How important is a radon barrier?

sydthebeat

villain is correct as far as my info goes.

Whilst it should be best practice to specify and ensure a radon barrier is included in all builds, its not legally required in areas shown to have a detection rate of less than 10%.

Villain

You'd swear the map was drawn up by a 10 year old, have a read of http://www.rpii.ie/radon/building.html they have maps for each county which give more detail. The map is the result of techinal analysis.

Yes I will be putting in a radon barrier with sump in my house, the fact I was trying to point out is that that what Mellor said was incorrect, there is areas with low levels.

Mellor

Villain, If you are going to respond to somebody in a disagreable fashion, you'd better make sure you know what you are talking about, or are at least correct.

I wouldn't make such a statement if I wasn't sure I was right. There are is not a single area in the country classed as a low radon area. The RPII refer to some areas as high radon areas but also make sure to not use the term low radon radon area, as it is misleading.

Villain wrote: »

Well there is really:

http://www.alpharadon.ie/graphics/radon_map.gif

Firstly, if you were familar with this map you would know that it does not show the amount of radon in a paticular area. It is precentage of homes in each area found to be above the reference level (200 Bequerels/cubic metre). It is radon in dwellings, not the bedrock! (the big bold title should of given this away)

Obviously there will be a link between the amount of homes above the reference level and the radon levels of the area. But the age of the home and construction of the home will also affect it, and area with newer houses will measure better than older houses, in the radon levels are the same.

The amount of houses in each grid will also affect the accuracy of the estimate (it is only an prediction of number of affected houses in an area).
For example, dublin has had c.2000 surveys carried out, but Monaghan has only had 230, both counties are a similar size, but the accuracy is going to be different.

I choose a midlands county at random, Offaly.


Now, obviously the levels of radon will vary from area to area, but it is highly unlikely that adjoining areas vary by so much. You cam see an area of the highest level recorded in houses almost surrounded by the lowest level. This is more likely varience than huge difference in levels, there is likely some difference in reading, but not a 2000% increase.
Similarly, an area of the lowest surrounded my the highest readings two grids deep in Roscommon is also likely survey varience.

Villain wrote: »

I never said anywhere was radon free but Mellor said "There is no such thing a low radon area" when obviously there is low area's.

As I said, the RPII refer to area as high radon areas, but they specificly do not refer to low radon areas. Instead these are refered to area other than high areas.

I wouldn't said it if I didn't know what I was talking about

Villain

I do know what I'm talking about the building regulations state excatly what I am talking about.

The building regulations provide for different requirments based on the level.

Mellor

sydthebeat wrote: »

villain is correct as far as my info goes.

Whilst it should be best practice to specify and ensure a radon barrier is included in all builds, its not legally required in areas shown to have a detection rate of less than 10%.

The fact is some areas of 100 sq.km have as few are 10 dwelling surveyed,
No houses means 0%, 1 house means 10% and 2 houses mean 20%,
so all it takes is 1 house that is maybe a few years old to competely change the reading and the measures taken.
1 house and it changes for a low-radon area to a high radon area. 1 house is nothing

What if you are in one of these areas, and its <1%, so you start building without a radon barrier. Before you finish a house is founf above 200 Beq, suddenly you are in a 10% area and need a radon barrier, the map is a guide and can easily change.

Villain wrote: »

You'd swear the map was drawn up by a 10 year old, have a read of http://www.rpii.ie/radon/building.html they have maps for each county which give more detail. The map is the result of techinal analysis.

Those maps are no more detailed, its the same info at a different scale. 100sq.km is the same no matter what the scale.

Yes I will be putting in a radon barrier with sump in my house, the fact I was trying to point out is that that what Mellor said was incorrect, there is areas with low levels.

There are no areas designated low radon areas, RPII do this for a reason.
There are high areas, and the rest of the country.
The map does not show the levels of radon in an area.

Mellor

Villain wrote: »

I do know what I'm talking about the building regulations state excatly what I am talking about.

The building regulations provide for different requirments based on the level.

