Lead and demo

[kfc510]

Interesting article on the spread of lead dust from whole-house demolition:


kevin

[Guest]

Kevin:

In order to get a demolition permit here you have to abate the asbestos and lead, the same abatement companies do both. I don't know whether that's just Bay Area or all of California, I do know that for a single house it increases the cost about 10 times according to my demolition contractor.

[Guest]

Dick, how exactly do you abate lead? I mean lead in the paint on an entire house.

[Guest]

Dick, how exactly do you abate lead? I mean lead in the paint on an entire house.

DG:

We have licensed abatement companies, I've never had lead abated but have had asbestos abated several times and assume they do it the same, guys in space suits show up in trucks that are sealed over, they park the trucks at a close spot aligned with a door and erect plastic "tents" that run from the bed of the truck to the door, then the guys in the space suits proceed to remove all contaminated sheetrock, stucco, or whatever and load it into the trucks, my understanding is that they take it to a rail yard and it's shipped to a canyon in Arizona for disposal. I've watched through the plastic but they would never allow me inside, they are very professional and leave everything spotless.

Over the years I've always hated removing floor tile, I've tried grinders and even taking my pickup to to an ice company and bringing back a truck load of dry ice and it's still a nightmare, after seeing how efficient these guys work I started hiring them to remove all floor tile even if it tests negative for asbestos.

[Guest]

One line I find interesting is "Detroit does not have records of violations in the first 2 1/2 years of demo". What does that mean? Everyone did it right? No one got caught? No one cared or checked the work? Based on them just hiring 6 inspectors I am thinking no one checked.
The other is that if you remove a window you have to follow lead base paint protocols but if you tear down a whole house there are not rules for that.

Next question is if this story is published in the Detroit papers, talked about on the Detroit news programs, etc. Is the word getting out to those who live there.

Another thing that I have always wondered about is the idea of lead in the soil around a house. I understand it is often high from simple rainwater washing of walls and painted surfaces along with the paint chips on the ground. So what happens when a house is taken down and then gets all stirred up when they come to build a new house on it or it becomes a community garden spot or the neighborhood kids turn it into a baseball diamond or soccer field? Every time they slide into home plate they stir up lead dust.Will the soil ever be OK for the next group of folks that show up there.

[Guest]

No one got caught? No one cared or checked the work?

Correct on both.

Another thing that I have always wondered about is the idea of lead in the soil around a house. I understand it is often high from simple rainwater washing of walls and painted surfaces along with the paint chips on the ground...

Correct. I believe we talked about this in the past. There is significant lead in the top layer of soil from many sources including lead in the gasoline in the past.

[Guest]

I guess my point is when a house comes down and is filled in they may be taking off the top 6 inches of soil and replacing it. I do not recall if the article said that but it did mention grass seed and a straw mat. But even if they do add 6 inches of top soil the next time a house is built and a foundation is dug, electrical and sewer are trenched the soil is disturbed so there is likely to be lead dust being blown around again. It seems like a long term issue that the neighbors need to know about not just at the time the demo is done but whenever any future work is done in that location.

Almost like some sort of disclosure when you buy a house that would state that lead was found within the dust containment zone and you are being made aware of it.

[Guest]

Be interesting to see what Pruitt's EPA does about this lead paranoia, a lot depends on how much lobbying money is put up to change or get rid of it, of course if the EPA wipes it all out we in California will be stuck with our state rules, because Californians don't care what anything costs as long as it's more regulation.

[Guest]

It's estimated that there's over 5 million tons of lead in the soil just from leaded gasoline and who knows how much from other sources. I don't think we are getting rid of lead, we're just moving it around and fooling ourselves.

[Guest]

Gary:

Just more absurd regulation, I'm meeting with my lead guy Wednesday to have lead shrouds made made for foundation vents in rock walls, the recent 'biblical storms' drove rain through the foundation vents and the customer wants it fixed, with lead I can mold the shrouds to look like other stones and the aging patina will make them look like other rocks. My son works with lead all the time and is acknowledged for his ability to make ancient Greek typefaces that mimic the characters of ancient Greek. This is from the manuscript of a book about to be printed:

[Guest]

I'd recommend Bondo with a good primer.

[Guest]

This article from a true scientist addresses the overregulation of asbestos but would apply to lead as well.

The economic burden of America’s accumulating mountain of regulatory requirements is almost unimaginable: According to a study from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University that used a 22-industry dataset covering the years from 1977 through 2012, by distorting the investment choices that lead to innovation, regulation has created a considerable drag on the economy that amounts to an average reduction in the annual growth rate of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) of 0.8 percent.

That translates to a U.S. economy that is a whopping $4 trillion smaller than it otherwise would have been.

