Radon mitigation

[Grateful Stache]

Hi!

We are considering buying a home that needs radon mitigation. My understanding is that once the mitigation is completed, radon levels are reduced to acceptable levels making it a non-issue.

Does anyone have experience with these systems? Are they noisy? Do they run up the electricity bill? Have they influenced your decision to purchase (or not purchase) a home?

Thanks for the input!

[Indio]

As far as i am concerned there is no such thing as an acceptable level of a carcinogen. You should aim to get the level as close to zero as possbile and not follow the federal guidelines of 4, which are always being downgraded anyway.
I have a radon system with a strong fan that does run up the electric bill but its better than the alternative. The fan isnt noisy at all and we can hardly hear outside unless standing right next to it.  Carefully select the spot you put it in so you dont have to do 2 systems but tht all depends on the size of the house. Also, make sure that any sources for air leaks, like sump pump, are sealed up as well.  Make sure you know the fan warranty and what installer will do if fan burns out, which happened after a year to mine.

[clarkm04]

I can just speak to our situation.  We purchased a house last year.  Our real estate agent talked about radon and in our bidding contract we asked for it to be tested and a mitigation system put in and paid by the seller if the levels were too high.

The levels came back high, so one was installed and then the levels were retested to ensure it works.

The system is quiet.  The only parts that are visible inside the house are in our laundry room.  There is a gauge on the system and if the gauge falls below a certain point, the system needs to be looked at by a professional because it's not working correctly.  Just like any part of your house that runs a lot, the system will need periodic maintenance.

Then outside, there's a pipe that exits the rear side of our house and goes up to the roof line to let the gas escape.

Being a scientist and understanding radon, I'm glad to have the system and given the seller paid for it and it does improve our property value slightly, it was pretty close to a no brainer.

[NewMustachian]

Like other posters our system is quiet and unobtrusive, except for a long narrow pipe on the side of our house.  In my area (NE) radon is a common problem so many buyers will ask about levels and most home inspectors will test for radon.  I would see having a mitigation system as an advantage in buying a home and it was inexpensive to install. 

[Grateful Stache]

Thanks for the information, everyone.

Unfortunately we are in an area where radon is ubiquitous, so we are going to have to deal with it in any home transaction. It is good to hear that these systems are largely quiet and unobtrusive.

Cheers and thanks!

[Ashyukun]

I'd pretty much echo clarkm04's experience- the house we bought a few months ago came back with high radon levels in the lower basement and the sellers gave us extra to put in a mitigation system. Install went fairly quickly and painlessly, and when we re-tested the levels it came back as being on par with what's in the air normally. Since our master bedroom is just a room away from the laundry room where the system is installed you can hear it running- but you never notice it unless it shuts off for some reason (like me messing with the breakers) because it's a very low, dull white noise as it's essentially just a fan running and creating a vacuum under the basement slab. It's pretty common around here for houses that have basements.

[jo552006]

When I bought my house ~3 years ago it failed Radon testing.  I had the old homeowner reduce the cost of the house so that I could pay somebody to install a system.  Then I never installed one.

I see a lot of people (ESPECIALLY REALTORS) extremely worried about the Radon risk.  I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I think is is POSSIBLE that the risk is over-hyped.  I have (a few years back) tried to find actual data relating to radon risks, but almost everything I found was a Meta-Analysis of the same few studies.  One of the most commonly cited studies was a small number of miners who were working in mines with astronomically high levels of radon exposure, for extended periods of time developing cancer.  For that study, IF radon were the culprit it was at levels so absurd that they'd practically never be seen in a home.  But again, they were miners, and radon was likely not the only risk they had.  In a couple (all but one I think?) of the other studies if you actually read them, they agreed that at very, very high levels there is a positive cancer correlation, but at low levels (order of magnitude seen in most homes regardless of mitigation) they found a NEGATIVE CORRELATION with cancer and radon.

Now it's been years since I have looked this up.  Maybe there's more studies now, I don't know, but when the radon testing contractor tried to tell me that Radon was the #2 cause of lung cancer in the US and was an extremely dangerous carcinogen, I almost threw him out of the house.  First, scaring me into purchasing anything ALWAYS pisses me off.  (He conveniently did radon testing AND mitigation...)  Second, when the #1 cause of cancer is orders of magnitude higher than everything else and (due to 2nd hand smoke) has the ability to cause cancer in non-smokers, almost everything else rapidly becomes statistical noise.

In short, if you're on this board you probably already question conventional wisdom of some things, and the current radon fears are something I urge you to question.  Having said that, if you have the money, (or young kids) the systems are relatively cheap for the peace of mind they can offer.  They are quiet, non-intrusive, and extremely inexpensive to operate.  In my case, we'll be installing a system as a house sale may be pending, and potential buyers will want a system.

