I am removing the boards on an old back porch (dimensions about 4X8.)
The existing boards are true 1" thick 5" wide tongue and groove that
date back about 60 years. The porch is basically a "farmers' porch"
with a roof but no enclosure.
Having examined several options including the use of T&G fir
flooring, I have decided to use 6" decking boards as these have
exactly the right thickness and the 10' lengths that are best for the
dimensions of the porch. (The boards will need to be cut to 49 1/2
inches. I wish they could be 48" but they're not.)
Ideally I'd like non-pressure treated, but try to find them!
These need to be painted, not stained, to match the charcteristics
of the house, built in the 20's. I know that PT is not even the best
for stain, but is there any hope for paint? Does anyone know
any one who has done this, what they did, and if they had any
success?
My other thought would be to use composite and paint that,
but I don't know if I'd gain anything and it would be much more
expensive.
Any ideas are warmly appreciated. Thank you!
Frank

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:
I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. Paint goes best on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)



Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

On Jun 1, 5:33�pm, BobK207 wrote:
On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. *Paint goes best on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting *requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)

Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it *

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract

Have a family friend who replaced their deck this year because their
dad painted the PT wood. the wood was good physically but appearance
YUK.

Solid stain is a much better choice.

Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck

presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

I can't wait for this to dry out. What about the idea of using
composite?
(Thanks all for your help!)






On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:05:17 GMT, frank1492
wrote:

I am removing the boards on an old back porch (dimensions about 4X8.)
The existing boards are true 1" thick 5" wide tongue and groove that
date back about 60 years. The porch is basically a "farmers' porch"
with a roof but no enclosure.
Having examined several options including the use of T&G fir
flooring, I have decided to use 6" decking boards as these have
exactly the right thickness and the 10' lengths that are best for the
dimensions of the porch. (The boards will need to be cut to 49 1/2
inches. I wish they could be 48" but they're not.)
Ideally I'd like non-pressure treated, but try to find them!
These need to be painted, not stained, to match the charcteristics
of the house, built in the 20's. I know that PT is not even the best
for stain, but is there any hope for paint? Does anyone know
any one who has done this, what they did, and if they had any
success?
My other thought would be to use composite and paint that,
but I don't know if I'd gain anything and it would be much more
expensive.
Any ideas are warmly appreciated. Thank you!
Frank

On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:
On Jun 1, 5:33?pm, BobK207 wrote:



On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. ?Paint goes best on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting ?requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)

Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it ?

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract

Have a family friend who replaced their deck this year because their
dad painted the PT wood. the wood was good physically but appearance
YUK.

Solid stain is a much better choice.

Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck

presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

HB-

Please explain

.......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not a fan of PT but my experiment with PT
has been that PT'd DougFir is dimensionally stable but the more
typical HemFir that ships nearly dripping wet, twists & bows as it
dries.

Treaters prefer the HemFir because it treats quicker (at least that's
what I was told)

When used as mud sill & anchored in place it tends to behave itself


OP-

We used to stack & sticker green framing timber (2x's & 4s's) put a
cluster of 20" box fans on the end of the stack & blow air though it
24/7 for a couple weeks to get the moisture content down near 12%
This was indoors in SoCal....YMMV depending on local weather.

PT'd HemFir would really dry qucikly but I's hate to see the resulting
bows & twists. We ordered about 20% extra on our framing materail so
we could dump the un-usable ones.

cheers
Bob

On Jun 1, 11:19?pm, BobK207 wrote:
On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:





On Jun 1, 5:33?pm, BobK207 wrote:

On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. ?Paint goes best on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting ?requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)

Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it ?

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract

Have a family friend who replaced their deck this year because their
dad painted the PT wood. the wood was good physically but appearance
YUK.

Solid stain is a much better choice.

Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck

presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

HB-

Please explain

......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not a fan of PT but my experiment with PT
has been that PT'd DougFir is dimensionally stable but the more
typical HemFir that ships nearly dripping wet, twists & bows as it
dries.

Treaters prefer the HemFir because it treats quicker (at least that's
what I was told)

When used as mud sill & anchored in place it tends to behave itself

OP-

We used to stack & sticker green framing timber (2x's & 4s's) put a
cluster of 20" box fans on the end of the stack & blow air though it
24/7 for a couple weeks to get the moisture content down near 12%
This was indoors in SoCal....YMMV depending on local weather.

PT'd HemFir would really dry qucikly but I's hate to see the resulting
bows & twists. We ordered about 20% extra on our framing materail so
we could dump the un-usable ones.

cheers
Bob- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well seemingly all the PT wood around here FOREVER twists, bends,
expands and contracts a LOT. About 5 years ago I installed a PT wood
railing on some new concrete steps.

