 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:44:22 -0500, Alain <ele### [at] netscape net> wrote:
>Radon is radioactive. But, as it's a "noble" gas, it's non-reactive and thus
>can't be toxic. To be toxic, a substance need to be able to easily react with
>other substances.
>As radon is radioactive, it cause some ionisation in other substances. That
>ionisation can denaturate some substances. But radon's radioactivity is very
>weak. You need a lot of it over several years for it to become a problem. Any
>basement where you go more than 4 times a year will have to much air movement to
>be able to get a critical radon concentration. Also, the floor need to be
>permeable, while the walls and ceiling need to be prety air tight.
Is that a personal opinion, Alain? I take it you don't live in a granite area or
worry about lung cancer?
And my definition of toxic has nothing to do with reacting with other substances
but with how much harm it can cause. So water can be toxic if enough is ingested
and we all know that oxygen can be toxic.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> Is that a personal opinion, Alain? I take it you don't live in a granite area or
> worry about lung cancer?
> And my definition of toxic has nothing to do with reacting with other substances
> but with how much harm it can cause. So water can be toxic if enough is ingested
> and we all know that oxygen can be toxic.
Sorry for interfering in. But after reading your interesting discussion I had to
say this.
--dosis facit venenum--
(don't want to sound bragging)
bluetree
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 17:29:28 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>--dosis facit venenum--
>(don't want to sound bragging)
Well you were showing off :) (It took me ages to find the meaning)
And you are correct, of course. I don't know if the discussion was interesting
but it certainly was petty, on my part. :)
It did have a point as yet unseen.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> It did have a point as yet unseen.
Perhaps of thinking about where chemistry might be in your daily life?
Better letting no gases into your house?
Not to breath too much of anything?
Why eating or drinking?
I'm drifting off :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 05:25:14 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
>> It did have a point as yet unseen.
>
>Perhaps of thinking about where chemistry might be in your daily life?
>Better letting no gases into your house?
>Not to breath too much of anything?
>Why eating or drinking?
>I'm drifting off :-)
>
Moderation in all things, including Moderation. That's what I always say.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/12 16:32:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:44:22 -0500, Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>
>> Radon is radioactive. But, as it's a "noble" gas, it's non-reactive and thus
>> can't be toxic. To be toxic, a substance need to be able to easily react with
>> other substances.
>> As radon is radioactive, it cause some ionisation in other substances. That
>> ionisation can denaturate some substances. But radon's radioactivity is very
>> weak. You need a lot of it over several years for it to become a problem. Any
>> basement where you go more than 4 times a year will have to much air movement to
>> be able to get a critical radon concentration. Also, the floor need to be
>> permeable, while the walls and ceiling need to be prety air tight.
>
> Is that a personal opinion, Alain? I take it you don't live in a granite area or
> worry about lung cancer?
> And my definition of toxic has nothing to do with reacting with other substances
> but with how much harm it can cause. So water can be toxic if enough is ingested
> and we all know that oxygen can be toxic.
>
>
> Regards
> Stephen
If radon is a concern for you, you must make sure that the basement is properly
ventilated.
In my area, the ground is a base of blue granite, covered by a layer of clay
going from a few cm to several meters thick. Many house basements go trough that
clay and reatch the granite.
Anyway, secondary cigaret smoke and city polution are greater lung cancer risks,
and by a very large magin, than the radon you can find in an under ventilated
basement. Also, several other common products can contribute: formaldeide,
bleatch, many disinfectants and cleaning products, food aditives,...
If the basement don't reatch the underlying granite, is reasonaby well
constructed, and the ground is relatively porous, that radon will mostly seep
out of the ground outside the house. Add a pair of small basement windows and a
stareway to the basement and radon won't accumulate.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you resign the fact that printing
uses CMYK instead of RGB to one of those tests God gave to Job; otherwise life
would be too painful to go on.
-- Taps a.k.a. Tapio Vocadlo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:34:18 -0500, Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>If radon is a concern for you, you must make sure that the basement is properly
>ventilated.
It doesn't, Alain. I've always lived in the upper stories of buildings.
Radon is toxic not because it reacts chemically with the body but because it
gets into the lungs and the radioactivity affects the internals. Toxicity, as
bluetree points out without saying it directly, depends on how much of it, it
takes to harm you.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:28:44 -0000, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
did spake, saying:
> Phil Cook wrote:
>> liquid, nozzle. Would you prefer faffing about with two-skin cans or
>
> All you'd need to do is run a can-length straw down the inside from the
> nozzle, like they do when you actually *want* to spray the liquid in the
> can (like WD-40, say).
Except that people using it the 'right' way up will be spraying liquid so
you'd need to put a label on the can *anyway* as well as buying straws.
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gregjohn wrote:
> My son has an elementary school homework assignment where he's supposed to do
> simple observations on a solid, liquid, and gas for seven days. Solids: easy,
> liquids: seven is probably exact the number that is easy to name. Gases? So
> far, we've done air, boiling water, and the smoke from cooking fish. But
> that's about all I can think of without either getting dangerous or overly
> egg-headed.
>
don't forget the mercury vapor in those florescent lights
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> My son has an elementary school homework assignment where he's supposed to do
> simple observations on a solid, liquid, and gas for seven days. Solids: easy,
> liquids: seven is probably exact the number that is easy to name. Gases? So
> far, we've done air, boiling water, and the smoke from cooking fish. But
> that's about all I can think of without either getting dangerous or overly
> egg-headed.
Double-pane windows contain sealed gas (argon, usually) instead of air,
to avoid internal condensation.
Radon can come into a house (and it's dangerous), coming from the ground.
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