I am aware that the requirements are different based on high areas or not, where did I say different.
I said there was no such thing as a low area,

Some me where the building regs refers to low radon area.



Edit: Read my last three posts, they pretty much sum it up. I stand by my statement that no area is designated a low radon area.
If you are in a area other than a high radon area you don't need a radon barrier. You do however need a DPM, the difference between the two is marginal.

sinnerboy

"High Radon Area" means a Radiological Institute of Ireland prediction that more than 10% of houses in area will experience high radon levels

Low radon area are actual termed "Areas other than High radon areas"

Radon sumps and vents are required to all areas

Mellor is correct . Low radon area is a total misnomer - the term does not exist - in the regulations

So - who would seriously NOT upgrade a DPM ( which you must provide anyhow ) to a radon barrier - even in an Area other than High radon area

What would you save ? What would you risk ?

Mellor

As an additional final point,
some countries measure and quantify radon maps based not on levels in homes and on actual bedrock radioactive gas levels. In this case the area can be designated high medium or low areas as the actual area was measured.

In ireland the houses were measured, so it is purposely not used.

pete6296

I agree with Mellor 100%, there is no such thing as a low level of Radon. 200 is the figure we can all quote, but below this level we cannot say the Radon level is low. What are the deterministic effects of the levels we quote, its not known but i would always feel more comfortable with a well installed Radon Barrier and down the road to perform a Radon measurement.
The case in Cork that was in the press was not detected by RPII, it was an independent test, the RPII will admit they are under resourced and the map is only a tiny percentage of the inhabitable house in Ireland which is well outdated.
Pete

Villain

My point was not all areas are the same and building regulations allow for such, putting in a radon barrier makes sense but the fact is there is low and high areas of risk so as I said if you are in a high area I would put extra effort into ensuring that the radon barrier is properly installed.

sinnerboy

Villain wrote: »

My point was not all areas are the same and building regulations allow for such, putting in a radon barrier makes sense but the fact is there is low and high areas of risk so as I said if you are in a high area I would put extra effort into ensuring that the radon barrier is properly installed.

..... and less of on effort elsewhere ?

i don't see the point of this hairsplitting Villain

ALL works should be "properly installed"

It is a HUGE mistake to interpret the building regulations in the way you appear to .

To all who are still persrervering with this thread - INSTALL A RADON BARRIER

pete6296

But the map supplied is nearly outdated by now, no one can define low and high risk so i think any radon barrier installed is done professionally. I personally put down mine and i will personally check my radon level when house is complete with a radon detector i have.

Villain wrote: »

My point was not all areas are the same and building regulations allow for such, putting in a radon barrier makes sense but the fact is there is low and high areas of risk so as I said if you are in a high area I would put extra effort into ensuring that the radon barrier is properly installed.

Villain

Quick story for you, my uncle block layed my footings and said he had done a house recently for a guy who was going direct labour but had no knowledge of the building industry. The uncle asked who was doing his radon barrier and he said the person who was doing the ground work, the uncle said he had seen this on a few sites he had done lately where the persons doing the groundwork did the radon barrier he warned him to get it done by someone who was more qualified and experienced to do it as he was in a high radon area in south carlow.

The guy let the grounds work fella do it and the uncle saw and said it wasn't lapped properly it was strained at the side at a slant meaning it would either tear or pull in when concrete was poured. The point I was pointing out is he especially should have got it right as he is in a high risk area.

Telling everyone to put in a radon barrier is great advice, my point is have a look at the map and if you are in a high risk pay extra attention and get someone expierenced to do it even if it costs a few more Euro's. Its not hard to do it properly.

pete6296

I agree to install it correctly but don't do it by looking at a map, do it all the time.....

Villain wrote: »

Quick story for you, my uncle block layed my footings and said he had done a house recently for a guy who was going direct labour but had no knowledge of the building industry. The uncle asked who was doing his radon barrier and he said the person who was doing the ground work, the uncle said he had seen this on a few sites he had done lately where the persons doing the groundwork did the radon barrier he warned him to get it done by someone who was more qualified and experienced to do it as he was in a high radon area in south carlow.