The railing went in the fall I waited nearly a year before solid color
staining at the carpenters suggestion. Was ging to sell hoime wanted
everything perfect.

railing split repeatedly, had to stain repeatedly.

told the PT chemicals make the wood less dimensionally stable,
espically in a area with freezing weather

On Jun 1, 8:42 pm, frank1492 wrote:
I can't wait for this to dry out. What about the idea of using
composite?
....

You can buy kiln-dried treated lumber. Of course, I've seen lumber
yards that then store it outside in the weather so it gets soaked
again, so you have to be sure that it has been subsequently handled as
dried. But, as others have said, painting before dry is futile (as,
of course, it is for non-treated ). If you haven't already started
the project, what I normally like to do w/ PT is to buy it in time to
let it dry before using. It does take, as someone else noted, care in
handling to be dried to control movement, but once done it will be
reasonably stable, particularly where it doesn't get much direct
exposure to water.

If you go that route, best results will be to paint before
installation and to use a fine-tooth crosscut saw to make the ends as
neat a cut as possible, then soak them up really well w/ the paint.

As in most cases, the preparation for painting will be important as
well -- a "scuff" sanding is advised to provide a good surface for
adherence -- the planer tends to hammer the surface.

Whether the composite decking material is paintable, I'm not sure on
all brands whether it is recomended or not, check the manufacturers'
information. I know Aztek is, I'm not so sure about Trex, for
example.

I'm guessing you're talking of the 5/4 decking as the right
thickness? And if you're talking about present decking you're not
planning on replacing the T&G but just a butted spacing? For a
covered porch floor, I'd be tempted to order the fir despite the price
and use a solid stain. What material was the original?

On Jun 1, 10:19 pm, BobK207 wrote:
On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:


....
PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract
....
Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck
presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.
....

You're consistently an "over-reacter", Haller...

Observation of reasonable precautions in direct ingestion/exposure is
warranted, but to the best of my knowledge there is no direct
indication of any serious problem from common exposure to PT lumber in
construction nor play equipment, for example. The worst I've seen
expounded upon is the possible relatively minor reaction to splinters
and some burning when handling wet material during its use.

......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

No...

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not a fan of PT but my experiment with PT
has been that PT'd DougFir is dimensionally stable but the more
typical HemFir that ships nearly dripping wet, twists & bows as it
dries.

Treaters prefer the HemFir because it treats quicker (at least that's
what I was told)

Treaters prefer whatever is available locally. Your experience in CA
reflects the proximity to western species. In the south/east, most
commonly PT is yellow pine.

When used as mud sill & anchored in place it tends to behave itself

When restrained in a strait jacket, so do most violent people...

....

--

frank1492 wrote:
I am removing the boards on an old back porch (dimensions about
4X8.) The existing boards are true 1" thick 5" wide tongue and
groove that date back about 60 years. The porch is basically a
"farmers' porch" with a roof but no enclosure.
Having examined several options including the use of T&G fir
flooring, I have decided to use 6" decking boards as these have
exactly the right thickness and the 10' lengths that are best for
the dimensions of the porch. (The boards will need to be cut to 49
1/2 inches. I wish they could be 48" but they're not.)
Ideally I'd like non-pressure treated, but try to find them!
These need to be painted, not stained, to match the
charcteristics of the house, built in the 20's. I know that PT is
not even the best for stain, but is there any hope for paint? Does
anyone know
any one who has done this, what they did, and if they had any
success?

There's no problem painting PT after the wood is completely dry. As
purchased, they are usually sopping wet.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

On Jun 2, 10:17 am, "dadiOH" wrote:
frank1492 wrote:
I am removing the boards on an old back porch (dimensions about
4X8.) The existing boards are true 1" thick 5" wide tongue and
groove that date back about 60 years. The porch is basically a
"farmers' porch" with a roof but no enclosure.
Having examined several options including the use of T&G fir
flooring, I have decided to use 6" decking boards as these have
exactly the right thickness and the 10' lengths that are best for
the dimensions of the porch. (The boards will need to be cut to 49
1/2 inches. I wish they could be 48" but they're not.)
Ideally I'd like non-pressure treated, but try to find them!
These need to be painted, not stained, to match the
charcteristics of the house, built in the 20's. I know that PT is
not even the best for stain, but is there any hope for paint? Does
anyone know
any one who has done this, what they did, and if they had any
success?

There's no problem painting PT after the wood is completely dry. As
purchased, they are usually sopping wet.

Agreed, again w/ the caveat of surface preparation...

--

On Jun 2, 11:11?am, dpb wrote:
On Jun 1, 10:19 pm, BobK207 wrote: On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:

...
PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract
...
Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck
presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

...

You're consistently an "over-reacter", Haller...

Observation of reasonable precautions in direct ingestion/exposure is
warranted, but to the best of my knowledge there is no direct
indication of any serious problem from common exposure to PT lumber in
construction nor play equipment, for example. The worst I've seen
expounded upon is the possible relatively minor reaction to splinters
and some burning when handling wet material during its use.

well lets see you arent allowed to cut PT wood at a lumberyard because
the dust can be hazardous

you supposed to keep kids away from the underside of decks because the
chemicals like arsenic leach out and get concentrated in the ground.
Much like LEAD, and little kids are espically vulnerable to the
chemicals...

