Fight over Radon in Granite Countertops Heats Up
Please visit an updated post on radon in granite countertops here: A Rational Discussion on Radon in Granite Countertops
The Marble Institute of America better get ready for another round of fighting because the issue of radon in granite countertops is back. For the past decade, the MIA has been trying, with much success, to squash the rumor that granite countertops have the potential to add dangerous amounts of radon in the home. A new study being conducted by Houston area not-for-profit BuildClean is raising old fears about the dangers of granite countertops, and its preliminary results show that while most granite countertops in the study contain very little to no radon at all, the countertops that do contain radon have levels that are frighteningly high. While consumers can be secure in the fact that the vast majority of granite is perfectly safe, a small percentage is still in question, and no independent scientific study exists to assuage consumer fears.
The first issue of Solid Surface in 1995 explored the possibility that granite countertops may pose a health risk. Soon, the MIA issued their response, which attacked the credibility of the science involved in the study as well as the fact that the advertisers in the journal included companies that competed with granite countertop manufacturers. But one phrase in the response, a highlighted phrase no less, is troubling: “…actual levels of radon gas emmissions are so low as to be insignificant and generally represent no threat.” As a father, I don’t want to be assured that there is “generally” no threat to my family. I want to know there is no threat. And after BuildClean* found that 3 of 95 granite countertops contained harmful amounts of radon, would the MIA consider such a small number to be “generally” no threat? I’m sure the owners of those three countertops are not reassured.
(*Correction: BuildClean did not find that 3 of 95 countertops contained harmful amounts of radon. Rather, the results are from a study by Dr. William Llope, a Rice University Physicist, who is not associated with either BuildClean or the MIA. His comments can be found on the third page of comments below.)
Look around for information on radon in granite and you will find many sites telling you the “truth” or uncovering “myths” about radon. Since many of the statistics cited are the same, it’s clear that much of the information comes from the MIA response linked above or from an updated (though with the same references) MIA PDF. My personal favorite was a site titled “Ask an Expert – 9 Myths about Granite” where they claim that “No one today takes credit for starting the rumor, and certainly no one supports it.” No one? They then make the claim that granite actually has healing properties. Most troubling is the fact that, as experts, they don’t seem to know that “lose” is spelled with only one “o.” The most common argument you’ll find, that radon occurs naturally, really needs to be taken out of their playbook. Just because it’s on the periodic table of the elements doesn’t mean I want it in my house. I’m talking to you, Californium.
In late 2007, the MIA scuffled with Home Safety Systems, which sells radon detectors. Like the fight over the original journal article, this seems to be another example of competing companies arguing science, which doesn’t sit right with me. The current BuildClean study is funded in part by Silestone and Cambria, two competitors of granite countertops. (Ironically, Silestone is a sponsor of the “Ask the Experts” article above – their logo is at the bottom of the page.)
So how do we start trusting that granite is safe? An independent study done by the EPA would be a good start. Leave corporate interests out of it. And don’t give us general findings – tell us exactly what was found. Since radon is found naturally in some parts of the earth, the MIA needs to admit that there is a possibility that some granite will contain radon, and then show how they are making sure such slabs do not make their way into our homes. Are granite countertops screened for radon before reaching the consumer? (Maybe the folks over at Home Safety Systems can help the MIA out with that.) Otherwise, without solid assurances, it won’t be long until consumers reject granite outright.
For information on green alternatives to granite, try Green Counter Culture.
Before commenting, please visit our updated post on radon in granite countertops here: A Rational Discussion on Radon in Granite Countertops
Huligar, you make a good point with the environmental costs of engineered stone and solid surface. The bauxite ore that is used in the creation of these countertops is strip-mined from dozens of countries, but its environmental and cultural impact on countries such as Jamaica and India are just starting to be realized. To be fair, 95% of bauxite ore becomes aluminum, so increased recycling on our parts will help on this front.
Jamaica: Bauxite Mining in Jamaica
India: Bauxite Mining in India
Hi folks,
I’m the rice university physicist that contributed to this story… please allow me to add some clarifications…
but let’s make one thing clear at the outset. i am simply an independent physicist that is not supported by the granite industry, its competitors, or buildclean. i was asked by KHOU to comment for the story, which i did. please see the PDF writeup that is available on my site. this PDF was linked to from KHOU’s website on the story.
i am presently measuring the gamma rates and spectra from stones being sold in the US for use in homes. i am seeing, in some cases, rather signficant rates. the spectra themselves (see the writeup) indicate the predominance of Uranium ore as the source of the radiation.
i am receiving stones from a number of sources and will circulate my results on the radioactivity and spectra. The spectra allow one to estimate the relative contributions of the 40-K series, the 232-Th series, and the Uranium ore series to the measured radiation. only the Uranium ore series leads to the long-lived radon that the EPA considers a health risk.
the direct radiation is however also a health risk. this is a risk that the MIA has so far ignored. there is unfortunately a lack of published research on this risk from natural stone countertops. i am in the process of addressing this “hole”.
now, a couple of specific comments to this blog entry. i look forward to participating in the discussion…
” Soon, the MIA issued their response, which attacked the credibility of the science involved ”
the response was from an email in 1995 if i recall correctly, not a peer-reviewed publication. there is no sufficient description of the assumptions made to form that response, nor is there any indication of what was the source of the granite considered for that response.
