Our geology tends towards high radon levels. We have an unfinished basement and levels down there were above limits. Levels on the first floor were fine. Because of the local high levels, radon remediation seems almost a requirement for selling a house. Because our basement is not a living area I could have let it go, but eventually we’d need to do something about it when we sell. I got a reasonable deal years ago so I had a local company install a system. Follow-up testing showed radon readings at outdoor levels.
I tested several times, not really sure of what I would find. According to all the info I could find, usually mapped by ZIP or county, I did expect high levels. I tested two or three times, spread out over several months. Apparently there can be seasonal variations because of changing water table levels that can push more or less gas to the surface.Interesting. When I moved here we had the house tested and the levels were fine, so we don't have a system. I hadn't realized that radon was as much of an issue here (it has nothing to do with internal combustion engines so it's not high on my priority list). Maybe I should have things rechecked - I do spend a decent amount of time in the basement since that's where the workout equipment is.
When I sold my house in Colorado I had to have it tested for radon. It failed, so I gave the buyers an allowance rather than doing mitigation. I had lived there for 25 years. Radon testing was not a thing when I had it built.I'm curious if others have tested their house for Radon.
And, if so, did you implement any Radon reduction methods?
You don't "succumb" to radon any more than you succumb to asbestos, but I don't want to be breathing either one in quantity.I managed construction for almost 20 years, primarily commercial, but residential for the last 5 years of that. I’ve never seen, known, heard or read about anyone succumbing to radon.
They don't succumb to "radon". They die a painful death from lung cancer years later.I managed construction for almost 20 years, primarily commercial, but residential for the last 5 years of that. I’ve never seen, known, heard or read about anyone succumbing to radon.
Marketers will always be looking for another way to make a buck.Both fair points, and you learn something everyday. What always rubbed me the wrong way was the flimsy and aggressive marketing from the radon mitigation contractors, that seemingly sprouted up overnight, and the politically charged rules and regulations that appeared in municipalities effectively mandating a process of radon mitigation that no one ever even heard of 20 years ago.
Maybe where you are, but we did radon testing back in 1989 which is 35 years ago. Virginia made testing mandatory back in 1994.Both fair points, and you learn something everyday. What always rubbed me the wrong way was the flimsy and aggressive marketing from the radon mitigation contractors, that seemingly sprouted up overnight, and the politically charged rules and regulations that appeared in municipalities effectively mandating a process of radon mitigation that no one ever even heard of 20 years ago.
A challenge with showing Radon causing lung cancer is the length of time and amount of exposure that eventually leads to cancer (never mind all the other things that can cause lung cancer). Kind of like asbestos, it's not an instant death but something that occurs years later.
What I find particularly frustrating is trying to figure out how the EPA came up with 4 pCi/L as the action level. I'm always suspicious of limits/specs that are nice round/even numbers. And 4 pCi/L is amazingly 10 times the amount of Radon typically found outside (0.4 pCi/L).
Why 4 pCi/L? Why not 3.2 or 8.31?
Of course, the flip side is why OSHA has 100 pCi/L limit for a 40 hour work week and 30 pCi/L average for the year (it's a little more complicated than that but the OSHA numbers are waaaay higher than the EPA "recommended action level").
Radon Level | If 1,000 people who smoked were exposed to this level over a lifetime... | The risk of cancer from radon exposure compares to... | WHAT TO DO: Stop smoking and... |
---|---|---|---|
20 pCi/L | About 260 people could get lung cancer | 250 times the risk of drowning | Fix your home |
10 pCi/L | About 150 people could get lung cancer | 200 times the risk of dying in a home fire | Fix your home |
8 pCi/L | About 120 people could get lung cancer | 30 times the risk of dying in a fall | Fix your home |
4 pCi/L | About 62 people could get lung cancer | 5 times the risk of dying in a car crash | Fix your home |
2 pCi/L | About 32 people could get lung cancer | 6 times the risk of dying from poison | Consider fixing between 2 and 4 pCi/L |
1.3 pCi/L | About 20 people could get lung cancer | (Average indoor radon level) | (Reducing radon levels below 2 pCi/L is difficult) |
0.4 pCi/L | (Average outdoor radon level) | (Reducing radon levels below 2 pCi/L is difficult) | |
Note: If you are a former smoker, your risk may be lower. |
Radon Level | If 1,000 people who never smoked were exposed to this level over a lifetime... | The risk of cancer from radon exposure compares to... | WHAT TO DO: |
---|---|---|---|
20 pCi/L | About 36 people could get lung cancer | 35 times the risk of drowning | Fix your home |
10 pCi/L | About 18 people could get lung cancer | 20 times the risk of dying in a home fire | Fix your home |
8 pCi/L | About 15 people could get lung cancer | 4 times the risk of dying in a fall | Fix your home |
4 pCi/L | About 7 people could get lung cancer | The risk of dying in a car crash | Fix your home |
2 pCi/L | About 4 people could get lung cancer | The risk of dying from poison | Consider fixing between 2 and 4 pCi/L |
1.3 pCi/L | Less then 2 people could get lung cancer | (Average indoor radon level) | (Reducing radon levels below 2 pCi/L is difficult) |
0.4 pCi/L | (Average outdoor radon level) | (Reducing radon levels below 2 pCi/L is difficult) | |
Note: If you are a former smoker, your risk may be higher. |
We cemented over our crawlspace in Naperville in the 90s due to radon. I'd have to ask my dad how they came to that conclusion.Interesting. It was only emerging in the mid-aughts in the Chicagoland area. I remember Naperville created an ordinance mandating for “envelope testing” as part of the purchase / sale of a home about 15 years ago. At a premium of about $30k for the mitigation guys.
Same one I have.Here's a simple RADON meter on Amazon for $169.00. I've had it running for the past two years.
I think you were just out of the loop. I bought a house in Carol Stream in 92 and radon testing and mitigation was already part of the deal by then.Interesting. It was only emerging in the mid-aughts in the Chicagoland area. I remember Naperville created an ordinance mandating for “envelope testing” as part of the purchase / sale of a home about 15 years ago. At a premium of about $30k for the mitigation guys.