Look up some information for yourself, and if nothing else, you can use that information to leverage some extra money out of a seller.  I firmly believe knowledge is power, and "finding" radon in a home after a purchase and sales is signed, will give you negotiating power.  (BTW you can tell from homes in the area if there is a high probability of radon being an issue.  Yes it's different from house to house, but neighborhoods and states trend towards different radon levels).  Also note that older homes have different sub-slab preparation than newer homes and systems for older homes may be more costly to install.

https://www.google.com/url?url=https://www.aarst.org/proceedings/1988/1988_06_Correlation_Between_Mean_Radon_Levels_Lung_Cancer_Rates_in_US_Counties.pdf&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=2vzoU8CoJKfgsAS1jIDwDQ&ved=0CBQQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGhrf_08hFvxIIv3uNfmB1xIhfk6w

[frugalnacho]

As far as i am concerned there is no such thing as an acceptable level of a carcinogen. You should aim to get the level as close to zero as possbile and not follow the federal guidelines of 4, which are always being downgraded anyway.
I have a radon system with a strong fan that does run up the electric bill but its better than the alternative. The fan isnt noisy at all and we can hardly hear outside unless standing right next to it.  Carefully select the spot you put it in so you dont have to do 2 systems but tht all depends on the size of the house. Also, make sure that any sources for air leaks, like sump pump, are sealed up as well.  Make sure you know the fan warranty and what installer will do if fan burns out, which happened after a year to mine.

Really? Perhaps you should block out all your windows so you don't let any of that deadly sunlight in either. 

[hambeast]

I've been looking for something else to test with my Kill-a-Watt, looks like I'm plugging my radon fan into it tonight.  In general it's quiet, though the pipe runs just outside the master bedroom and when everything is silent you can hear the slight hum.  I don't hear it but my SO can notice it.  I have re-tested each year and every time levels come back below the minimum.  When looking to buy the house the levels were somewhere around 3x the maximum of the top of the EPA's scale.  Previous owners son lived in the basement and dad smoked...poor kid probably has lung cancer already.   I spend a lot of time in my man cave down in the basement so having it at safe levels is important to me. 

Word of warning though, if tests show there is radon and the current owner is going to install a remediation system, they will do it as cheap as possible, probably not up to your expectations.  The shit job they did on mine looks like a 10 year old sealed the sump and I have no paperwork to go with it.  I would say get 3 quotes, then you pick a vendor and have the owner knock that off the sale price.  The current owner has no vested interest in quality of work, warranty, documentation, etc.  I was a first time home buyer and was a bit naive. 

[Grateful Stache]

It is a bit of an eyesore on the outside of the house but it isn't a big deal- not very loud.

Yes, I have noticed that they are a bit of an eyesore. I am working with the contractor to 'hide' the equipment, and possibly vent through the garage roof.

Word of warning though, if tests show there is radon and the current owner is going to install a remediation system, they will do it as cheap as possible, probably not up to your expectations. 

Great point. We have stated in our inspection/objection that we get to pick the company and have input on the placement. Crossing our fingers that the seller goes for it!

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I think is is POSSIBLE that the risk is over-hyped. 

You have clearly done your research! To each his (her?) own, but to me the $1,000 cost, which is paid for by the seller, is well-worth the piece of mind. 

If the research is accurate, then it's a heckuva deal to prevent cancer. If the research is inaccurate, then I'm certainly not doing any harm by installing the system (as you suggested).

Thanks, everyone, for their insight.   

Cheers.

[gobius]

When I bought my house ~3 years ago it failed Radon testing.  I had the old homeowner reduce the cost of the house so that I could pay somebody to install a system.  Then I never installed one.

I see a lot of people (ESPECIALLY REALTORS) extremely worried about the Radon risk.  I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I think is is POSSIBLE that the risk is over-hyped.  I have (a few years back) tried to find actual data relating to radon risks, but almost everything I found was a Meta-Analysis of the same few studies.  One of the most commonly cited studies was a small number of miners who were working in mines with astronomically high levels of radon exposure, for extended periods of time developing cancer.  For that study, IF radon were the culprit it was at levels so absurd that they'd practically never be seen in a home.  But again, they were miners, and radon was likely not the only risk they had.  In a couple (all but one I think?) of the other studies if you actually read them, they agreed that at very, very high levels there is a positive cancer correlation, but at low levels (order of magnitude seen in most homes regardless of mitigation) they found a NEGATIVE CORRELATION with cancer and radon.

Now it's been years since I have looked this up.  Maybe there's more studies now, I don't know, but when the radon testing contractor tried to tell me that Radon was the #2 cause of lung cancer in the US and was an extremely dangerous carcinogen, I almost threw him out of the house.  First, scaring me into purchasing anything ALWAYS pisses me off.  (He conveniently did radon testing AND mitigation...)  Second, when the #1 cause of cancer is orders of magnitude higher than everything else and (due to 2nd hand smoke) has the ability to cause cancer in non-smokers, almost everything else rapidly becomes statistical noise.