BTW some granite mines are right next to uranium mines! is it therefore a complete surprise to anyone that some granites contain much more uranium ore than others?
i have a piece of “Barre Grey” granite from the rock of ages quarry in vermont in my office. it is “stone cold”.
however, it is not generally true that all granites are like this one.
“And after BuildClean found that 3 of 95 granite countertops contained harmful amounts of radon, ”
this was not buildclean’s result.
it was my result. see the PDF writeup i mentioned above.
this comment was based on my survey of the published literature on the radiation and radon from natural stones. this published literature is reference [8] of my writeup. i then took those results and used a simple model to convert the measured radon emanation rates into a saturation radon concentration in an unventilated 20×10x10 ft^3 room.
one can certainly add in assumptions about the rate of air circulation (which would increase the effective volume of the room and hence decrease the saturation concentration) as well as including some assumptions about ventilation to the outside air (units are ACH). the base measurement is that in a small test volume. how one goes from there to the radon concentration to that to be expected in a home is much more fuzzy. some people never open their windows, and some (at least some months of the year) do not run the central air system which circulates the air.
“Since radon is found naturally in some parts of the earth, the MIA needs to admit that there is a possibility that some granite will contain radon, ”
the MIA recently did exactly this, although one might not realize it from their website – which still claims “no risk”. they now link to a new paper from a Professor Chyi at akron university, which admits for the first time that granite emits radon.
this is a huge step in the right direction. a piece of Crema Bordeaux in this study was found to saturate at above 300 pCi/L in the test volume!
that is a very hot stone.
however, they then make precisely the kinds of assumptions that i worry are not generally applicable to every home in order to say that “there is no risk”.
and again, it completely ignores the potential risks associated with the direct radiation. the direct radiation risks are not ameliorated by ventilation.
as i said i am presently collecting data on the radiation rates and spectra from a variety of natural stones. i will publish.
if anyone here has small sections of natural stones that they would like to lend to me to expand my data set, i would certainly test them. the email to use to contact me is available from my site on this.
but, i will ned to know the trade name of the stone and the quarry of origin.
and to Konstantin Kovler’s post….
thank you very much for that link! it amusing to note that the EU recognizes that natural stone building materials can be a potential health risk, yet the MIA, the organization one would think would know more than anyone about granite, does not.
i also have such a standards document on the regulations in place in China. it is in Chinese, and a student of mine is translating it for me. they too recognize the possibility of risk here.
it’s about time the US (EPA?) recognized the potential issue and instituted some kind of oversight here. the US is way behind the curve in this regard…
best regards, take care,
bill
ttp://wjllope.rice.edu/SaxumSubluceo/
saxumsubluceo@gmail.com
Dr. Llope,
I want to thank you, not just for taking the time to post here, but for your continued work in this area as well as making yourself so accessible.
And did you just say that China has regulations in place for granite? The irony is making my head hurt.
Joel,
The Chinese law states that all stone products be tested if they are intended for building material.
Class A granite emits less than .3mSv/yr, and can be used inside homes, retirement homes, day cares, hospitals, anywhere where people spend lots of time.
Class B emits less than 1 mSv/yr, and can be used in lobbies, entry ways,outsides of buildings, steps, anywhere people will spend little time thus getting little exposure.
Class C can be used on piers, sea walls, stelles (higher panels on the outside of buildings) and so on.
Below Class C is to be used only where human contact is not expected, foundations, fill, and so on.
Testing is done by independent labs, by law, and stickers are placed on any product for Chinese home market use.
This is easily proven, google “Chinese Import Granite” or something close, and you will see that most companies advertise that their stone meets “Class A” standards. Does it really? No one knows for sure, since there is no restrictions on exporting Class B, C or below Class C to the United States or any other country.
As the one poster said, the EU, Canada, and many other countries do prohibit the importation of hot granite slabs or products. Canada has their laws on NORM posted on the internet, they use something like 50″ distance for Gamma radiation measurement, over .3 mSv/Yr, and it is not allowed. Most countries also have a Bq per kilo gram equvilant instead of distance based measurments.
