Since joining the Risk Science Center, I have found myself looking at the world through new eyes – it’s what happens when you introduce an economist to a bunch of really smart scientists! This has made for interesting dinner conversation at my house and the start of ‘risk science moments,’ where I come across an everyday decision and wonder how a risk scientist would weigh the evidence. Lucky for me, I can use this blog and our members as a resource to help answer these questions, and I hope this process will help in understanding and illustrating the role of risk science and communication in everyday life.
Our first ‘risk science moment’ has been researching guidelines for renovating homes with lead paint. My husband and I figured that lead paint is nothing new, and that there would be plenty of clear guidance that could help us understand the risks of lead exposure when it comes to our original windows – whether we choose to renovate or leave the paint as is. But we’ve found the massive mix of guidance confusing – and we’re not sure how to evaluate the health risk on this relatively commonplace situation:
- Our 1940s house is in great shape and has all been recently repainted. We assume there’s lead paint under there somewhere but generally no peeling. There are sometimes a few small paint chips in the window sill when we open the window, but the windows have been recently repainted and are in about as good shape as they can be.
- We’d like to replace the original wood windows with more energy-efficient ones (it is Ann Arbor, after all – cold winters!).
In reading guidance on this (admittedly we didn’t read all of the over 100 different pdfs available from the National Lead Information Center, but we’ve read several), two themes emerge:
- If paint is in good shape and not chipping or peeling – leave it alone. The dust generated by renovation would likely cause more potential for exposure than leaving the lead paint as is. (yes, that’s us pretty much us!)
- Where friction is likely to cause scraping (i.e window and door frames)– wipe surfaces frequently and consider replacing older windows, doors in a lead-safe way. (yes, we’re talking about windows, so this is us, too!)
And this is where it’s confusing – both of these standards seem to apply, the first seems to suggest we’re better off (from a lead exposure standpoint) leaving the windows as they are, while the second suggests we should consider replacement.
This leads us to ask: How do the exposure risks compare, if we either: 1) Live for years with windows scraping from friction and potentially producing lead dust, or 2) Replace the windows and have the risk of exposure from the replacement process (assuming it’s all done in a lead-safe way), but then no further daily risk when opening the windows?
I’m asking center members and other experts for advice and what they would do in this situation – and/or to point me to resources that they might use. So far I’ve sought advice from Dr. Niladri Basu, RSC Member and Assistant Professor of Environmental Health Sciences, and Tracey Easthope, Environmental Health Director at the Ecology Center. I’ll be posting their thoughts and suggestions in a couple of follow-up pieces.
I am selfishly appreciative of the help, and I hope this and other ‘risk science moments’ further our understanding of risk science in everyday life. I’ll also provide an update here of what we decide to do and why. And of course, if you have any thoughts or advice, please leave your comments below. I’m looking forward to hearing from you!
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
Thanks for the great post. As we all know, lead is a toxic element that has no biological function. Exposure to lead causes a wide spectrum of problems most notably brain damage in the developing brain.
From the risk perspective, early life stages are most susceptible to lead. For example, young children absorb (through the gut) about 50% or more of the lead they ingest while adults only absorb about a tenth of the amount ingested. Children are also more sensitive to the effects of lead, particularly effects to the nervous system, and also behave in ways that put them at much higher risk of exposure to lead in the environment. Still, lead is associated with numerous adverse effects in adults ranging from hypertension to nerve damage.
In your situation, if the home has children living in it then you should have all the work done with proper lead abatement done by reputable companies. The risk of long-term exposure to lead in the air and dust, even at low levels, is more problematic than addressing the problem in one fell swoop, so to speak. The focus that you and your family will place on ensuring that you minimize your possible exposure to lead during the construction period is likely to be the most important aspect of your project. On the other hand, over time you are likely to forget about the potential for lead exposure and stop taking steps to ensure proper cleaning on an ongoing basis.
Thanks David – yes, the human error factor in cleaning and maintenance over time, is a really good point! Many thanks
Take a look at what HUD’s Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control (OHHLHC) has to say about the your situation regarding windows. Below is their web site. You might also want to talk with Dr. Warren Friedman, 202-402-7574, who works in the the Directors Office of OHHLHC – Warren is an expert on lead-based paint risks in housing and other buildings.
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/healthy_homes
Good luck.
Thank you Bill – much appreciate, and I’ve left a message with Dr. Friedman, that sounds like an excellent connection! Best, Tracy
Ok, I do see that the top related post says “one risk at a time”. As a new homeowner myself, I’d suggest ignoring that, and broadening my perspective a bit.
I’d get an energy assessment. If you are lucky, you’ll have something like our community energy challenge: http://sustainableconnections.org/energy/energychallenge/ What we got was a team that came out and put a fan on the front door, created a bit of a vacuum and then systematically identified leakage points. Once we seal all that, then we proceed to a ERV (energy recovery ventilation) fresh air replacement process, and a furnace with a ducted outside air intake.
As you already know, those windows probably ought to be on a replacement program anyway.
Have you checked the furnace, insulation and water pipes?
Many thanks, Gaythia – there is a lot to think about in an older home! The community energy challenge you have sounds great — I’m having a look to see if we have one in Ann Arbor, I hope we do. Thanks for the idea, that would be a great resource! Best, Tracy
Tracy: I am the manager of the Michigan Department of Community Health Healthy Homes Section. We are the responsible agency for the state of Michigan for all things lead in the home environment. We have many health and housing experts that can help you make an informed decsion. We also have many resources located on our website. Our agency is the receipent of HUD and EPA funding. To date we have overseen the abatement of lead hazards in 1,900 homes across the state. We are the authorized EPA state agency for the certifciation of the lead professionals that inspect for lead hazards, perform risk assessments and perform lead hazard control. Our website lists these individuals and firms in your area. We also perform the compliance oversight of these individuals and firms to ensure quality work is performed according to the Michigan Lead Abatement Act and Rules. Please feel free to contact us at 866 691-53223 or at 517 335-9390.
Thanks Wesley – that sounds excellent. I’ve just left a voicemail at that number; I’m looking forward to hearing back and I’ll post about it here! Best – Tracy
Hi Wesley, Thanks again – I just received a call back on my request (same day – thanks!) and had a really helpful conversation with one of your colleagues. She explained that the lead safe renovation practices really minimize the exposure during a renovation project like removing windows, so she suggested that this is a better option than keeping the windows and having the exposure over time that would occur with the friction of the windows and the dust settling into the grain of the wood in the sills. She also suggested that we have the work checked by a separate certified lead inspector to ensure that the clean-up was thorough and that dust samples come back clean. This extra inspection costs about $200.
{ 1 trackback }