Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces

Roger D. Lewis, Sridhar Condoor, Joe Batek, Kee Hean Ong, Denis Backer, David Sterling, Jeff Siria, John J. Chen, Peter Ashley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Government guidelines have widely recommended trisodium phosphate (TSP) or "lead-specific" cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust (LCD) from hard surfaces, such as floors and window areas. The purpose of this study was to determine if low-phosphate, non-lead-specific cleaners could be used to efficiently remove LCD from 3 types of surfaces (vinyl flooring, wood, and wallpaper). Laboratory methods were developed and validated for simulating the doping, embedding, and sponge cleaning of the 3 surface types with 4 categories of cleaners: lead-specific detergents, nonionic cleaners, anionic cleaners, and trisodium phosphate (TSP). Vinyl flooring and wood were worn using artificial means. Materials were ashed, followed by ultrasound extraction, and anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV). One-way analysis of variance approach was used to evaluate the surface and detergent effects. Surface type was found to be a significant factor in removal of lead (p < 0.001). Vinyl flooring cleaned better than wallpaper by over 14% and wood cleaned better than wallpaper by 13%. There was no difference between the cleaning action of vinyl flooring and wood. No evidence was found to support the use of TSP or lead-specific detergents over all-purpose cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dusts. Nophosphate, non-lead-specific detergents are effective in sponge cleaning of lead-contaminated hard surfaces and childhood lead prevention programs should consider recommending all-purpose household detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust after appropriate vacuuming.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)590-594
Number of pages5
JournalEnvironmental Science and Technology
Volume40
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 15 Jan 2006

Fingerprint

Dust
detergent
Detergents
dust
Cleaning
Wood
phosphate
sponge
Lead
removal
laboratory method
Voltammetry
Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
variance analysis
Ultrasonics
Phosphates
Doping (additives)
sodium phosphate

Cite this

Lewis, R. D., Condoor, S., Batek, J., Ong, K. H., Backer, D., Sterling, D., ... Ashley, P. (2006). Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(2), 590-594. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050803s
Lewis, Roger D. ; Condoor, Sridhar ; Batek, Joe ; Ong, Kee Hean ; Backer, Denis ; Sterling, David ; Siria, Jeff ; Chen, John J. ; Ashley, Peter. / Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces. In: Environmental Science and Technology. 2006 ; Vol. 40, No. 2. pp. 590-594.
@article{b46b70eadefd41b2a64947e092fef1a9,
title = "Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces",
abstract = "Government guidelines have widely recommended trisodium phosphate (TSP) or {"}lead-specific{"} cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust (LCD) from hard surfaces, such as floors and window areas. The purpose of this study was to determine if low-phosphate, non-lead-specific cleaners could be used to efficiently remove LCD from 3 types of surfaces (vinyl flooring, wood, and wallpaper). Laboratory methods were developed and validated for simulating the doping, embedding, and sponge cleaning of the 3 surface types with 4 categories of cleaners: lead-specific detergents, nonionic cleaners, anionic cleaners, and trisodium phosphate (TSP). Vinyl flooring and wood were worn using artificial means. Materials were ashed, followed by ultrasound extraction, and anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV). One-way analysis of variance approach was used to evaluate the surface and detergent effects. Surface type was found to be a significant factor in removal of lead (p < 0.001). Vinyl flooring cleaned better than wallpaper by over 14{\%} and wood cleaned better than wallpaper by 13{\%}. There was no difference between the cleaning action of vinyl flooring and wood. No evidence was found to support the use of TSP or lead-specific detergents over all-purpose cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dusts. Nophosphate, non-lead-specific detergents are effective in sponge cleaning of lead-contaminated hard surfaces and childhood lead prevention programs should consider recommending all-purpose household detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust after appropriate vacuuming.",
author = "Lewis, {Roger D.} and Sridhar Condoor and Joe Batek and Ong, {Kee Hean} and Denis Backer and David Sterling and Jeff Siria and Chen, {John J.} and Peter Ashley",
year = "2006",
month = "1",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1021/es050803s",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "590--594",
journal = "Environmental Science and Technology",
issn = "0013-936X",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "2",

