Various stories on radioactivity being found in granite countertops have popped up in various places over the past several weeks, most of them pushed very strongly by a specific advocacy group (a group that lobbies on behalf of synthetic countertop makers). There’s not a lot beyond the scare tactics of the story, so I don’t think there’s any reason to pull out your granite; that said, some scientists have gone on the record as saying there are rare cases of significantly radioactive countertops, so it is something to think about.
“It’s not that all granite is dangerous,” said Stanley Liebert, the
quality assurance director at CMT Laboratories in Clifton Park, N.Y.,
“But I’ve seen a few that might heat up your Cheerios a little.”The E.P.A. recommends taking action if radon gas levels in the home
exceeds 4 picocuries per liter of air (a measure of radioactive
emission); about the same risk for cancer as smoking a half a pack of
cigarettes per day; a few granite countertops exceed this, but not
many. But others, like Lou Witt of the EPA, say “There is no known safe
level of radon or radiation.” Moreover, he said, scientists agree that
“any exposure increases your health risk.” New York Times
Of course, completely secondary to the radioactivity issue, Granite is not an environmentally sound choice for countertops: the mining is incredibly devastating, it’s often shipped around the world for processing and cutting, and it is – obviously – completely non-renewable. The fact that it may outgas radioactive substances and contain radioactive ores is now something else to worry about, or maybe Mother Nature’s revenge for being assaulted.
Thanks to Treehugger for digging a bit deeper (at least, deeper than the New York Times or anyone else had bothered to).
My wife and I are building a Bungalow Company plan here in TN (the Laurel) and we decided to go with a composite counter top rather than granite. The folks at the counter place voiced their own preference for granite, and I read several comparisons, one of which claimed granite was more environmentally friendly because of the chemicals used in the manufacturing of the quartz composite. And yet, I grew up in the Blue Ridge mountains (just outside of Asheville) and I’ve seen what the removal of a whole mountain can look like, and it literally hurts me to see it. I couldn’t bring myself to participate in that, which is what I felt I would be doing if we went with granite. Now the composite may not be any more environmentally friendly, but it seems from what I’ve read that there is some subjectivity to it, i.e. what is worse, chemicals or mining? At least the quartz composite is recyclable.
whoa,
granite and other natural stones used in building for thousands of years have never removed whole mountains (just look in Carrara Italy where we get lots of white and have since Michaelangelo) – but aggregate for road building has…
stone is a lifecycle product so if you are worried about the carbon load of quarrying or transportation compare the lifecycles of the different products you are looking at…stone lasts and lasts
Natural stone is green because it IS NOT A SCARCE RESOURCE
it is also not a manufactured product – it already exists and just needs minimal processing
quartz composite is up to 20% plastic (catches on fire and burns – try a Mapp gas torch – not good for firefighters in a kitchen fire) COSTS MORE because it has to be MANUFACTURED and sure isn’t as recyclable as all natural stone! you get plain jane colors (stepford stone anyone)? and just hold a piece of each in your hands and compare. LIke comparing a plastic doll to a real baby! or a blow up ‘love doll’ to the real thing maybe?! sorry, getting carried away – I guess its just easier to be more passionate about our planet then plastic. Alex
ps the Rock Cycle is recycling in its purest form
Best keep looking for info on this topic rather than believe the stone industry. Way too much money at risk, plus the have sucessfully covered this up for the past 14 years. They can’t tell the truth, so they keep digging the hole deeper.
If this was a non issue, neither the CRCPD (state radiation officials) nor AARST (radon scientists) would have committees seting maximum allowable radiation/radon levels for stones and measurement protocols. ANSI and ASME are also looking into the controversy for their organizations.
On the radon issue, we have a full scale radon test going currently, over 10 pCi/L so far from only 18square feet of granite in a 96 square foot room. That is like smoking 1 1/2 packs a day,
http://forum.solidsurfacealliance.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=98ST
We have a lot of info on the topics available.
forum.solidsurfacealliance.org
solidsurfacealliance.org/blog
solidsurfacealliance.org
Al, I appreciate your weighing in on this – we do need to see both sides of the issue, both your side and the stone industry’s side. I’m not saying it’s a non-issue, but the scare tactics (like many of the articles online about this subject) aren’t contributing anything to the discussion, either.
This was really interesting to read. My dad is a plumber framingham ma. He went into a house and saw one of these. Now I understand more of what he was talking about. Are they selling these all over the place now?
Wow, I can really see why this would freak people out. It’s good that they haven’t tried this with plumbers in scottsdale az. Can you imagine if someone told you your water was contaminated with something?