Note PT wood has been reformulated because of these hazards and before
you say its been used for years so its safe so was lead in paint,
asbestos in all sorts of things like brake shoes.

Today guys in moon suits remove both lead and asbestos



......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

No...


Hey years ago a regular 4 by 4 was fairly stable, barber polling a
rare event. With PT wood thats to be expected. Same for large
cracking. The home I sold the buyer asked his inspector since the 4 by
4 railing posts had large cracks and splits.

Inspector said thats normal for PT.

Incidently stain even solid color works well, paint doesnt really
absorb, and on PT is a waste it cant be maintained to look good

Go ahead and paint it, in a few years you will be asking about how to
strip it and stain, but thats impossible once its been painted

On Jun 2, 10:58 am, " wrote:
On Jun 2, 11:11?am, dpb wrote:



On Jun 1, 10:19 pm, BobK207 wrote: On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:

...
PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract
...
Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck
presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

...

You're consistently an "over-reacter", Haller...

Observation of reasonable precautions in direct ingestion/exposure is
warranted, but to the best of my knowledge there is no direct
indication of any serious problem from common exposure to PT lumber in
construction nor play equipment, for example. The worst I've seen
expounded upon is the possible relatively minor reaction to splinters
and some burning when handling wet material during its use.

well lets see you arent allowed to cut PT wood at a lumberyard because
the dust can be hazardous

I've never seen that although there's very little reason to cut it
anyway. But, otoh, EPA/OSHA has also listed "ordinary" wood dust as
carcigenic and to be avoided in the work place so it's quite possible
(even probable?) any restrictions you've seen are in response to that
as opposed to strictly related to ACQ-treated lumber...

you supposed to keep kids away from the underside of decks because the
chemicals like arsenic leach out and get concentrated in the ground.
Much like LEAD, and little kids are espically vulnerable to the
chemicals...

Well, that's one of the common-sense items I alluded to although like
the lead and asbestos the risks for other than the extreme cases tend
to be far overblown. Like, sure, it's not good for a 2-yr old to be
consuming quantities of lead-based paint off a peeling windowsill next
to the crib in a slum tenement, but realistically, what's the
ingestion path for the average youngster of your acquaintance?

Note PT wood has been reformulated because of these hazards and before
you say its been used for years so its safe so was lead in paint,
asbestos in all sorts of things like brake shoes.

Same as for the arsenic-based PT vis a vis ACQ -- can you find a case
documented of a serious exposure-related incident of a kid on a
playground swingset or similar? I don't recommend making toothpicks
or toy blocks out of it, but then again, walnut sawdust is highly
toxic to horses and some people are pretty allergic to it as well.

Today guys in moon suits remove both lead and asbestos

Direct work is far, far different than casual exposure. And, in most
cases, the requirements for handling both of the above really far
exceed that required for adequate protection. There's a whole
industry grown up feeding itself over and therefore, promoting the
hysteria to maintain their revenue stream.

......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

No...

Hey years ago a regular 4 by 4 was fairly stable, barber polling a
rare event. With PT wood thats to be expected. Same for large
cracking. The home I sold the buyer asked his inspector since the 4 by
4 railing posts had large cracks and splits.

Inspector said thats normal for PT.

The phenomenon is _not_ new and is related to how the wood is dried
and subsequently handled, not the pressure treatment per se. It is
compounded somewhat by the use of lesser quality timber in general
owing to higher demand and the non-existence of old-growth timber to
harvest any longer (at least for construction grade lumber). If you
took the same stick of wood and didn't PT it, but didn't dry it under
controlled conditions either, it would warp and contraction crack as
it dried virtually the same as if it were PT'ed.

Incidently stain even solid color works well, paint doesnt really
absorb, and on PT is a waste it cant be maintained to look good

Go ahead and paint it, in a few years you will be asking about how to
strip it and stain, but thats impossible once its been painted

I can't say as I have personally tried to paint any of the new ACQ so
can't realistically comment on whether there is any effect or not. I
actually rather doubt that if it were dried thoroughly _first_ and the
surface prepared that it wouldn't hold paint nearly as well as the old
which I have quite a bit of painted here that hasn't been any more
problem than the rest of the house/barn adjacent to it. The key is
imo, the "thoroughly" part -- non-kiln-dried PT takes a long time to
dry on it's own and most people don't wait that long. Then, most also
don't take the time to surface prep including a sanding and proper
primer, etc., to give the paint a fighting chance...