There are numerous reasons for this impact. For a start, as regulations become more and more complex and burdensome, prospective entrepreneurs and managers must expend more resources on issues related to regulation and have less available for innovation and corporate growth. The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s report Ten Thousand Commandments 2016 found that federal regulation alone costs consumers and businesses at least $1.9 trillion every year in compliance costs and lost economic productivity—more than 11 percent of current GDP. Federal regulation acts as “a hidden tax that amounts to nearly $15,000 per U.S. household each year.

Much of existing regulation is superfluous or fails to be cost-effective. In his excellent book “Breaking the Vicious Circle, written shortly before he was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, Stephen Breyer cited an example of expensive, non-cost-effective regulation by the EPA: a ban on asbestos pipe, shingles, coating, and paper, which the most optimistic estimates suggested would prevent seven or eight premature deaths over 13 years—at a cost of approximately a quarter of a billion dollars.

Breyer observed that such a vast expenditure on regulating uses of asbestos that confer de minimus risks would cause more deaths than it would prevent from the asbestos exposure, simply by reducing the resources available for other public amenities. Nevertheless, political pressures from environmental activists pushed the EPA into making a decision whose net effect was actually to increase health risks.¹

Note that Justice Breyer is on the left wing of the Supreme Court.


¹

[Guest]

one of the differences that I see with lead over asbestos is the long term effect. You get a kid at age 9 months who gets lead poisioning and it is severe enough you end up with a kid with a 70 year issue.
And the statement that only 7 or 8 deaths in 13 years seems awfully low to me. That is based only on what little I have read about it and the fact that almost weekly, if you watch any television, you will see some ads for contact lawyer brown for asbestos exposures.

On the other hand I am not so sure that there is a total drain on the economy. Think of all the doctors, hospitals, nurses, research staff, administration, inspectors, science guys who are employed studying these issues. What are they going to be doing if not this area of health issues? then there are all the specialist in the construction field making a living at working with this stuff, the companies that train the workers, the companies that make all the moon suits and masks, miles of plastic and bags, and more.

[Guest]

On the other hand I am not so sure that there is a total drain on the economy. Think of all the doctors, hospitals, nurses, research staff, administration, inspectors, science guys who are employed studying these issues. What are they going to be doing if not this area of health issues? then there are all the specialist in the construction field making a living at working with this stuff, the companies that train the workers, the companies that make all the moon suits and masks, miles of plastic and bags, and more.

Mark, you make a point, but it also solves the problem or health care costs skyrocketing, and university's costs skyrocketing as they keep soliciting grant monies to do their so-called research, we need to get costs down, generations have lived with lead and asbestos and this generation can live with it too. Perhaps all these people employed in make-work jobs can move into productive occupations instead of milking society. Just today the President signed new Executive Order eliminating unnecessary regulations like lead and asbestos regulation:

“Excessive regulations are killing jobs, driving companies out of our country like never before,’’ Trump said as he signed the executive order. “Today this executive order directs each agency to establish a regulatory reform task force. It will ensure that every agency has a team of dedicated people to research all regulations that are unnecessary, burdensome and harmful to the economy, and harmful to the creation of jobs and business.

The Department of Transportation and thus the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration fall under the order, which calls for each task force to make recommendations to repeal or simplify existing regulations. It’s unclear how this might impact FMCSA since many of their rules are Congressionally mandated and eliminating a mandated regulation would likely take Congressional action, a source told The Trucker.

The regulatory system represents “an impossible situation and we’re going to solve it very quickly, Trump said. “They (the task forces) will have to every once in a while report to us so we can report on the progress, and so we can come up with some even better solutions.

Friday’s order comes on the heels of two other executive orders related to regulations, one in effect freezing the regulatory process with some exceptions, the other ordering federal agencies to identify two regulations that could be eliminated for every one new regulation they write.

“This executive order is one of many ways we’re going to get real results when it comes to removing job-killing regulations and increasing economic opportunity, Trump said. “We’re working very hard to roll back the regulatory burden so that coal miners, factory workers, small business owners and so many others can grow their businesses and thrive. We cannot allow government to be an obstacle to government opportunity. We’re going to bring back jobs and create more opportunities [than] ever before in our country.

¹

[Guest]

Ahhh yes, The Glory Days.
The days when cars could go 6 whole miles on a gallon of leaded gas and your brains would get splattered on the dash in a minor accident. Smog alerts and rivers that catch fire. Factory workers losing limbs, and miners dying at 30.
Yes! That's what working class people voted for!


I can't wait to see the greedy, soulless "pro life" hypocrites try to sell this one. Once their base realizes what they're up to (robbing the poor to give to the rich), it should be about as easy as repealing the ACA.