AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: Residential radon risk

[Bernard Cohen]

    My personal research on this consisted of showing that dust 
eliminators drastically reduce WL in my own home. I have done this with 
several types of dust eliminators. My attempts to measure unattached 
fractions have not been convincing to me.
    There were published studies involving measurements of unattached 
fractions, of net effects of dust removal syatems, and they indicated 
very little reduction in radiation dose. Unfortunately, I don't remember 
the references -- I vaguely remember that the authors may have been from 
General Electric. Dade Moeller was pushing very hard at one time for 
electrostatic precipitators as a solution to the problem of radon in 
homes, but he made very little headway. It is my impression that this 
was because of the studies I refer to, so he may remember the references.

GELSG at aol.com wrote:

>Dr. Cohen:
> 
>I generally agree with your work and conclusions on indoor radon.   However, 
>the statement below troubles me.  In theory, in laboratory  conditions, one 
>can approach a UF of 1.0.  However, (and I have seen very  little data on this 
>point) I have never heard of real world UFs of more than  0.1, much less 1.0.  
>If you do have such data, I would like to see  it.  In my house, we always 
>seem to have plenty of dust, even with the  electrostatic precipitator running.  
>I have always believed that, in the  real world of opening doors and leaking 
>windows and cooking and playing  children, there will always be plenty of 
>"replacement dust" particles.  In  that case, I would take exception with your 
>conclusion about electrostatic  precipitators, and state that they would be a very 
>good means of reducing lung  exposure to radon daughters in homes that are 
>not laboratory glove boxes.   As such, we should be actively encouraging, not 
>discouraging, their use.
> 
>Gerald Gels
> 
>_blc+ at pitt.edu_ (mailto:blc+ at pitt.edu)  wrote:
>"As an example, one 
>can drastically reduce the WL by removing the dust (for example, with an  
>electrostatic precipitator), but the newly formed radon daughters have  
>no dust to attach to, so UF = 1.0, and the danger is not  reduced."
>_______________________________________________
>You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing list radsafe at radlab.nl
>
>Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
>
>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
>  
>