IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Hepa Vacuum cleaning effectiveness of surface
Rank: Forum user 
|
hi All.
I have another query i am hoping some one has a paper on. Or can direct me somewhere.
I can not seem to find any paper/research whatsoever that discusses the effecriveness of industrial hepa vacuuming a surface after asbestos dust removal.
HSE has many documents outlining it needing to be done and so on...But has there been any research by any country that examines the decontamination of say wood floors or wood beams (after remval and subsequent vacumming).??
It seems as though a lot of publications say hepa needs to be done...which is obvious....But how good a job at decontminating surfaces does hepa vacuuming do.
please note i am not talking about the hepa filter...I am refering to how well the surface in question is cleaned.
I would think that some surfaces are more difficult ...but there is no research that i can find
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Hi Bill Not seen the research you are looking for but would agree that some surfaces will be more difficult to effectively vacuum.
A very long time ago, I went into the undercroft below a Court building to look at how the contractor was attempting to sort out the previous botched asbestos removal job. The undercroft was rough sandstone so would be very difficult to effectively vaccum. In such circumstances applying an encapsulant might be more effective, but, of course, does not entirely remove the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi Peter.
Thanks for the reply.
Yes..this one is a bit curious. Hopefully one day the study will be done..one day!
I know that encapsulation is not always legally reguired, if the site passes a visual clearance by certified inspector
This is where it annoys me...
1) we go to the effort of say asbestos is microscopic....
2) The health sector market and campaign to the public that microscopic fibres are dangerous and can not bee seen
3) Yet...we rely on "visual" clearances issued after HEPA vacumming.
Am I the only one who can see the problem with this.?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Morning Bill This comes down to a question of how clean is sufficiently safe? Four or five decades ago the notion that "one (asbestos) fibre can kill" as in vogue. But research tells us that there is a dose-response relationship such that it is assumed that exposure to asbestos needs to be relatively extensive before there is a measurable risk. HSE fell foul of this in the judgment in R v Squibb (a case that has been discussed on these Forums) though that only related to the penalty that was deemed appropriate. In practice, anyone who lives in a built up area probably breathes in a tiny amount of asbestos on a daily basis, so we have to apply some pragmatism or we would end up dying of worry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15298669091369998
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
https://www.elcosh.org/record/document/4347/d001602.pdf
This list of references should keep you going for a while... :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Originally Posted by: peter gotch  Morning Bill This comes down to a question of how clean is sufficiently safe? Four or five decades ago the notion that "one (asbestos) fibre can kill" as in vogue. But research tells us that there is a dose-response relationship such that it is assumed that exposure to asbestos needs to be relatively extensive before there is a measurable risk. HSE fell foul of this in the judgment in R v Squibb (a case that has been discussed on these Forums) though that only related to the penalty that was deemed appropriate. In practice, anyone who lives in a built up area probably breathes in a tiny amount of asbestos on a daily basis, so we have to apply some pragmatism or we would end up dying of worry.
Hi Peter. Many thanks for the response. I think your first line sums it up perfectly. How sufficient is it?. I would understand if there was some research...but there appears to be nothing.
As you correctly pointed out ... one fibre can kill is ridiculous, but there are rightful concerns expressed by the public building owners when it comes to hazardous material removal.
In the case of vacuuming out an area and to the untrained person/public...it would be assumed in most cases, that all asbestos is removed because a clearance certificate is subsequently issued.
My view is that it would make for an interesting undergrad study at university to write a paper on. Ie vacuum vs different surfaces and the decontamination rate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Originally Posted by: stevedm https://www.elcosh.org/record/document/4347/d001602.pdf
This list of references should keep you going for a while... :)
Excellent. Much appreciated Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
this will also help...if you don't have it already...you might need an IH'st to underwrite anything you decide or take the course yourself... https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl_pdf/2001/hsl01-11.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
IOSH forums home
»
Our public forums
»
OSH discussion forum
»
Hepa Vacuum cleaning effectiveness of surface
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.