U.S. Cities  
Happy New Year 2010!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania
Register Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Northeastern Pennsylvania Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pocono area

Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 700,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 15,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads.

Get a detailed profile
Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply


 
Old 07-05-2007, 05:26 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
4,513 posts, read 2,099,156 times
Reputation: 1583
mathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant future
Default radon in pa

boy looks like most of pa is the radon king of america. we are closing on a house next week in lake wallenpaupack and just got the radon report back. 4.4 which is an unacceptably high number. buyer is crediting us with a rebate to pay for a mitigation system. house is only 2 years old but because they bought it new they never had the test done.

looking at the epa map most of the state is flagged as high. bottom line is if you never did it, its a good idea to test your house, radon is the second biggest cause of lung cancer next to smoking
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2007, 05:37 PM
Lifelong NJ, Winter in SC...Hometown NEPA
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Native of New Jersey, Now in SC, Home in NEPA
11,035 posts, read 4,171,946 times
Blog Entries: 21
Reputation: 9449
Summering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond repute
Summering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond reputeSummering has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via Skype™ to Summering
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
boy looks like most of pa is the radon king of america. we are closing on a house next week in lake wallenpaupack and just got the radon report back. 4.4 which is an unacceptably high number. buyer is crediting us with a rebate to pay for a mitigation system. house is only 2 years old but because they bought it new they never had the test done.

looking at the epa map most of the state is flagged as high. bottom line is if you never did it, its a good idea to test your house, radon is the second biggest cause of lung cancer next to smoking
Actually don't feel bad we had to have one put in an estate home in NJ for the closing there. Also, another had to be put in in Pa, Middle Smithfield on another home in the family. We squeeked by after closeing all cracks and vents from water lines.........lines to the washer etc. on a sale in NJ.
A home we almost closed on once Pa. ( our buyers failed us) was very high also......... Seems it is all around and in quite a few states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2007, 11:30 AM
Señor Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Beautiful Upstate NY!
5,284 posts, read 3,567,544 times
Reputation: 1218
jfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud ofjfkIII has much to be proud of
There's even a town called Radonville, PA!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2007, 08:07 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dingmans Ferry PA
6 posts, read 6,305 times
Reputation: 10
A2Zpa is on a distinguished road
Radon results from the natural decay of Uranium, of course there is a deposit of Uranium
PA Radon Link

Link

Health Hazards Associated with Elevated Levels of Indoor Radon -- Pennsylvania

As a part of the safety program at the Limerick Nuclear Power Plant in Pennsylvania, personnel entering the plant must pass through a radiation monitoring area. In December 1984, the monitoring device detected an abnormally high level of radiation in one construction worker. When an investigation was made to determine how and where this worker was being exposed to excessive radiation, investigators found that the air in the man's home contained extremely high levels of "radon daughters,"(Polonium) the short-lived decay products of radon-222. Radon is an inert, radioactive gas formed in the decay chain of uranium-238. For each year the worker and his family lived in this house, they were exposed to over 50 times the annual occupational limit of exposure for uranium miners. The family relocated until remedial actions to lower the indoor radon levels could be completed.

As a result of this incident, in January 1985 state officials in Pennsylvania began a sampling program in which over 2,000 homes around the construction worker's house were examined. The homes are in an area of natural uranium deposits. Approximately 40% of the homes had radon levels exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guideline for indoor radon of 0.02 "working levels." A working level is a measure of radon daughter concentrations and is defined as any combination of radon daughters in 1 liter of air that results in 1.3 x 10((5)) million electron volts of potential alpha energy. About 7% of the homes tested had radon levels at or above the 0.1 working level. If residents in these homes spend 75% of their time indoors exposed to 0.1 working level, their yearly exposure would equal 4 working level months, the annual occupational limit of exposure. A working level month is a measure of exposure and is a function of the time of exposure and the level of radon daughters, given in working levels. Reported by J Logue, DrPH, J Fox, MD, Pennsylvania Dept of Health; Cancer Br, Div of Chronic Disease Control, Center for Environmental Health, CDC.
Editorial Note

Editorial Note: The elevated radon levels near the eastern border of Pennsylvania are associated with natural uranium deposits that extend into northern New Jersey and southern New York. Since similar geologic deposits are found throughout the country, the elevated radon levels in Pennsylvania may indicate a much broader national problem. Radon enters a building through cracks, such as those in a basement floor, and through openings around pipes and wiring. Once inside, the radon builds up in the air, particularly in poorly ventilated houses. As radon daughters are formed, they attach to airborne particulates. When inhaled, these particulates can deliver a substantial dose of radiation to the bronchial epithelium.

No exposure limit has been established for indoor levels of radon from natural sources; however, EPA is now developing guidelines that will define action levels concerning houses with high concentrations of radon and is developing and evaluating mitigation strategies.

Exposure to radon daughters increases a person's lifetime risk of lung cancer. The risk rises in direct relationship with the length of exposure and with radon daughter levels.

The two risk estimates in Table 1 are derived from studies of uranium miners and have been extrapolated from relatively high occupational exposures to environmental levels. The highest lifetime risk calculated from studies of uranium miners is 7.3 x 10))-4)) deaths per working level month, and the lowest generally accepted risk is 3.0 x 10))-4)) deaths per working level month (1,2). These estimates are for the general population, including smokers. The risks for nonsmokers are approximately six times less than those given in the upper portion of the table (1).

Each year, approximately 5,000-30,000 deaths may be attributed to background levels of indoor radon. The health threat from radon can be addressed by identifying geographic areas that could produce elevated levels of indoor radon, developing strategies to reduce exposure, conducting research on effective remedial measures to be taken in buildings, and providing educational programs for health officials and the public. Changes in usage patterns of high-radon areas in a home, such as the basement, and the control of future construction in geographic areas high in uranium deposits can reduce exposure. Effective remedial measures for individual dwellings can also be used to lower radon exposure. Research in these areas should be coordinated with other agencies active in this field. The educational programs can be used to inform health officials and the public about the health threat from radon and about associated risk factors, such as smoking.

References

1.

National Research Council. The effects on populations of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1980.
2.

International Commission on Radiological Protection. Limits for intakes of radionuclides by workers. ICRP report no. 32, part 3, 1981.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2007, 06:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
4,513 posts, read 2,099,156 times
Reputation: 1583
mathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant future
had the 4.4 level mitigated and it came right down to 0.9. all is well
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2007, 06:33 PM
Senior Member
Status: "Confidently Confused...." (set 28 days ago)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lake Ariel Pa
2,591 posts, read 2,527,797 times
Reputation: 960
I LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to beholdI LOVE PA! is a splendid one to behold
Glad to hear that all is well with your new home. It makes me wonder...My house is only 3 yrs old...My parents built theirs also, about 14 years ago, never had it tested. I'm going to have to buy one of those kits for peace of mind. Thanks for the tip!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2007, 03:37 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
4,513 posts, read 2,099,156 times
Reputation: 1583
mathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant futuremathjak107 has a brilliant future
i would have it tested by a pro. there are certain procedures that must be followed to get an accurate test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



Reply


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:41 PM.

Copyright © 2005-2009, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 - Top