Radon

[curru]

Phew! When I first saw the "Radon" heading I thought that maybe someone found it to be present in the trailers! Having just signed the final edition of my build sheet, I was worried !
Sorry to hear about your problem though, Jim. Hope that further testing will show better results.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

My house is located in an area called Springdale, with you guessed it, springs. Although it has survived 70 years without one, I installed a sump pump and drainage system awhile back, the original french drain allowed the basement to be damp They excavated around the perimeter and laid gravel and pipes that drain into the sump pit where it is then pumped out. All of this construction and now open areas in the basement I think may have solved my dampness issue but now it allows the radon an egress to the basement. So solving one issue has created another problem.

Has a problem been created, or only a potential problem? Is there actually detectable radon in the basement now, or is this just a proactive check?

If it had a reason to be concerned, I would certainly look at getting a professional test done before anything else, but I have no idea of the cost. At least a professionally assessed long-term sample ($50 for the kit, including analysis) seems like a better way to start than putting a couple hundred dollars into a consumer-grade meter... and then not knowing whether or not to believe it.

[Brian B-P]

Originally Posted by Brian B-P

... if rates are rising, it would not rationally be due to radon, which has existed at the same levels (other than in areas affected by improperly handled waste of activity such as uranium processing) for much longer than humans have existed. The radon risk is relatively newly recognized (the last few decades), but the risk is not new.

From a Health Canada study, here's an illustration of my point:

This report summarizes the results from the Cross-Canada Survey of Radon Concentrations in Homes, a two-year study conducted by Health Canada's National Radon Program.

The aims of this study were to obtain an estimate of the proportion of the Canadian population living in homes with radon gas levels above the guideline of 200 Bq/m3, to identify previously unknown areas where radon gas exposure may constitute a health risk, and to build, over time, a map of indoor radon gas exposure levels across Canada.

...

The results from this two-year study indicate that 6.9% of Canadians are living in homes with radon levels above the current radon guideline of 200 Bq/m3. These results are in line with the year 1 results of 7%. This estimate is also similar to the Cross-Canada Survey results from the late 1970s which showed that 5% of Canadians lived in homes that were above the 200 Bq/m3 radon guideline.

Four decades - no change.

Note: U.S. sources still typically refer to levels in picocuries per litre (pCi/L), not the becquerels per cubic metre (Bq/m3) used in Canada; 200 Bq/m3 is the same as 5.4 pCi/L.

[Mike Lewis]

The mid-Atlantic region where Jim lives is notorious for radon emissions. When I lived in Maryland I strategically bought an old, drafty house that wouldn't hold concentrations of anything, including heat, thus I had no radon problems. I'm only half-joking-- I had my house tested for radon with negative results, but some of my neighbors had radon mitigation pipes installed. I'm sure the drafty house was the reason.

As for Florida:
- hurricanes -- yes
- tornadoes -- yes
- heat/humidity -- yes
- bugs -- yes
- basements -- no
- radon -- no

[cpaharley2008]

Traditionally homes without basements or crawl spaces, just on slab are less likely to have issues. I'm setting up my test tomorrow, let it sit for 72 hours and then mail away. If elevated, going to next step, sump pump cover, then if still high, negative air pump installation. Going to try DIY.