Why does China have regulations in place? Simple, the Olymics committe pushed for a lot of regulations, envirnomental stuff, as part of China getting the Olymics this year.
There are a few nice people, but most people do nice things when it is in their interests!
There are three new developments in the battle.
The EPA has a new position on this issue, they say to radon test if you have a granite countertop.
There is a blog discussing this issue
solidsurfacealliance.org/blog/
You can find links to the Garden web thread and the EPA position on Radon and granite countertops
and the MIA has sent one of their shills over to Garden Web.com, the kitchen forum, to start a discussion. It isn’t going well for him.
Build Clean should put its money where it mouth is and mention specifically which granites it believes have dangerous levels of radon. This case was tried and lost years ago.
Clare,
You are missing the entire point, no one knows which ones emit dangerous Radon. We know of three cases in which three granite countertops had to be torn out because they contributed so much Radon to the homes.
Two were Shivakaski, one was Jupanara Bordeaux. There are thousands of countertops of both types out there, but since you can’t see, taste, or smell radiation or Radon, know one knew to look for it.
If this was about tomatoes, spinach, or peanut butter having salmonella, would you still ask that they be proven unsafe before pulling them from the market? Of course not, the only decent thing to do is to start testing all slabs prior to use so no more high radiation level granites are sold to unsuspecting consumers, then go back and track down what was sold, test it, and replace as needed.
Besides Shivakaski and Bordeaux, add most of the African Range granites to the list, Niagara Gold, Lady’s Dream, Natahila, and Savanah.
THAT WE KNOW OF……
From what I have seen, forget about the Radon, the high radioactivity stones are just as dangerous. We found out this week that once past a certain level, our meters read extremely low, 60 to 80 times lower than the meter reads. What we thought was going to test at 10 mR/hr, read over 700 mR/hr using a more expensive meter that was able to read the higher level radiation.
For reference, a single chest X ray is around 22 mR exposure.
Clare, it amazes me when people attempt to dismiss this issue. What is your motivation?
It has also been found that one of the individuals who is in this non-profit group owns a laminate countertop business….so don’t you think he is a little biased? Read this article about granite. This is ridiculous that this keeps coming up.
http://www.granitestock.com/news/granite_radiation_danger_myth.php
Thanks for your comment, Shirley. The fact that opposing research seems to have come from people and businesses that could profit from their findings makes the whole issue seem tainted and unscientific, which is why people are calling for independent scientific studies to get to the bottom of the issue, rather than just slinging accusations.
The site you linked references a study done over a decade ago, which I talked about in the original article. The issue is back in the news because scientists not associated with either side have recently found radon in granite (see comments above by Dr. Llope.)
When marketing a product, one expects a bit of hype. The idea is to show that the product is the best over the competitor’s line of product. That is the trade of advertisers and the history of marketing. Some tactics used to sell can be humorous or as serious as the competition between manufacturers. Marketing tactics that play on fears of the general public can be a very powerful tool.
In the present day, there’s a very popular angle of “green.” This is prevalent everywhere in the media. So what happens when you mix a scare tactic under the guise of environmental concern?
Buildclean found the answer to that question. The premise seems of the nonprofit organization seems to be admirable but the fact that the “awareness campaign” that Buildclean is currently using seems to be curiously slanted. In fact, the target seems to be the natural stone industry.
When Sara Selber of BuildClean was asked how she got involved in natural stone and radon, she explained how she was approached by the owner of C&C North America, a company that produces two products – granite and a quartz product called Silestone®™.
“C&C North America then recruited a quartz company called Cambria, after they learned quartz was an issue, she further explained that the two companies hired her to test quartz, granite and other surfaces for radon emission. Both companies are testing their products through BuildClean, and they contracted two labs – one in New York and one in Israel.
We have looked all over the C&C website but cannot find any mention of natural stone.
When ask what granites emit radon, Sara Selber said; “Not all granites emit radon or radiation. There are some that clearly do. There are some that absolutely don’t. We don’t know,” she said.
They’re being set up as a non-profit, and they’re funded with two large donations.
The first is $250,000 from the makers of ‘Silestone.’ They manufacture quartz countertops, which is a direct competitor to granite. Silestone finance records show that they started out in April of 1998 with a an initial investment of $410K, made there first million in 1998, sales in 2002 was over $70M, and sales in 2006 was well over $260M. it is not hard to see that they have the money to invest $250,000 in a new advertising campaign.
BuildClean is also getting money from Cambria, another quartz manufacturer.
In fact, Cambria’s marketing director is on BuildClean’s board of directors.
