Radon test result
 

My test result have come and the levels are 320 Boquerels?? which is above
the action level of 200.
A few pamphlets came with the test results suggesting various remedies.
Has anyone had similar problems and would like to share their experience so
I can take a more educated judgment/action.
Thanks
Tom

Bequerels; I suspect this will be 320 Bequerels per cubic metre, meaning
that each cubic metre of air contains 320 radon atoms decaying per second.
(In general 1 Bequerel just means a quantity of any radioactive material in
which one atom decays per second).

Others will advise you on action, but I'd comment that it's not very much
above the action limit. There's a tendency for people to regard government
"limits" for all sorts of pollutents as "danger limits", e.g. 199 is "safe"
and 201 is an immediate threat to life and limb. In fact the limits are
usually levels where the risk is very small compared to other natural risks.

Tom wrote:
My test result have come and the levels are 320 Boquerels?? which is above
the action level of 200.
A few pamphlets came with the test results suggesting various remedies.
Has anyone had similar problems and would like to share their experience so
I can take a more educated judgment/action.


Very easy to bring the level down (if you feel this is necessary; but
that's a different story) by increasing the ventilation. What are the
current ventilaltion arrangements for each room?


--
Grunff

Grunff wrote:

Tom wrote:

My test result have come and the levels are 320 Boquerels?? which is
above
the action level of 200.
A few pamphlets came with the test results suggesting various remedies.
Has anyone had similar problems and would like to share their
experience so
I can take a more educated judgment/action.



Very easy to bring the level down (if you feel this is necessary; but
that's a different story) by increasing the ventilation. What are the
current ventilaltion arrangements for each room?


Normal BCO resolution in cases like this is to insist on suspended
floors with underfloor vents I believe.

Its a bit of a pain to mod an existing house.

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:00:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Normal BCO resolution in cases like this is to insist on suspended
floors with underfloor vents I believe.

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite? Ventilation is the way to deal with it
though.

Maybe we need more info from the OP. Type/age of house, floor
construction, recently fitted DG'ing etc. I'd have thought any
moderately recent place with a solid floor would have a plastic DPM
these days. Can Radon get through plastic DPM?

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite?

The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is because
radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point - even if it
is coming from the walls.


Ventilation is the way to deal with it
though.

Agreed - far more practical to install in an existing house.


Can Radon get through plastic DPM?

Only to a small degree.


--
Grunff

Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:00:52 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Normal BCO resolution in cases like this is to insist on suspended
floors with underfloor vents I believe.


I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite? Ventilation is the way to deal with it
though.

I think that the walls are not the usual major problem. IIRC its more a
question of it seeoping up from the ground.

Maybe we need more info from the OP. Type/age of house, floor
construction, recently fitted DG'ing etc. I'd have thought any
moderately recent place with a solid floor would have a plastic DPM
these days. Can Radon get through plastic DPM?


Not that well, no, but that raises the concentrations under it so any
small leak...

Grunff wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite?


The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is because
radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point - even if it
is coming from the walls.

Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It has to be heavy, being radioactive...



Ventilation is the way to deal with it though.


Agreed - far more practical to install in an existing house.


Can Radon get through plastic DPM?


Only to a small degree.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It [radon] has to be heavy, being radioactive...

Eh?

In article , "Chris Bacon"
says...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It [radon] has to be heavy, being radioactive...

Eh?

It's usually large atoms that are unstable.

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes
Grunff wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite?
The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is
because radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point -
even if it is coming from the walls.

Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It has to be heavy, being radioactive...

Not necessarily, Tritium isn't.

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

See the information on http://www.nrpb.org/radon/index.htm

Chris Bacon wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It [radon] has to be heavy, being
radioactive...


Eh?

Radioactive nuclei are radioactive because they are effing big and
disintegrate.

All radioactive elements are HEAVY.

Rob Morley wrote:

In article , "Chris Bacon"
says...

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It [radon] has to be heavy, being radioactive...

Eh?


It's usually large atoms that are unstable.

Its ALWAYS large atoms that are unstable.

bof wrote:

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes

Grunff wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite?

The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is
because radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point -
even if it is coming from the walls.


Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It has to be heavy, being
radioactive...


Not necessarily, Tritium isn't.


Tritium is not IIRC radioactive...

bof wrote:

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes

Grunff wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made of
that nice cornish granite?

The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is
because radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point -
even if it is coming from the walls.


Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It has to be heavy, being
radioactive...


Not necessarily, Tritium isn't.


On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days, so poses very little hazard.

Perhaps I should have said more exactly that 'any radioactive element
with a sufficient half life to actually be present and represent a risk
to health will be very heavy'

Tritium only occurs naturally AFAICT on account of cosmic ray
bombardment. It decays as fast as it is produced.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Radioactive nuclei are radioactive because they are effing big and
disintegrate.

All radioactive elements are HEAVY.


ahem

Tritium?