}

Lewis, RD, Condoor, S, Batek, J, Ong, KH, Backer, D, Sterling, D, Siria, J, Chen, JJ & Ashley, P 2006, 'Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces', Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 590-594. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050803s

Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces. / Lewis, Roger D.; Condoor, Sridhar; Batek, Joe; Ong, Kee Hean; Backer, Denis; Sterling, David; Siria, Jeff; Chen, John J.; Ashley, Peter.

In: Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 40, No. 2, 15.01.2006, p. 590-594.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Removal of lead contaminated dusts from hard surfaces

AU - Lewis, Roger D.

AU - Condoor, Sridhar

AU - Batek, Joe

AU - Ong, Kee Hean

AU - Backer, Denis

AU - Sterling, David

AU - Siria, Jeff

AU - Chen, John J.

AU - Ashley, Peter

PY - 2006/1/15

Y1 - 2006/1/15

N2 - Government guidelines have widely recommended trisodium phosphate (TSP) or "lead-specific" cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust (LCD) from hard surfaces, such as floors and window areas. The purpose of this study was to determine if low-phosphate, non-lead-specific cleaners could be used to efficiently remove LCD from 3 types of surfaces (vinyl flooring, wood, and wallpaper). Laboratory methods were developed and validated for simulating the doping, embedding, and sponge cleaning of the 3 surface types with 4 categories of cleaners: lead-specific detergents, nonionic cleaners, anionic cleaners, and trisodium phosphate (TSP). Vinyl flooring and wood were worn using artificial means. Materials were ashed, followed by ultrasound extraction, and anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV). One-way analysis of variance approach was used to evaluate the surface and detergent effects. Surface type was found to be a significant factor in removal of lead (p < 0.001). Vinyl flooring cleaned better than wallpaper by over 14% and wood cleaned better than wallpaper by 13%. There was no difference between the cleaning action of vinyl flooring and wood. No evidence was found to support the use of TSP or lead-specific detergents over all-purpose cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dusts. Nophosphate, non-lead-specific detergents are effective in sponge cleaning of lead-contaminated hard surfaces and childhood lead prevention programs should consider recommending all-purpose household detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust after appropriate vacuuming.

AB - Government guidelines have widely recommended trisodium phosphate (TSP) or "lead-specific" cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust (LCD) from hard surfaces, such as floors and window areas. The purpose of this study was to determine if low-phosphate, non-lead-specific cleaners could be used to efficiently remove LCD from 3 types of surfaces (vinyl flooring, wood, and wallpaper). Laboratory methods were developed and validated for simulating the doping, embedding, and sponge cleaning of the 3 surface types with 4 categories of cleaners: lead-specific detergents, nonionic cleaners, anionic cleaners, and trisodium phosphate (TSP). Vinyl flooring and wood were worn using artificial means. Materials were ashed, followed by ultrasound extraction, and anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV). One-way analysis of variance approach was used to evaluate the surface and detergent effects. Surface type was found to be a significant factor in removal of lead (p < 0.001). Vinyl flooring cleaned better than wallpaper by over 14% and wood cleaned better than wallpaper by 13%. There was no difference between the cleaning action of vinyl flooring and wood. No evidence was found to support the use of TSP or lead-specific detergents over all-purpose cleaning detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dusts. Nophosphate, non-lead-specific detergents are effective in sponge cleaning of lead-contaminated hard surfaces and childhood lead prevention programs should consider recommending all-purpose household detergents for removal of lead-contaminated dust after appropriate vacuuming.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=31144455687&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/es050803s

DO - 10.1021/es050803s

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 590

EP - 594

JO - Environmental Science and Technology

JF - Environmental Science and Technology

SN - 0013-936X

IS - 2

ER -