--

Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:
Inorganic Arsenical Pressure-Treated Wood
CCA Table of Contents


General Information
Alternatives
Guidance Documents
Risk Assessments & Reviews
Sealant Study
Technical Guidance
Use Cancellations
Report an Incident
Contacts for CCA Information
For More Information





[Including Chromate Copper Arsenate (CCA), Ammoniacal Copper Arsenate
(ACA), and
Ammoniacal Copper Zinc Arsenate(ACZA)]

Consumer Information:

This wood has been preserved by pressure-treatment with an EPA-
registered pesticide containing inorganic arsenic to protect it from
insect attack and decay. Wood treated with inorganic arsenic should be
used only where such protection is important.

Inorganic arsenic penetrates deeply into and remains in the pressure-
treated wood for a long time. However, some chemical may migrate from
treated wood into surrounding soil over time and may also be dislodged
from the wood surface upon contact with skin. Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards. Therefore, the following
precautions should be taken both when handling the treated wood and in
determining where to use or dispose of the treated wood.

Use-Site Precautions:


All sawdust and construction debris should be cleaned up and disposed
of after construction.


Do not use treated wood under circumstances where the preservative may
become a component of food or animal feed. Examples of such sites
would be use of mulch from recycled arsenic-treated wood, cutting
boards, counter tops, animal bedding, and structures or containers for
storing animal feed or human food.


Only treated wood that is visibly clean and free of surface residue
should be used for patios, decks and walkways.


Do not use treated wood for construction of those portions of beehives
which may come into contact with honey.


Treated wood should not be used where it may come into direct or
indirect contact with drinking water, except for uses involving
incidental contact such as docks and bridges.
Handling Precautions:


Treated wood should not be burned in open fires or in stoves,
fireplaces, or residential boilers because toxic chemicals may be
produced as part of the smoke and ashes. Treated wood from commercial
or industrial use (e.g., construction sites) may be burned only in
commercial or industrial incinerators or boilers in accordance with
state and Federal regulations. CCA-treated wood can be disposed of
with regular municipal trash (i.e., municipal solid waste, not yard
waste) in many areas. However, state or local laws may be stricter
than federal requirements. For more information, please contact the
waste management agency in your state, which you can find at
http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/stateweb.htm.


Avoid frequent or prolonged inhalation of sawdust from treated wood.
When sawing, sanding, and machining treated wood, wear a dust mask.
Whenever possible, these operations should be performed outdoors to
avoid indoor accumulations or airborne sawdust from treated wood.


When power-sawing and machining, wear goggles to protect eyes from
flying particles.


Wear gloves when working with the wood. After working with the wood,
and before eating, drinking, toileting, and use of tobacco products,
wash exposed areas thoroughly.


Because preservatives or sawdust may accumulate on clothes, they
should be laundered before reuse. Wash work clothes separately from
other household clothing.

wrote:

Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:
snipped

Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards.

More snippage

Yeah, it MAY cause a certain problem. Take precautions.

Having worked with CCA (which is not made any more due to the
threat of junk lawsuits and not because the EPA or anyone else
recommended the production be halted) for the last 30 years, I
believe that I have a certain knowledge about its use. I can
guarantee that I have been exposed to more CCA than ANYBODY
that is exposed to casual contact. I have had months where I
did nothing but saw and install PT lumber on huge decks, pool
decks, etc. I did not (nor was it recommended at the time)
use any dust masks, gloves, etc. I am fine. Just had a
checkup when I turned 52 and everything is great (except for
the getting old part).

This is one of those overblown, paranoid delusions that make
some people a lot of money and many people very afraid.

Take precautions and don't worry about it. The newer stuff is
supposed to be less dangerous, so you can probably eat it.

NOTE: I do not condone, nor recommend eating ACQ treated
lumber. It tastes terrible.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

On Jun 2, 3:38?pm, Robert Allison wrote:
wrote:
Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:

snipped

Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards.

More snippage

Yeah, it MAY cause a certain problem. Take precautions.

Having worked with CCA (which is not made any more due to the
threat of junk lawsuits and not because the EPA or anyone else
recommended the production be halted) for the last 30 years, I
believe that I have a certain knowledge about its use. I can
guarantee that I have been exposed to more CCA than ANYBODY
that is exposed to casual contact. I have had months where I
did nothing but saw and install PT lumber on huge decks, pool
decks, etc. I did not (nor was it recommended at the time)
use any dust masks, gloves, etc. I am fine. Just had a
checkup when I turned 52 and everything is great (except for
the getting old part).

This is one of those overblown, paranoid delusions that make
some people a lot of money and many people very afraid.

Take precautions and don't worry about it. The newer stuff is
supposed to be less dangerous, so you can probably eat it.

NOTE: I do not condone, nor recommend eating ACQ treated
lumber. It tastes terrible.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

well some people chain smoke for a lifetime and die at 90 of old age,
while others with less exposure get emphsema, heart disease, cancer,
and die young from smoking./

one persons report does not determine safety of anything.

In 1985 my mom wanted a raised bed for growing vegetables. after
looking into PT I built it frome reguar wood, concerned of PT chemical
leaching into food. It was considered PERFECTLY SAFE at that time. by
1995 PT was out for growing around veggies.