The guy let the grounds work fella do it and the uncle saw and said it wasn't lapped properly it was strained at the side at a slant meaning it would either tear or pull in when concrete was poured. The point I was pointing out is he especially should have got it right as he is in a high risk area.

Telling everyone to put in a radon barrier is great advice, my point is have a look at the map and if you are in a high risk pay extra attention and get someone expierenced to do it even if it costs a few more Euro's. Its not hard to do it properly.

Villain

Well the building reg's say you don't even need to put in a radon barrier below floor if your in a low (non high) risk area so maybe thats why some people don't give it proper consideration. It should probably be updated.

pete6296

To conclude, it should be updated.

Villain wrote: »

Well the building reg's say you don't even need to put in a radon barrier below floor if your in a low (non high) risk area so maybe thats why some people don't give it proper consideration. It should probably be updated.

sydthebeat

its should be a matter of course for anyone specifying or constructing a dwelling to properly install a certified radon barrier.

however, if i am certifying a build and the builder / client insists on not installing one, i cannot state that it is against the building regs if its in one of those low risk areas from the map. I have to sign it off...... thats villains point and one in which he is correct. Everyone agrees that this is an incorrect situation but as of today, it has not been updated.

Mellor

Villain wrote: »

My point was not all areas are the same and building regulations allow for such, putting in a radon barrier makes sense but the fact is there is low and high areas of risk so as I said if you are in a high area I would put extra effort into ensuring that the radon barrier is properly installed.

sydthebeat wrote: »

its should be a matter of course for anyone specifying or constructing a dwelling to properly install a certified radon barrier.

however, if i am certifying a build and the builder / client insists on not installing one, i cannot state that it is against the building regs if its in one of those low risk areas from the map. I have to sign it off...... thats villains point and one in which he is correct. Everyone agrees that this is an incorrect situation but as of today, it has not been updated.

Firstly, I didn't say that this wasn't the case.
I was well aware that the building regs in their current format allow for a RB to be omitted. I never disputed this being allowed (I wouldn't recommend it though). What I did dispute, however, was Villian "correcting" me when I said there are no low radon areas. In this instance he was most definatly wrong.

Whatever about storys of incorrectly laid RBs in high radon areas. Thats ignoring the original point. They are valid in the sense that they highlght why you should inspect this stage very carefully, but have nothing t do with the original point. Being the suggestion that the map shows low radon areas.


Out of interest, it has been mentioned that the reference level is 200 Beq (above this the dwelling is counted towards percentage of the area). So a high radon area might have 20% of dwellings above 200 Beq. And some of the better areas might has <5% above 200 Beq.

The national average is about 89 Beq, so any could have every dwelling at or above a level twice the national average, and still be marked at <1%. This is why it is not a low radon area, as the reference level is still reletively high.
If you live your whole live in a dwelling at the reference level, you have a 1 in 50 chance of lung cancer (if you don't smoke). At thats the acceptable level.

Villain

Mellor wrote: »

What I did dispute, however, was Villian "correcting" me when I said there are no low radon areas. In this instance he was most definatly wrong.

Your being Pedantic but I can be too.

From

A survey carried out by Dr. J.R McLaughlin of University College Dublin of a random sample of approximately 1300 houses in the State shows a median level of indoor radon of about 35 Bq/m3 throughout the country. However, levels in excess of 400 Bq/m3 were found in 1.5% of cases with individual peaks rising as high as 1700 Bq/m3. Most of these were located in counties Clare, Galway, Mayo and Cork, but even in these counties the vast majority of the sample houses had low radon levels.

Taken from ENFO.ie

ircoha

sydthebeat wrote: »

its should be a matter of course for anyone specifying or constructing a dwelling to properly install a certified radon barrier.

however, if i am certifying a build and the builder / client insists on not installing one, i cannot state that it is against the building regs if its in one of those low risk areas from the map. I have to sign it off...... thats villains point and one in which he is correct. Everyone agrees that this is an incorrect situation but as of today, it has not been updated.

I cannot say I share this view because it focusses on a rules-based system as opposed to a principles based system.

