One option would be to install a HRV/ERV to dilute the radon and also pressurize the house too by bringing in more air than exhausting. This can lower the radon and improve overall indoor air quality too.

Pesticide free extermination - it’s a business line!

Bob, Thank you for addressing worker safety. I’ve seen photos of mitigation employees enveloped in a cloud of concrete dust as they root-hammer through a concrete foundation (saw the photos on a mitigator’s website). Day in and day out silica exposure, radon exposure, adhesive vapors, etc. it all adds up to risks for workers.

The big radon conferences should ALWAYS include worker safety classes. This should include how to identify risks and protect workers. This starts with a company safety plan. Providing safety plan and documentation templates and apps for companies to use makes the challenge of creation, implementation and administration of worker safety much easier and, therefore, much likelier to happen.

I bet very few radon mitigation companies are OSHA compliant. As a result, I bet few mitigation employees are properly protected from workplace hazards. Just my thoughts.

Jeff, fascinating topic - thank you for sharing the report. I think about this topic a lot. Yesterday, I stopped to grab a coffee at Mt. Hood, while driving between Portland and Bend, OR. In the course of chit chat with the gal making my latte the topic of cougars came up. A woman hiker was killed last year very near this coffee shop. Interstingly, conversations about dangerous cougars are not uncommon in rural Oregon. I say interestingly because while an estimated 250 Oregonians die each year from Radon associated lung cancer, the woman killed last was the first modern day report of a person killed by a cougar in Oregon. I suspect, based upon antidotel evidence, that more Oregonians in coffee shops talk about cougar risks than Radon risks — despite the minuscule chance of being attacked by a cougar and much greater risk posed by Radon. Bottom line: people are often not. rational. Another brief example of risk assessment by the public. I recently noticed a fellow looking at handguns in the case an outdoor store. We started chatting. He said he wanted a gun for self protection. I asked if he thought violent crime was getting worse. He informed me it was getting much worse quickly. Wellll, statistics indicate violent crime has fallen to the lowest levels in decades (chicago not withstanding). ‘This fellow will spend $500 on a Glock, but probably not $25 on a Radon tent kit. People are not rational.

The primary source of polonium in tobacco is radium in high-phosphate fertilizers that are used to grow tobacco.

It’s my understanding that houseplants can reduce particulate. Radon doesn’t cause lung cancer - the decaying progeny solids do. Therefore, it seems plausible that house plants, by removing particulates with attached radon progeny)l could reduce the risks of radon caused lung cancer. How significantly, if true, would be very site specific. Note: removing radon progeny from the air would not reduce the radon level - just the risk.

Installed a membrane once that promptly inflated like a blow up pillow when the wind came up. Once the fan was on it was fine, but the fan must move more CFM than is entering under the membrane.

Bruce, well said.

People are not rational.

Dick, not that it adresses your question, but did you see the study done in the late 80s for the Bonneville power administration regarding radon and energy efficiency? I believe Lawrence did the study.