Radon

Have you tested your house for Radon?

  • Yes - and it was higher than EPA recommended action level

    Votes: 17 51.5%

  • Yes - not a problem

    Votes: 7 21.2%

  • No

    Votes: 7 21.2%

  • What's Radon?

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • Total voters
    33
Bob Noel

Bob Noel

Touchdown! Greaser!
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
22,966
Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
I'm curious if others have tested their house for Radon.

And, if so, did you implement any Radon reduction methods?
 
Can't say I have tested the current house, but when I sold the house I lived in for 21 years in Virginia we had high radon levels and I had to put a mitigation system in (drill a hole through the slab and a slow suction fan exhausts it out of the house). Oddly, the house was tested when we moved in and had was under the 4 pc limit but it was over when it was tested again. I got some real points from the buyer when I told the radon guy that his initial proposal was ugly and he should run the pipe more discretely through the garage even if it did cost me an extra $250 to do it that way. Amusingly, the radon guy must have thought the karma was good too and didn't end up charging me extra.
 
I’m in a moderate area so I bought a $200 tester years ago. Bottom floor averaged around 2.5. Haven’t tested since.
 
When I moved to Pennsylvania the house had a radon system, and the realtor tried to convince me not to have it tested because there was a system in place. I opted for “Trust but verify.” The system wasn’t doing its job (and was set up stupidly) so I made the sellers pay for a new system. Retested, no issues.

Had the subsequent houses tested and there were no issues. Some regions are impacted by it and some pretty much aren’t.

I voted option 1 since the PA house needed a system/stuff done.
 
I have a pretty good tester from Amazon, long & short term readings. I’m a little high, 5-5.5 or so, I mostly use improvised mitigation techniques. Those methods are an open basement door, to the outside and a barn fan. I do this when around home & weather allows. My average is near 4 with the better airflow.

I’m in S WI, modern unfinished basement, not heavily used. I have considered going with other options, but haven’t done so.
 
If you don’t have a basement, there’s less surface area for radon to enter. If you’re on city water, especially if it’s not groundwater, then there’s less entering the air when showering. Winter is worse if the house stays closed up. More will enter if you have exhaust fans like a bathroom fan and kitchen hood vented outdoors.

I’m in Indiana. Tested. Had seller comp me for install, I picked the contractor. Taps into the foundation footer drain, external negative pressure fan.

 
I have the electronic tester, ~$130?

I was running around 1.30 to 1.35. I had the crawlspace encapsulated, for other reasons, and my readings jumped up to 5+ with peaks over 7. The crawlspace was previously vented but the encapsulation sealed it. Had the remediation system added for about $1750. Now I'm generally under 0.60. I've seen as low as 0.06 on the 1-day reading.
 
My new build house tested over 10. And well below 1 after mitigation. What’s amazing is among my neighbors, only half have mitigation and won’t test to find out.
 
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.
 
Have two houses in Kansas that were both tested and required systems installed at the sellers expanse. Coming from California, I had never heard of Radon, except bad memories of chemistry classes. As I recall, the systems were not that costly.
 
Matthew said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
My office and the kids play room were in the basement, which tested high. So we remediated, levels went way down and I never regretted it.
 
Ted said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.

The remediation company vented from beneath my basement slab and then set up a 72(?) hr monitor. When they came back the guy said, “Technically, you pass, but just barely. Normally we see a much greater reduction. Let me think about this.”

The way my foundation is constructed to allow ductwork to be routed, there’s an area where the garage floor slab meets the foundation and there’s a notch. That allows access for gas to get into the basement from below the garage floor. The radon guy went through the side of the basement wall to access below the garage floor and then added a T to the main vent stack. Another 3-day test and the radon levels in my basement were the same as outdoor levels.

So it can be very localized.
 
Bob Noel said:
I'm curious if others have tested their house for Radon.

And, if so, did you implement any Radon reduction methods?
Click to expand...
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 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.
 
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.

CDC estimates that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer deaths after cigarette smoke. It's the number one cause of lung cancer deaths in non-smokers and increases the risk for smokers tenfold.

It's gotten worse over time because houses have gotten tighter in the name of efficiency and more basements converted over to living space.
 
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
They don't succumb to "radon". They die a painful death from lung cancer years later.
 
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.
 
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
Marketers will always be looking for another way to make a buck.

The radon pathway is interesting, though, and real.

As natural Uranium in the ground decays, it transforms through a series of other elements, at some point getting to Radon gas, and then further on to other stuff.

1711398693436.png

The Radon gas is charged, and tends to stick to small dust particles. These are then inhaled and adhere to the lung lining, where they emit α and β radiation particles as they decay further.

Due to the close contact and long periods of exposure, this radiation futzes with the DNA in the lung cells, significantly increasing the likelihood of cancer with time.

I'd especially hate to set little kids up with this legacy later on in life. Mine had basement bedrooms at one point in a high-radon house that I had mitigated.
 
Last edited:
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
Maybe where you are, but we did radon testing back in 1989 which is 35 years ago. Virginia made testing mandatory back in 1994.
 
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").
 
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.
 
I suspect that one of the reasons Radon is becoming of more interest (so to speak) is that houses are getting tighter, less ventilation will tend to increase the accumulation of Radon.
 
Reminds me of a study / occurrence back in the ‘70s that led to ACH requirements. I don’t recall the specifics, it’s been a while :oops:
 
Bob Noel said:
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").
Click to expand...

Here's an interesting, and simplified view of the risk levels, and where 4 fits in with other arbitrary numbers:

Radon Risk If You Smoke​

Radon LevelIf 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/LAbout 260 people could get lung cancer250 times the risk of drowningFix your home
10 pCi/LAbout 150 people could get lung cancer200 times the risk of dying in a home fireFix your home
8 pCi/LAbout 120 people could get lung cancer30 times the risk of dying in a fallFix your home
4 pCi/LAbout 62 people could get lung cancer5 times the risk of dying in a car crashFix your home
2 pCi/LAbout 32 people could get lung cancer6 times the risk of dying from poisonConsider fixing between 2 and 4 pCi/L
1.3 pCi/LAbout 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 Risk If You Have Never Smoked​

Radon LevelIf 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/LAbout 36 people could get lung cancer35 times the risk of drowningFix your home
10 pCi/LAbout 18 people could get lung cancer20 times the risk of dying in a home fireFix your home
8 pCi/LAbout 15 people could get lung cancer4 times the risk of dying in a fallFix your home
4 pCi/LAbout 7 people could get lung cancerThe risk of dying in a car crashFix your home
2 pCi/LAbout 4 people could get lung cancerThe risk of dying from poisonConsider fixing between 2 and 4 pCi/L
1.3 pCi/LLess 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.

Risk Comparison Charts | Radon | Health & Senior Services

health.mo.gov health.mo.gov
 
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
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 read here about the closing of envelopes, to “tightening” and potential negative effects. Still haven’t found the other case study. I think it was in Philly in the 70s…
 
The Airthings Wave is less expensive.

Of course, one consideration is the accuracy of non-lab equipment. I did a side-by-side comparison with a test vial kit. The accu-lab test vials were 2.4 and 2.6. The airthings wave was 3.61. (same length of time, same location, same everything, literally a side-by-side comparision).
 
kep5niner said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top