Subject: Air quality
Reply to Ramona Duncan-Huse about monitoring air quality in a new facility. As first good steps you specified non-urea formaldehyde based adhesive for the wood products and asked for technical data or/and materials safety data sheet (MSDS) for the various building materials. In the section on Flammability of the MSDS (or Hazardous decomposition products), combustion products are sometimes specified in the MSDS which gives hints on presence of contaminants. If sulfur compounds (SO2, H2S and H2SO4) are specified as combustive products, materials can be automatically rejected. Tests can be done for all materials with different spot tests including accelerated corrosion test such as Oddy test. This test can give some false positive results but little false negative results. Based on my knowledge thin films such as paints, sealers and adhesives will release most of their volatiles into a month with a normal HVAC system (when no important chemical reaction is involved such as oxidation of unsaturated linkage in oil based paints). Thick materials with free volatiles such as particle board glued with urea formaldehyde will take few months to release all the free formaldehyde. After these periods, both thin and thick materials will release volatiles but at very small levels. This may be due to the tale of the volatiles emission exponential decay or/and emission of volatiles from degradation process of the materials (oxidation, hydrolyse, etc). The question coming is are these emissions dangerous to artefacts in my specific case (display case, cabinet room)? We need reliable methods to measure volatiles levels and need to know the sensibility of artefacts to these volatiles. Some reliable and expensive methods of measurement and some standard for air quality for archival materials (SO2, NO2, O3) exist. These standards for air quality are based either on what the best technology can offer or on background levels of these pollutants in non urban/industrial environment. No (largely recognize) standard for indoor generated pollutants such as formaldehyde and acetic acid exist except "use best control technology". For these indoor pollutants, "experts" in indoor pollution and conservators are facing the challenge of the estimation of the level of pollutant to recommended as safe levels. In theory, any presence of pollutant can induce a damage, hence lower levels are the best. On the other hand, managers want to know the levels of volatiles which they should not exceed in their museums to establish their policies based on feasible criteria. I think a "Forum on Air Quality Criteria for Indoor Pollutants" should be established. We can consider criteria for mixed collections or for different artefact categories (metal, cellulose...). These criteria can be established by considering these elements: clean background levels, outside levels, results from non accelerated damage test, threshold (level of volatile which there is no expected significant effect), limit of detection of analytical methods and risk assessment. A security factor as for the food legislation (1/100 of the volatiles levels known to be harmful) or health legislation can be also examined as a possibility. Of course, these criteria could be readjusted in the future according to updated data. I am hoping that this topic can be considered at the meeting that Dr. Lorraine Gibson at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow <l.t.gibson [at] strath__ac__uk> plans to organize in mid-April on "Standardising Methods for Materials Testing in the Museum Environment". However, I admit that Standardising Methods is important and complex subject enough to required to two full days. Criteria for indoor pollutant may need a separate meeting. Jean Tetreault Conservation Scientist Preventive Conservation Services Canadian Conservation Institute 1030 Innes Road, Ottawa (Ont) K1A 0M5 Canada *** Conservation DistList Instance 11:58 Distributed: Wednesday, January 7, 1998 Message Id: cdl-11-58-002 ***Received on Wednesday, 24 December, 1997