--
Grunff

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Not necessarily, Tritium isn't.


Tritium is not IIRC radioactive...


No, really, it is.

http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/tritium.htm


--
Grunff

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days, so poses very little hazard.

12.something years, according to

www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/tritium.htm and

others: 4500+/-8 days.

Perhaps I should have said more exactly that 'any radioactive element
with a sufficient half life to actually be present and represent a risk
to health will be very heavy'

Tritium only occurs naturally AFAICT on account of cosmic ray
bombardment. It decays as fast as it is produced.

This will be a different kind of tritium, then, from the stuff in the Traser
key-tags in my pockets, will it? Ummm...
--
SAm.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Perhaps I should have said more exactly that 'any radioactive element
with a sufficient half life to actually be present and represent a risk
to health will be very heavy'

That covers you for the many radioactive isotopes of common elements
then (C13, N15 etc).


--
Grunff

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes
bof wrote:

In message , The Natural
Philosopher writes

Grunff wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:

I guess most comes up from the ground, but what about walls made
of that nice cornish granite?

The reason suspended floors with a 'sump' arrangement work is
because radon is very heavy, and will collect at the lowest point -
even if it is coming from the walls.


Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It has to be heavy, being
radioactive...
Not necessarily, Tritium isn't.


Tritium is not IIRC radioactive...

Well Tritium has a half life of around 12 years, Uranium 235 (the stuff
they make atomic bombs from) has a half life around 700million years.





--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

In message , Sam Nelson
writes
Traser
key-tags in my pockets, will it? Ummm...

They look cool, might get some, how bright are they?

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Radioactive nuclei are radioactive because they are effing big and
disintegrate.

All radioactive elements are HEAVY.


ahem

Tritium?


--
Grunff

Radon is a naturally occuring gas (the heaviest) and is inert
Tritium is a naturally occuring isotope of hydrogen and is not inert - it
will readily combine with oxygen to form a liquid

Regards Jeff

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days,

Erm, rubbish - again!

so poses very little hazard.

What has the half-life got to do with the hazard?

Jeff wrote:

Radon is a naturally occuring gas (the heaviest) and is inert
Tritium is a naturally occuring isotope of hydrogen and is not inert - it
will readily combine with oxygen to form a liquid

And?


--
Grunff

bof wrote:

They look cool, might get some, how bright are they?

Bright enough to find your keying in the dark, but that's about it. I
suspect you could probably just about read by the light if you held it
up against the paper and held the paper up close to your face.

They are very cool - I always have one on my keyring, and also attached
to torches (makes the torch muche easier to find in the dark).



--
Grunff

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Jeff wrote:

Radon is a naturally occuring gas (the heaviest) and is inert
Tritium is a naturally occuring isotope of hydrogen and is not inert -
it
will readily combine with oxygen to form a liquid

And?

so imho its not a very good comparison as radon is a noble gas and tritium
is a transitional isotope that will mainly be found as a liquid

Regards Jeff

Jeff wrote:

so imho its not a very good comparison as radon is a noble gas and tritium
is a transitional isotope that will mainly be found as a liquid

I don't follow - and I'm not just being difficult - I genuinely don't
understand your argument. I'm not sure what point you are arguing against.


--
Grunff

In article ,
bof writes:
In message , Sam Nelson
writes
Traser
key-tags in my pockets, will it? Ummm...

They look cool, might get some, how bright are they?

The older ones, like wot I've got, not particularly, but very neat when you
drop your car-key on the path in winter. Visibility falls off very quickly
in any natural light. The newer ones are apparently bigger and brighter, but
quite a lot more expensive.
--
SAm.

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 15:05:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Its ALWAYS large atoms that are unstable.

Make your mind up or have you just decayed a bit?

Message-ID:
From: The Natural Philosopher
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 15:09:07 +0000
snip
On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and
radioactive,

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Rob Morley wrote:

In article , "Chris Bacon"
says...

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Ah. I hadn't thought that through. It [radon] has to be heavy, being
radioactive...

Eh?


It's usually large atoms that are unstable.

Its ALWAYS large atoms that are unstable.

?? what about tritium and deuterium - cant get much 'lighter' / 'smaller'
than that - both are radioactive,
/+geek more to the point its the ratio of protons to neutrons in the
nucleus that is the main reason for explaining radioactivity - but not the
only reason /-geek


(º·.¸(¨*·.¸ ¸.·*¨)¸.·º)
.·°·. NIK .·°·.
(¸.·º(¸.·¨* *¨·.¸)º·.¸)

"Chris Bacon" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days,

Erm, rubbish - again!

so poses very little hazard.

What has the half-life got to do with the hazard?

