regulated, as far as I know. Yet, orange oil is a VOC. Pine trees
> are not regulated by the EPA either.
> 
> In an effort to sell product, the paint companies are trying to make
> everyone think that their zero VOC formulas are safe for humans without
> actually coming out and saying it. They use terms like ³green² and
> ³eco-friendly² etc., and we all read into it too much. If you really want
> to use a paint that is truly healthier for the occupants, then look into
> products that have been used successfully by the chemically sensitive.
> These ³canaries in the mineshaft² have been able to tolerate AFM Safecoat
> paint since it came out almost 30 years ago. AFM lists all of their
> ingredients on their data sheets. Yes, it has titanium dioxide in it, as
> does all white paint. But, so does toothpaste.
> 
> I co-authored an article about paint ingredients a couple years ago that
> dealt with some of this...here¹s where it is posted
> http://www.afmsafecoat.com/news_page.php?id_news=14
> It would be great if more folks would push the green building groups to deal
> with the human health aspect of green building....not just the
> eco-friendliness of it.

> Andrew Pace
> Degree of Green, LLC
> Waukesha, WI 262.968.5070
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20120909/bf68663b/attachment.html>