In short, if you're on this board you probably already question conventional wisdom of some things, and the current radon fears are something I urge you to question.  Having said that, if you have the money, (or young kids) the systems are relatively cheap for the peace of mind they can offer.  They are quiet, non-intrusive, and extremely inexpensive to operate.  In my case, we'll be installing a system as a house sale may be pending, and potential buyers will want a system.

Look up some information for yourself, and if nothing else, you can use that information to leverage some extra money out of a seller.  I firmly believe knowledge is power, and "finding" radon in a home after a purchase and sales is signed, will give you negotiating power.  (BTW you can tell from homes in the area if there is a high probability of radon being an issue.  Yes it's different from house to house, but neighborhoods and states trend towards different radon levels).  Also note that older homes have different sub-slab preparation than newer homes and systems for older homes may be more costly to install.

https://www.google.com/url?url=https://www.aarst.org/proceedings/1988/1988_06_Correlation_Between_Mean_Radon_Levels_Lung_Cancer_Rates_in_US_Counties.pdf&rct=j&frm=1&q=&esrc=s&sa=U&ei=2vzoU8CoJKfgsAS1jIDwDQ&ved=0CBQQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNGhrf_08hFvxIIv3uNfmB1xIhfk6w

I had a similar experience; mine failed radon 5 years ago (I have recently sold it and the buyer didn't ask for a radon test).  I was worried so I read a lot on it; a lot of the studies, as you said, had to do with miners who had huge exposure rates and were breathing in other toxins.  I remember reading about a study done in Iowa and they somehow equated your level/years of exposure with the cancer risk of smoking.  The level in my old basement was about 3x what it was upstairs (basement was at 20), and I remember reading that I had a 15% risk of lung cancer after 70 years of exposure, 70% of the time at that level.  Something like that.  I also calculated roughly how much radiation exposure I had over the 5 years I lived there and remember that it wasn't much.

My mom was telling me to get it mitigated to limit my risk.  My wife and me being non-smokers, I told her my risk was quite low.  I then told her that, if she is worried about lung cancer, then she should stop smoking.  Probably not the most polite thing to say.

My current house passed radon testing (it was at 2-2.5 or something like that).  Of course, radon level changes so much throughout the year that it could have just been tested at an optimal time.

I've read that a lot of it has to do with if you have a sump.  My old house did and my current house has an external one.  Usually having some sort of sump and drain system in the basement seems to correlate with higher radon levels, perhaps because of the exposure to the dirt or something like that.  The good news is that it can be easier to mitigate because of this.

[gobius]

I actually just re-read the statistics: a smoker at 20 pCi/L would have a 26% chance of lung cancer at a lifetime exposure rate; a non-smoker (like myself) would have a 3.6% chance.  Not the lowest risk, but having a 96.4% chance of not having lung cancer is pretty good.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=8&po=7

I'm 30, so when I was growing up I could have been exposed to higher levels (my parents never had radon testing done on houses they bought).  In high school I lived in the basement of the house and we knew nothing of radon then.  For all I know, I could have been exposed to 200 pCi/L.  So, I make sure to keep my current exposure low and hope that, since I don't smoke, my risk is low.  With my current rate being 2-2.5 I think I'm OK.

[Grateful Stache]

I've read that a lot of it has to do with if you have a sump.  My old house did and my current house has an external one.  Usually having some sort of sump and drain system in the basement seems to correlate with higher radon levels, perhaps because of the exposure to the dirt or something like that. 

It's regional. Virtually my entire state is in the red zone.

http://www.epa.gov/radon/pdfs/zonemapcolor.pdf

Whether the risk is real or imagined, I am glad we are mitigating. Like saving for retirement: Better safe than sorry. 

I can't think of how many rentals I might have lived in with elevated levels and I didn't even know it. In fact, a little old lady lived in the home we are purchasing. Hope she's OK!

Cheers.

[libertarian4321]

As far as i am concerned there is no such thing as an acceptable level of a carcinogen.

Then you'd better stop breathing, eating, and drinking, because you are taking in carcinogens whenever you do, even if you live on a "pristine" mountain top and only consume organic free trade pure whatever the Hell.

God forbid you touch a cup of coffee, which contains 21 carcinogens.  And don't try to avoid them by drinking water:  tap water has carcinogens, bottled water has carcinogens (probably more than tap water), "pure mountain spring water" has carcinogens.  Unless you double distill your water, then run it through a de-ionizer, followed by a charcoal filter, you are getting carcinogens (actually, you'll still have some, even after that process).

The point is, essentially EVERYTHING contains at least some level of carcinogens.  The important thing is to determine whether the level you are facing is really a problem.

And FYI, you'll be fine if you drink that cup of coffee...