When asked about the funding Sara responds: I don’t believe the issue is who our founders are. And I’m not going to have that debate.” That answer seems to be clear enough.
In a recent interview Mrs. Selber mentions teaming up with Al Gerhart who has some interest in the granite \radon scare.
Al Gerhart is a carpenter whohappens to own a website called the Solid Surface Alliance .org. He educated himself, regarding materials he works with that may expose him to harmful elements.”
Upon further review it seems this “personality” is well known for his view of natural stone. All one has to do is look at the website to get the gist of his viewpoint. Coincidentally, there also seems to be a new business venture for Solid Surface Alliance as the website now sells Geiger counters to detect radiation…
His debates have earned him quite a place online in forums discussing the subject.
After a certain debate on a well known residential forum, a renowned geoscientist in the industry concluded:
“Al attempts to hijack debates by choking the system with verbal diarrhea. The problem appears to be that he has a bit of knowledge about some things but not enough sense and understanding of the subjects. In that debate on the Garden Forum he threw in so many fabrications (plain made up lies) that his credibility just plummeted to zero.
Anyone who operates this way (by including a number of facts to gain an element of credibility in the eyes of a generally uninformed audience, twisting facts deliberately or because of his lack of understanding, and then throwing in a number of lies) does not deserve extended airtime. Many years ago when doing science psychology I still remember my professor giving the advice to his students that you should never engage a nutter in debate. You can never win an argument with such people. I recognized this early in the forum and that is why I would not engage him in “debate”.
One of his major problems is that he does not know what the numbers mean and how they are derived.”
In response to the buildclean tactics, The Marble Institute of America is in the process of doing their own independent study:
“The Marble Institute of America (MIA) is grateful for the preliminary response from the members to the newly established Truth About Granite Fund. Based on this positive response, it’s clear that their colleagues share their commitment to protect consumers from needless fear mongering by establishing standards for the testing of granite so consumers can safely and comfortably enjoy the beauty, durability and practicality of this natural stone.”
When we asked the MIA why Sara Speer Selber consider The Truth About Granite Fund as a draconian move that is being waged against BuildClean(TM), they simple responded:
“The Truth About Granite Fund was established to help raise funds to develop unbiased, scientific standards for the granite industry, including the testing of granite for radon. No such standards currently exist in the natural stone industry. Previous tests of granite samples have found they are safe. However, the Truth in Granite Fund aims to take advantage of new, advanced scientific instruments that make testing both more practical and more accurate. Our goal is to make sure testing follows consistent protocols, so that future studies are meaningful and based on consistent, approved science – not isolated methodologies or unapproved instruments. Ultimately, our goal is to make sure the granite we sell is safe.”
This latest sales tactic received the attention of an independent group called the Natural Stone Restoration Alliance (NSRA). The NSRA saw Radon testing as an added service that their members could provide to the homeowners along with all their other services for natural stone. Josveek Huligar, one of the lead testers and trainer for the NSRA , invited times Members of the Solid Surface Alliance dot org to discuss and provide proof of this threat to the home owners.
The Solid Surface Alliance dot org agreed to provide an alleged radiation producing granite sample that they claim to have in their possession to do independent testing. After an initial agreement between the two groups it seems the Solid Surface Alliance dot org has reneged on the delivery of the alleged material. Mr Huligar was disappointed of the outcome. The NSRA than requested the name of the company that Mr. Gerhart claimed to just have rejected over 10k worth of radon producing granite. When the information was not provided, Huligar ask if he could purchase the next slab that Mr. Gerhart rejected. But for some reason Mr. Gerhart could no longer find a sample for testing. Mr. Huligar went on to say: “All we care about at this point. As for whether are not Stone adds a measurable amount of “radon” in a home, Mr. Gerhart had agreed to come to NY and pick out a hot slab that I would place in my own home after testing my home for radon. Once the granite was installed I would test my home again as described by the EPA and have it tested by someone approved by the EPA. Not only would we do the short and long term test, we would also video tape the whole event, the selection, the creation, the install, and than setting up cameras for anyone to view the stone and meters on the net. I was looking forward to do this, but at this time it appears that Mr. Gerhart has no plans on doing as he said which is a big disappointment.”
The NSRA plans to push for this simple test, they feel that the consumers only care about one thing; “whether or not adding granite in your home would significantly change the radon levels in a home”. At present, the most prudent consumer should watch the outcome of this debate and make an informed decision, not taken in by a scare tactic by advertisers.
EPA Confirms That Granite Countertops Pose No Significant Health Risk
http://nsraweb.com/index.php/Latest/EPA_Confirms_That_Granite_Countertops_Pose_No_Significant_Health_Risk.html