I will not certify a build in a non-high radon area that does not have a RB properly fitted in place as well as the sumps etc because there is an obvious omission in the regs based on a principles based perspective.

sinnerboy

Villain wrote: »

Your being Pedantic but I can be too. :

Why Villlian ? to what end ? you are using a radon barrier . You know this forum is viewed by "novices" . Why weaken the case to do as you have done ?

Ircoha - you are absolutely correct in your stance . No RB - no cert

Well.. I installed the rb as required in an area designated "low" on the rpii website.
I don't believe it's a waste as I spent a lot of time and effort ensuring it was as airtight as posssible, despite the flooring contractors sticking spikes in it!

Where I used to live in the UK (Northampton) the "Radon Board" (can't think of their official name right now) requested volounteers to test their own homes.

I was given a sensor that I placed in the living room for three months and posted back to them, the figures I got back were something like 30bq* per second or similar.

This figure was considered above average but below the 200bq level that required action.



I would love to know what the level is in my house now!

* sorry about the non-technical answer as I don't have the document to hand.

pete6296

Hi Folks,
Currently, it is essential that all workplaces have a Radon assesment carried out and continuous assesment in the future. One case in Cork had a level 37,000Bq which is equavalent to approx 30 chest x-rays on a daily basis, this location on the map was located with white.
200Bq cannot indicate a 1/50 chance of developing Lung Cancer, there are other human factors eg. transatlantic flying, eating alot of fish etc. which would increase the probability.
But our aim is to reduce the probabilities, one method would be to install a radon barrier in our homes.
Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

Well.. I installed the rb as required in an area designated "low" on the rpii website.
I don't believe it's a waste as I spent a lot of time and effort ensuring it was as airtight as posssible, despite the flooring contractors sticking spikes in it!

Where I used to live in the UK (Northampton) the "Radon Board" (can't think of their official name right now) requested volounteers to test their own homes.

I was given a sensor that I placed in the living room for three months and posted back to them, the figures I got back were something like 30bq* per second or similar.

This figure was considered above average but below the 200bq level that required action.



I would love to know what the level is in my house now!

* sorry about the non-technical answer as I don't have the document to hand.

smashey

Jesus, this has opened a can of worms.

Can we all just agree that it is good practice to fit a radon barrier and sump etc in all jobs?

Villain

I don't think anyone has disagreed on that point smashey.

The point is though not everywhere has the same risk, there is areas of low risk. Someone posted about novice users reading this, I'm sure many of those users are living in homes that were built with little or no radon barrier, I don't think they should all panic as they could be in a low area. Obviously testing would give piece of mind, but not everyone is at a high risk.

smashey

I see what you're saying there Villain but my point is that I couldn't care less about what the risk is in a certain area. Low risk or high risk, it doesn't matter. Fit one.

Villain

Yes I agree 100% if you are building a home install a Radon Barrier.

sydthebeat

ircoha wrote: »

I cannot say I share this view because it focusses on a rules-based system as opposed to a principles based system.

I will not certify a build in a non-high radon area that does not have a RB properly fitted in place as well as the sumps etc because there is an obvious omission in the regs based on a principles based perspective.

You are very close to questioning my profesionalism there ircoha, be careful. If you would walk from a job because they are installing a 1200 gauge DPM in an area where they are allowed to under current building regulations then you obviously have enough work to be selective. As i work in counties that are (in the main) low radon level areas *see what i did there * i do not have that luxury. All i can do is describe the current inadequacies and potential risks, and leave it up to the client to make the decision. More often that not they choose the BR, but in some cases they havent. I do not feel my professionalism is compromised in this case. I will support any proposal to change these regs in any way i can, but i have to work within a 'rulesbased' system, not an anarchic opinion based system.

muffler

People, people, people. Take a deep breath and step back from this for a while.

Im tempted to lock it but as there are some good points being made I would prefer to leave it open. If anyone has a problem with any posts here then they can report the post, PM the post author or PM a mod.

Chill.

sinnerboy

Is a pain barrier important ?