On Jun 2, 2:50 pm, " wrote:
On Jun 2, 3:38?pm, Robert Allison wrote:



wrote:
Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:

snipped

Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards.

More snippage

Yeah, it MAY cause a certain problem. Take precautions.

Having worked with CCA (which is not made any more due to the
threat of junk lawsuits and not because the EPA or anyone else
recommended the production be halted) for the last 30 years, I
believe that I have a certain knowledge about its use. I can
guarantee that I have been exposed to more CCA than ANYBODY
that is exposed to casual contact. I have had months where I
did nothing but saw and install PT lumber on huge decks, pool
decks, etc. I did not (nor was it recommended at the time)
use any dust masks, gloves, etc. I am fine. Just had a
checkup when I turned 52 and everything is great (except for
the getting old part).

This is one of those overblown, paranoid delusions that make
some people a lot of money and many people very afraid.

Take precautions and don't worry about it. The newer stuff is
supposed to be less dangerous, so you can probably eat it.

NOTE: I do not condone, nor recommend eating ACQ treated
lumber. It tastes terrible.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

well some people chain smoke for a lifetime and die at 90 of old age,
while others with less exposure get emphsema, heart disease, cancer,
and die young from smoking./

one persons report does not determine safety of anything.

In 1985 my mom wanted a raised bed for growing vegetables. after
looking into PT I built it frome reguar wood, concerned of PT chemical
leaching into food. It was considered PERFECTLY SAFE at that time. by
1995 PT was out for growing around veggies.

I've been around even longer than Robert and I don't recall ever
hearing a recommendation for _other than_ treated lumber for garden
beds. That said, of course, who knows how many millions of old (or
even new) creosote-treated ties have been used for the very same
purpose? Or, of course, any of the treated lumber (pressure or not)
has also been used whether recommended or not by millions for garden
beds I'm sure.

Can you find even one actual citation of a confirmed illness or
serious complications attributable to CCA? In several previous
discussion like this no one has yet provided that firm confirmation of
there being a real problem. With all the carpenters and other
construction workers like Robert who have handled the stuff for years,
it would seem the epidemiological evidence would be quite readily
available if it were really a hazard, yet as near as I can tell, it
doesn't exist. That pretty much tells me the "problem" isn't a real
problem.

Cigarette smoke, otoh, _does_ have a strong correlation w/ morbidity
statistics that is irrefutable and widely available. "Carcinogenic",
otoh, in the sense given by EPA tests on lab rats wherein they're
exposed to direct contact w/ the substance at dosage levels that are
simply unobtainable in real world scenarios isn't particularly useful
for judging actual risk -- in fact, it leads to the ridiculousness one
sees in CA where virtually everything is labelled as a risk of some
sort.

All I"m asking for is a little more perspective on actual vis a vis
perceived risks here. If you can find the epidemiology data, I'll be
right in line...

--

On Jun 2, 5:51?pm, dpb wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:50 pm, " wrote:





On Jun 2, 3:38?pm, Robert Allison wrote:

wrote:
Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:

snipped

Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards.

More snippage

Yeah, it MAY cause a certain problem. Take precautions.

Having worked with CCA (which is not made any more due to the
threat of junk lawsuits and not because the EPA or anyone else
recommended the production be halted) for the last 30 years, I
believe that I have a certain knowledge about its use. I can
guarantee that I have been exposed to more CCA than ANYBODY
that is exposed to casual contact. I have had months where I
did nothing but saw and install PT lumber on huge decks, pool
decks, etc. I did not (nor was it recommended at the time)
use any dust masks, gloves, etc. I am fine. Just had a
checkup when I turned 52 and everything is great (except for
the getting old part).

This is one of those overblown, paranoid delusions that make
some people a lot of money and many people very afraid.

Take precautions and don't worry about it. The newer stuff is
supposed to be less dangerous, so you can probably eat it.

NOTE: I do not condone, nor recommend eating ACQ treated
lumber. It tastes terrible.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

well some people chain smoke for a lifetime and die at 90 of old age,
while others with less exposure get emphsema, heart disease, cancer,
and die young from smoking./

one persons report does not determine safety of anything.

In 1985 my mom wanted a raised bed for growing vegetables. after
looking into PT I built it frome reguar wood, concerned of PT chemical
leaching into food. It was considered PERFECTLY SAFE at that time. by
1995 PT was out for growing around veggies.

I've been around even longer than Robert and I don't recall ever
hearing a recommendation for _other than_ treated lumber for garden
beds. That said, of course, who knows how many millions of old (or
even new) creosote-treated ties have been used for the very same
purpose? Or, of course, any of the treated lumber (pressure or not)
has also been used whether recommended or not by millions for garden
beds I'm sure.

