Re: Soda Blasting For Mold Removal???
Posted by johncodie on 12/08/06
On 12/07/06, Ryan wrote:
> Lot of misinformation on this post. Soda is very weakly caustic (8 PH
> Ref http://www.chemistryquestion.com/English/Questions/
"Soda blasting is a method of removing surface contaminants and
coatings by using sodium bicarbonate (baking soda). Compressed air
from specialized blasting machine propel particles against the surface
to be cleaned. As the sodium bicarbonate particles come in contact
with the surface, it removes the contaminant or coating. The sodium
bicarbonate and blasting machine work in unison to perform this removal
process in a nondestructive manner. The soda blasting is usually done
in open air, booth or cabinet."
I stumbled upon washing soda because I needed to peel old wax off a
floor. Washing soda worked for this, as it did for cleaning up engine
oil, and other tough materials that people generally use solvents.
Washing soda--sodium carbonate--is in the same family as baking soda.
It has just been processed differently. It is much more
caustic/alkaline, with a pH of 11, and while it doesn't give off
harmful fumes, you do need to wear gloves. It is found in the laundry
section of most supermarkets. Arm & Hammer is one brand; Shop and Save
has a generic house brand.
Washing soda cuts grease, cleans petroleum oil, removes wax or
lipstick, and neutralizes odors in the same way that baking soda does.
Don’t use it on fiberglass, aluminum or waxed floors—unless you intend
to remove the wax.
One of the lowest
> carbonates on the scale. Why would you use something that corrodes
> metal in your moms birthday cake? Your saliva is 6.4 (ref
> http://biomedx.com/pH/page3.html)with 7 being neutral. It will not
> corrode metals. How caustic and environmentally safe are those great
> chemicals? Soda is a first step in remediation.
I don't know why you are referencing 6.4 when the material data safety
sheet is listing a 8.2 value? The differences in PH does not mean much
but rember you are using a logrithmic scale, ie 10x 100x etc. 6.4
mixed with 8.2 in a large quanity, or give to a mother that is
expecting can be fatal to the fetus.
Removal of visible
> mold. Then chemicals are used to treat studs and surfaces. Mold is
> already in the air around you...everywhere. That’s why you set up air
> scrubbers and treat afterward. Baking soda is NATURAL...everyone with
> a chemistry background knows this, not just environmentalists. It is a
> mined mineral crushed to ash and dissolved in water (ref
Baking soda starts as a natural mineral mined from the earth
as "trona," (sodium sesquicarbonate) which is then processed into soda
ash. This soda ash is dissolved in plain water into which carbon
dioxide is added to cause the formation of sodium bicarbonate crystals,
which is then allowed to dry and becomes the familiar white powder we
know. That's a very simplistic explanation of how common baking soda
comes to life.
This means that sodium bicarbonate is not natural occurring from mother
earth if carbon dioxide has to be added.
No one ever claims soda is a mold killer.
Arm & Hammer is pushing the air cleaning and other qualities of its
abrasive products. As opposed to sand which can take you down to bare
metal or wood; AMEX has a lower hardness, abreasive number so only a
certain level or surface exposure is removed. In both cases sand and
AMEX does not get into the pores of the wood or remove the mold in the
pores. The chemical processes in remediation does not saturate the
wood as the lumber is being made and pressure treated in the kil. You
do not get the saturation but rather a surface coat with a
encapsulation seal. Like all seals or tires they begin to leak.
Only a remover. Please do
> research before posting. And state some references to give your belief
> a backbone not just hot air.
Hey you guys in the remediation fields, Don't think that cleaning of
the Statue of Liberty did not have a clean up of removed debris and
have to undergo an environmental impact before they got the permit.
You keep using the term soda blasting, and forget that the correct term
should be bi-carbonate (Baking Soda) blasting; or perfered AMEX
regestered trademark of Arm & Hammer used in compliance with its
Material Data Safety Sheet. You don't want to influence someone to use
the more caustic washing caustic sodium carbonate. The stuff you put
in your pool is not the same as the stuff you put in your cake, which
is not the same as what you put in your refrigertor to absorb odors.
Another area that your are forgeting as remediation experts is whatever
chemical, metals, or other debris that your abrasive blasting is
removing, natural, by-product of the material your are blasting, or
parts of the material you are removing, becomes your airborne, or
surface water problem. Not knowing that it was there, even if it was
some other fool that misapplied a pestiside becomes your problem! I
know of three or four Grand Bay Alabama remediation workers trying to
remediate a school wooden foundation for mold that had to go to Ocean
Springs MS to have their eye lids slit to reduce the swelling. Don't
believe all four men had the same alergic reation, but it became a
problem for the contractor. The EPA, OSHA, and health department did
get involved. The workers got paid off, proper equipment was not
being utilized, and toxicologist reports did not indicate there was any
toxins that would quarintene the school. It was as you call it under
the Radar cover-up.
If you are going to interface with the public as subject matter experts
your going to have to be very precise and stop the slang, trade words
your groups come up with. You can bet your being quoted, and recorded.
> On 9/27/06, Chad wrote:
>> Soda blasting (using Arm & Hammer baking soda) is effective &
>> harmless. It is the same process that was used in 1987 to clean
>> the Statue of Liberty. Baking soda is also present in many
>> refrigerators, baked goods, toothpaste, deodorant and chewing
>> gums. It is extremely safe, and extremely effective and removing
>> mold without harming wood structures.
>> On 9/01/06, JOE ALEXANDER wrote:
>>> On 5/22/06, RemDude wrote:
>>>> I also agree that soda blasting creates more problems than it
>>>> solves. How anyone can believe that aerosolizing contamination
>>>> is a good thing for contaminated structures is beyond me. The
>>>> only folks pushing this technology are those who sell the
>>>> expensive equipment and soda for the process. It is being
>>>> banned in many areas and IHs won’t touch the process.
>>>> Yet another bad idea...
>>>> On 4/03/06, Mold Remover wrote:
>>>>> PD - You are correct in that soda blasting is a new method
>>>>> being employed for mold removal. The environmentalists
>>>>> somehow seem to believe that soda is both natural and
>>>>> environmentally safe. I would not recommend anyone using
>>>>> this method for mold removal. Soda is caustic, eats metal
>>>>> surfaces, and is not an approved mold killer.
>>>>> The only good thing it has going for it, is it’s fast.
>>>>> That’s why you are seeing it used. Considering the other
>>>>> cost effective remediation methods being deployed, soda
>>>>> blasting is NOT the answer. Look into the latest chemical
>>>>> remediation methods being used. This is the cost effective
>>>>> and labor efficient answer for mold remediation.
>>>>> On 3/29/06, P. Davidson wrote:
>>>>>> I have read about soda blasting as a new method being used
>>>>>> in the mold remediation business. Can anyone tell me how
>>>>>> effective the process is in killing mold and what the
>>>>>> dangers are for this type of method? It seems that there
>>>>>> would be a host of issues regarding the caustic nature of
>>>>>> soda, the potential for excessive mold release into the
>>>>>> environment, and the potential to drive spores deeper into
>>>>>> the substrate. Wouldn’t there be significant liability
>>>>>> associated with this method?
>>>>>> Anyone have any practical experience with this?
Posts on this thread, including this one