Something with a short half life will be more active than the same number of
atoms of a substance with a longer half life so poses greater hazard for a
shorter time (all other things being equal - the different types of
radiation pose different hazards in different circumstances generally alpha
if kept outside the body is relativly harmless since its penetrating power
is small, it is stopped by the dead skin cells, gamma radiation is very
penetrating but its ionising power is low so event per event does little
damage, beta will penetrate and will ionise so outside the body this poses
quite a hazard. The problem particulaly with radon is that its an alpha
emmitter which because its a gas can penetrate into the body and the high
ionisng power of the alpha radiation damages the living cells it comes into
contact with.

(º·.¸(¨*·.¸ ¸.·*¨)¸.·º)
.·°·. NIK .·°·.
(¸.·º(¸.·¨* *¨·.¸)º·.¸)

NikV wrote:

?? what about tritium and deuterium - cant get much 'lighter' / 'smaller'
than that - both are radioactive,


Deuterium is NOT radioactive.

--
Grunff

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
NikV wrote:

?? what about tritium and deuterium - cant get much 'lighter' /
'smaller' than that - both are radioactive,


Deuterium is NOT radioactive.

true - must engage brain before fingers BG

Grunff wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Perhaps I should have said more exactly that 'any radioactive element
with a sufficient half life to actually be present and represent a
risk to health will be very heavy'


That covers you for the many radioactive isotopes of common elements
then (C13, N15 etc).


Yup.

I realised that I had an internal disconnect between 'dangerous'
isotopes and 'normal naturally ocurring ones'

If you like the anthropic principle. We couldn't live on the earth if
the air were dangerously radioactive, ergo all dangerously* radioactive
compounds tend to accumulate towards the surface, or below it.

* by virtue of nastiness or concentration

Sam Nelson wrote:

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:

On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days, so poses very little hazard.


12.something years, according to

www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/tritium.htm and

others: 4500+/-8 days.


Perhaps I should have said more exactly that 'any radioactive element
with a sufficient half life to actually be present and represent a risk
to health will be very heavy'

Tritium only occurs naturally AFAICT on account of cosmic ray
bombardment. It decays as fast as it is produced.


This will be a different kind of tritium, then, from the stuff in the Traser
key-tags in my pockets, will it? Ummm...

site I looked up gave 4 days half life... Hmm.

Chris Bacon wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and
radioactive, It also has a half life measured in days,


Erm, rubbish - again!

so poses very little hazard.


What has the half-life got to do with the hazard?

Becaise it doesn't hang around being radioactive. Created by cosmic rays
in upper atmosphere, and turns to deuterium or hydrogen by the time it
gets to the surface?

Radoactivity is a fact of life. Its only when its in heavy
concentrations, or associated with substances that get incorporated into
the body structure, that it ooses serious risks.

Low l;evel tritium presumable occurs as heavy water, and teh body is
constantly excreteing that so it won;t stock.

Contrast a flake of inhaled plutonium stuck in the lungs, forming a nice
radioactive hots spot exactly wheer cancers are prone to form..and not
decaying for hundreds of years either, and poisonous to boot.

Grunff wrote:

Jeff wrote:

so imho its not a very good comparison as radon is a noble gas and
tritium
is a transitional isotope that will mainly be found as a liquid


I don't follow - and I'm not just being difficult - I genuinely don't
understand your argument. I'm not sure what point you are arguing against.


Liquids wash away.
Heavy liquids tend to end up on the sea floor. presumably.

NikV wrote:
"Chris Bacon"...

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On investigation, you are right. Tritium is both light and radioactive,
It also has a half life measured in days,
Erm, rubbish - again!
so poses very little hazard.

What has the half-life got to do with the hazard?


Something with a short half life will be more active than the same number of
atoms of a substance with a longer half life so poses greater hazard for a
shorter time (all other things being equal - the different types of
radiation pose different hazards in different circumstances generally alpha
if kept outside the body is relativly harmless since its penetrating power
is small, it is stopped by the dead skin cells, gamma radiation is very
penetrating but its ionising power is low so event per event does little
damage, beta will penetrate and will ionise so outside the body this poses
quite a hazard. The problem particulaly with radon is that its an alpha
emmitter which because its a gas can penetrate into the body and the high
ionisng power of the alpha radiation damages the living cells it comes into
contact with.

Thank you :-). It's interesting to note that whilst smokers are at far
greated risk of cancers than non-smokers, in this case they will be
better protected from the effects of radon due to the increased
thickness of mucus in the lungs... I add that useless information for
nothing.

On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 21:11:44 -0000, "Tom"
wrote:

My test result have come and the levels are 320 Boquerels?? which is above
the action level of 200.
A few pamphlets came with the test results suggesting various remedies.
Has anyone had similar problems and would like to share their experience so
I can take a more educated judgment/action.
Thanks
Tom


You did a hole under the house, and stick in a sump, its not a big
hole. My kids built (7 & 8) built my sump before the floor want down.
I recokn is probably a grand or so for a builder to retrofit a sump.
Its all in the leaflets they send you.

You will probably have issues when you come to sell, and the buyer
will start trying to knock the price down, so its a choice spend now
or loose later .......

Rick