Can you find even one actual citation of a confirmed illness or
serious complications attributable to CCA? In several previous
discussion like this no one has yet provided that firm confirmation of
there being a real problem. With all the carpenters and other
construction workers like Robert who have handled the stuff for years,
it would seem the epidemiological evidence would be quite readily
available if it were really a hazard, yet as near as I can tell, it
doesn't exist. That pretty much tells me the "problem" isn't a real
problem.

Cigarette smoke, otoh, _does_ have a strong correlation w/ morbidity
statistics that is irrefutable and widely available. "Carcinogenic",
otoh, in the sense given by EPA tests on lab rats wherein they're
exposed to direct contact w/ the substance at dosage levels that are
simply unobtainable in real world scenarios isn't particularly useful
for judging actual risk -- in fact, it leads to the ridiculousness one
sees in CA where virtually everything is labelled as a risk of some
sort.

All I"m asking for is a little more perspective on actual vis a vis
perceived risks here. If you can find the epidemiology data, I'll be
right in line...

--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

well at the time 1985 a good friend went all wierd that PT for veggies
was fine I finally told him thats what I did to shut him up. maybe 10
years later he called after hearing my mom had cancer and apologized
for recommending PT, he said the chemicals were found to cause cancer.
I assured him it was plain wood not PT

I will google this but what we do know the chemicals were changed
because of health concerns. that validation right there to some sort
of trouble. I THINK some states and countries have baned it but not
certain....

kinda reminds me of lead and asbestos before they reached critical
mass

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 1, 11:19?pm, BobK207 wrote:
On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:





On Jun 1, 5:33?pm, BobK207 wrote:

On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood
had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. ?Paint goes best
on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting ?requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)

Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it ?

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is
covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract

Have a family friend who replaced their deck this year because their
dad painted the PT wood. the wood was good physically but appearance
YUK.

Solid stain is a much better choice.

Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck

presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

HB-

Please explain

......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not a fan of PT but my experiment with PT
has been that PT'd DougFir is dimensionally stable but the more
typical HemFir that ships nearly dripping wet, twists & bows as it
dries.

Treaters prefer the HemFir because it treats quicker (at least that's
what I was told)

When used as mud sill & anchored in place it tends to behave itself

OP-

We used to stack & sticker green framing timber (2x's & 4s's) put a
cluster of 20" box fans on the end of the stack & blow air though it
24/7 for a couple weeks to get the moisture content down near 12%
This was indoors in SoCal....YMMV depending on local weather.

PT'd HemFir would really dry qucikly but I's hate to see the resulting
bows & twists. We ordered about 20% extra on our framing materail so
we could dump the un-usable ones.

cheers
Bob- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well seemingly all the PT wood around here FOREVER twists, bends,
expands and contracts a LOT. About 5 years ago I installed a PT wood
railing on some new concrete steps.

The railing went in the fall I waited nearly a year before solid color
staining at the carpenters suggestion. Was ging to sell hoime wanted
everything perfect.

railing split repeatedly, had to stain repeatedly.

told the PT chemicals make the wood less dimensionally stable,
espically in a area with freezing weather

I must be a mutant. I've used only PT for soffits and fascia boards, primed
with oil, painted with latex, and never, ever had a problem. Yes, I wait at
least 6 months to prime and paint a new install, but the PT has always
lasted as long as the regular clapboards. No twisting, shifting, etc. Are
you putting in enough nails/screws/fasteners? I just truly don't know what
everyone is complaining about. My 25 year old deck looks just great, and it
is 100% PT. I paint it every 2 years with milk (shaker) paint, and while it
fades after 2 years, it doesn't bubble, peel, flake, etc. I just don't get
the problem with PT.

On Jun 2, 5:43 pm, " wrote:
On Jun 2, 5:51?pm, dpb wrote:
....
In 1985 my mom wanted a raised bed for growing vegetables. after
looking into PT I built it frome reguar wood, concerned of PT chemical
leaching into food. It was considered PERFECTLY SAFE at that time. by
1995 PT was out for growing around veggies.

I've been around even longer than Robert and I don't recall ever
hearing a recommendation for _other than_ treated lumber for garden
beds. ...

I realize this was backwards of what I intended -- I meant it to read
as follows--

I've been around even longer than Robert and I don't recall ever
hearing a recommendation for _other than_ NONtreated lumber for
garden
beds. ...

....
well at the time 1985 a good friend went all wierd that PT for veggies
was fine ...

Well, I unless this "good friend" happened to be also be an ag
extension agent or someone trained in epidemiology or other relevant
medical areas I don't know that I'd think that a qualified
recommendation. In my previous post I was thinking of recommendations
for garden plots from places such as university ag extension or
similar organizations, NOT home/garden improvement shows on TV or
such...I can believe a bunch of them probably did suggest its use.

I will google this but what we do know the chemicals were changed
because of health concerns. that validation right there to some sort
of trouble. I THINK some states and countries have baned it but not
certain....

Not necessarily. I've not researched the rules changes for CCA/ACQ
extensively but often as in the case of some pesticide bans there has
been far more lobbying from only a few special interest groups than
real widespread science-based justification for the bans. I wouldn't
be all surprised to find a few very vociferous "socker-mom" types were
the driving force behind the whole thing.

kinda reminds me of lead and asbestos before they reached critical
mass

Again, the biggest problems there were really litigation-based as
opposed to risk-based. Not that lead ingestion isn't a problem, but
the magnitude of the "cure" far outweighed the magnitude of the
problem. Asbestos certainly was/is an industrial hazard, but again,
it could have been controlled/contained far more easily and in a less
costly manner than what ended up happening. Again, much of it was
litigation based as opposed to widespread actual hazard. Other than
occupational exposure, most of the other uses of the products
themselves were actually quite benign.

--

On Jun 2, 6:48 pm, h wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Jun 1, 11:19?pm, BobK207 wrote:
On Jun 1, 3:45 pm, " wrote:

On Jun 1, 5:33?pm, BobK207 wrote:

On Jun 1, 2:07 pm, professorpaul wrote:

I have used opaque latex stains on decks. Works fine. I have also
gasp painted PT stock with latex paint. In both cases, the wood
had
weathered for about a year. Don't know if that makes a difference.

Most PT lumber comes pretty wet from the supplier. ?Paint goes best
on
dry wood, un-weathered wood (best adhesion)

so what you got is conflicting ?requirements......PT comes weather,
allowing to "weather" (really alllowing it to dry) gives better
adhesion than wet timber, weathering (UV exposure) degrades surface
wood fibers (reduces adhesion)

Best of all worlds....dry PT stock but good luck finding it ?

Or you could just install wet & let dry...since your porch is
covered,
depending on exposure, you might not get much UV exposure.

cheers
Bob

PT wood even stained expands and contracts way too much. After a
couple years it will look HORRIBLE. PT does all sorts of wierd stuff
l;ike barber poll. The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract

Have a family friend who replaced their deck this year because their
dad painted the PT wood. the wood was good physically but appearance
YUK.

Solid stain is a much better choice.

Its my strong belief one day PT will be treated like asbestos with
guys in moon suits taking it away along with the soil under the deck

presently kids shouldnt get under PT wood because the dirt is
contaminated with chemicals.

HB-

Please explain

......The treatment makes it much more likely to expand
and contract ..............

PT treatment can change fundamental behavior of the wood?

Don't get me wrong.....I'm not a fan of PT but my experiment with PT
has been that PT'd DougFir is dimensionally stable but the more
typical HemFir that ships nearly dripping wet, twists & bows as it
dries.

Treaters prefer the HemFir because it treats quicker (at least that's
what I was told)

When used as mud sill & anchored in place it tends to behave itself

OP-

We used to stack & sticker green framing timber (2x's & 4s's) put a
cluster of 20" box fans on the end of the stack & blow air though it
24/7 for a couple weeks to get the moisture content down near 12%
This was indoors in SoCal....YMMV depending on local weather.

PT'd HemFir would really dry qucikly but I's hate to see the resulting
bows & twists. We ordered about 20% extra on our framing materail so
we could dump the un-usable ones.

cheers
Bob- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well seemingly all the PT wood around here FOREVER twists, bends,
expands and contracts a LOT. About 5 years ago I installed a PT wood
railing on some new concrete steps.

The railing went in the fall I waited nearly a year before solid color
staining at the carpenters suggestion. Was ging to sell hoime wanted
everything perfect.

railing split repeatedly, had to stain repeatedly.

told the PT chemicals make the wood less dimensionally stable,
espically in a area with freezing weather

I must be a mutant. I've used only PT for soffits and fascia boards, primed
with oil, painted with latex, and never, ever had a problem. Yes, I wait at
least 6 months to prime and paint a new install, but the PT has always
lasted as long as the regular clapboards. No twisting, shifting, etc. Are
you putting in enough nails/screws/fasteners? I just truly don't know what
everyone is complaining about. My 25 year old deck looks just great, and it
is 100% PT. I paint it every 2 years with milk (shaker) paint, and while it
fades after 2 years, it doesn't bubble, peel, flake, etc. I just don't get
the problem with PT.

It's a combination of things, I think, h. As with all other wood
products, 25-yr old PT isn't the same as new product. Another is the
naive belief by many that a 4x4 or 6x6 green piece of wood cut from a
twig w/ the core running through it can/should dry completely dry w/o
checking and/or cracking. Of course, in the real world, it ain't a'
gonna' happen. The last is few have the patience to wait for the wood
to dry thoroughly as you apparently have before trying to paint...

--

wrote:
On Jun 2, 5:51?pm, dpb wrote:

On Jun 2, 2:50 pm, " wrote:

On Jun 2, 3:38?pm, Robert Allison wrote:

wrote:

Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA):
Consumer Safety Information Sheet:

snipped

Exposure to inorganic
arsenic may present certain hazards.

More snippage

Yeah, it MAY cause a certain problem. Take precautions.

Having worked with CCA (which is not made any more due to the
threat of junk lawsuits and not because the EPA or anyone else
recommended the production be halted) for the last 30 years, I
believe that I have a certain knowledge about its use. I can
guarantee that I have been exposed to more CCA than ANYBODY
that is exposed to casual contact. I have had months where I
did nothing but saw and install PT lumber on huge decks, pool
decks, etc. I did not (nor was it recommended at the time)
use any dust masks, gloves, etc. I am fine. Just had a
checkup when I turned 52 and everything is great (except for
the getting old part).

This is one of those overblown, paranoid delusions that make
some people a lot of money and many people very afraid.

Take precautions and don't worry about it. The newer stuff is
supposed to be less dangerous, so you can probably eat it.

NOTE: I do not condone, nor recommend eating ACQ treated
lumber. It tastes terrible.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

well some people chain smoke for a lifetime and die at 90 of old age,
while others with less exposure get emphsema, heart disease, cancer,
and die young from smoking./

one persons report does not determine safety of anything.

In 1985 my mom wanted a raised bed for growing vegetables. after
looking into PT I built it frome reguar wood, concerned of PT chemical
leaching into food. It was considered PERFECTLY SAFE at that time. by
1995 PT was out for growing around veggies.

I've been around even longer than Robert and I don't recall ever
hearing a recommendation for _other than_ treated lumber for garden
beds. That said, of course, who knows how many millions of old (or
even new) creosote-treated ties have been used for the very same
purpose? Or, of course, any of the treated lumber (pressure or not)
has also been used whether recommended or not by millions for garden
beds I'm sure.

Can you find even one actual citation of a confirmed illness or
serious complications attributable to CCA? In several previous
discussion like this no one has yet provided that firm confirmation of
there being a real problem. With all the carpenters and other
construction workers like Robert who have handled the stuff for years,
it would seem the epidemiological evidence would be quite readily
available if it were really a hazard, yet as near as I can tell, it
doesn't exist. That pretty much tells me the "problem" isn't a real
problem.

Cigarette smoke, otoh, _does_ have a strong correlation w/ morbidity
statistics that is irrefutable and widely available. "Carcinogenic",
otoh, in the sense given by EPA tests on lab rats wherein they're
exposed to direct contact w/ the substance at dosage levels that are
simply unobtainable in real world scenarios isn't particularly useful
for judging actual risk -- in fact, it leads to the ridiculousness one
sees in CA where virtually everything is labelled as a risk of some
sort.

All I"m asking for is a little more perspective on actual vis a vis
perceived risks here. If you can find the epidemiology data, I'll be
right in line...

--- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


well at the time 1985 a good friend went all wierd that PT for veggies
was fine I finally told him thats what I did to shut him up. maybe 10
years later he called after hearing my mom had cancer and apologized
for recommending PT, he said the chemicals were found to cause cancer.
I assured him it was plain wood not PT

I will google this but what we do know the chemicals were changed
because of health concerns. that validation right there to some sort
of trouble. I THINK some states and countries have baned it but not
certain....

I watched the whole thing in real time, and I can assure you
that although many groups were lobbying and threatening
lawsuits, they could NEVER get the EPA or anyone else to label
CCA treated lumber as dangerous. The companies that produce
it, however, saw the onslaught of lawyers and potential
litigation. They decided it would be cheaper to change the
formula rather than fight. There is alot of evidence about
this for those that don't have a dog in the hunt and weren't
paying attention at the time it was going on.

As dpb said, do some research and try to find a single proven
case of harmful effects caused by exposure to CCA. You won't
find it. Except for a few idiots that burn it and are harmed
by the smoke, there is no evidence that it has harmed people
by normal exposure to the lumber.

kinda reminds me of lead and asbestos before they reached critical
mass


Kinda reminds me of asbestos, now. It is considered to be a
potential threat to mankind, but it is really only a threat to
people that are exposed to it for years on a daily basis.
Such as the workers that are being paid huge amounts of money
to remove it from our schools and workplaces. If you are
really afraid of it, you should talk to experts on the subject
that will tell you just how ridiculous it is to be bothered by
it at all.

Remember VA tile? The commercial and residential tile that
was in every grocery store and every kitchen floor for
decades? Ever wonder what VA stands for? Vinyl asbestos is
the correct answer. How many children crawled around on that
floor while their mothers were shopping or cooking? How many
people do you know that are suffering from asbestos exposure
(asbestiosis). None, unless you know someone that worked in
the asbestos manufacturing industry for at least a decade.

Instead of just believing all of the sky is falling rhetoric
by the nanny state protectors, it might be a good idea to look
into the real harmful effects of things before you start
warning everyone about them.

Those of us that ARE exposed to these substances on an almost
daily basis HAVE to find out the real facts about them because
it affects our health and longevity. Now, who are you going
to trust on these issues,...someone that once heard or read
something, or someone whose health depends on the facts about
them?

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX