Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Method To Remediate Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazards
EPA Contract Number: 68D03021Title: Method To Remediate Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazards
Investigators: Barca, Brian J.
Small Business: EMEC Consultants
EPA Contact: Richards, April
Phase: I
Project Period: April 1, 2003 through September 1, 2003
Project Amount: $69,970
RFA: Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) - Phase I (2003) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Hazardous Waste/Remediation , SBIR - Waste , Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
Description:
EMEC Consultants has developed and patented an electrochemical process to remove paint from steel. The so-called ElectroStrip™ Process produces no airborne particulates. Electrical current is transmitted through an ElectroPad™, which consists of a liquid-absorbent material (typically SorbX2) and an anode mesh and is wetted with a sodium sulfate (electrolyte) solution. The electricity, typically at 8-12 volts, passes into the steel structure, thus the steel is used as the cathode. When the electrical current flows from the anode to the cathode, water is reduced and an alkaline condition results at the cathode. This alkalinity debonds the paint from the steel structure.
The ElectroPad™ was patented in 2000 for use on steel structures. The pad consists of an electrode screen between two absorbent layers. The absorbent layers act to hold the sodium sulfate solution to facilitate the current passing through the ElectroPad™. Because the ElectroPad™ is wet and covers the area being stripped, no airborne particulates containing lead are emitted, thus making this process safe for the environment and for workers. The process has several advantages, such as: (1) worker friendly and safe; (2) environmentally clean; (3) quick, easy, low-cost setup; (4) no containment is necessary; (5) relatively quiet; and (6) low initial investment.
The marketing of the ElectroStrip™ Process revealed that the process would be best suited for smaller, niche-type jobs. These include repair and maintenance-type jobs on steel structures, such as jobs less than 100 ft2 in size. This niche advantage is created because the process is easily and quickly set up due to the fact dust containment is not required. It was discovered that these advantages also exist in the lead abatement market dealing with housing, especially at locations with children. For the ElectroStrip™ Process to be utilized in this market, the process had to be modified to remove paint from non-conductive surfaces (wood, concrete, brick, etc.).
To adapt the process to be utilized on non-conductive surfaces, the ElectroStrip™ Process procedures and the ElectroPad™ had to be modified. The modification of the ElectroPad™ consists of adding another electrode to the pad so that the electrical current is passed through the pad only and not into the structure. The advantages of using this process on non-conductive surfaces include: (1) no airborne particulates are created, (2) it is quick and easy to set up and clean up, (3) it provides the reliable removal of lead paint, and (4) there may not be a need to remove the tenants from the housing unit.
After limited preceding experiments with non-conductive surfaces, the research objectives for this SBIR project were to: (1) adapt and test the process for the new area of employment; (2) conduct a preliminary survey of the market (job size, costs, job structure, competing processes, etc.); and (3) initiate contacts with representatives from Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) organizations and potential partners in the industry. Laboratory testing of the process on various substrates and coatings, however, was the major objective for this project.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
Initial testing of the modified ElectroStrip™ Process and the new ElectroPad™ indicated that the process does remove paint from non-conductive surfaces. The alkaline condition that is created on the surface of the paint degrades the paint from the outer surface down to the substrate. This is different from the original process, in which the alkaline condition was produced and debonded the paint at the paint/substrate interface. The adapted process removes the coating in stages, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Paint Being Removed in Stages
In a subsequent systematic lead-based paint removal study, it was shown that the ElectroStrip™ Process does reduce or eliminate the lead hazard. In most cases, the process did lower the lead content to an acceptable level, as summarized in Table 1. The samples that were tested had a significant amount of lead present in the coating-any measurement greater than 1 mg/cm2 is considered hazardous as defined by the EPA (40 CFR Part 745). Table 1 demonstrates that the process did reduce the lead levels in the coating to less than this limit.
Sample | Coating | Result (lead mg/cm2) |
---|---|---|
MA House Sample | >10 Coatings, intact | 36 |
MA House Sample | >10 Coatings, removed | 0.93 |
MA Hosue Sample | > to Coatings, removed | 1.2 |
McK Mantle | >5 Coatins, intact | 43 |
McK Mantle | >5 Coatings, removed | 0.61 |
McK White Trim | >4 Coatings, intact | 8.8 |
MkK White Trim | >4 Coatings, removed | 0.57 |
To better modify and design the ElectroStrip™ Process for commercialization, EMEC Consultants personnel visited key personnel of EPA, HUD, Boston Area Agencies, City of McKeesport, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. It was found that the typical substrates that are stripped in housing units are trim, windows, baseboards, stairs, and doors. Plaster walls (or drywall) are not typically abated, which actually was the only surface that did not work well with the ElectroStrip™ Process. The typical paint removal techniques in commercial use also were mentioned during these discussions and included dry and wet scraping, chemical stripping, wet sanding, and replacement.
Preliminary market research has shown that there is a market for the ElectroStrip™ Technology. It is estimated that $230 million per year will be spent to remediate lead hazards in housing through private and public funding. Additionally, a supplemental market in graffiti removal has been discovered. The process has been shown to remove spray paint from concrete, brick, and wood. There currently is no dominant removal method in the graffiti removal market, and the ElectroStrip™ Technology also may be a good fit for this additional market.
Conclusions:
All of the objectives of this Phase I research project were satisfactorily achieved, and even surpassed in some aspects. The ElectroPad™ was modified, and many coatings were successfully removed from several substrates. The market evaluation is ahead of schedule, and a practice and demonstration specimen will be available for a Phase II project.
The ElectroStrip™ Process is a realistic and feasible alternative to the current paint-removal methods available in the market. The paint and lead in the paint are removed from the substrates adequately in an occupationally and environmentally safe manner. All of the samples and coatings that were found in the field during this study have been treated successfully with this process.
EMEC Consultants has developed plans for a Phase II project that will refine the process to a prototype stage that would be ready for full commercialization. In the Phase II project, the process will be scaled up, tested, practiced in the field, and demonstrated to industry representatives. The main advantages of the process-no airborne particulates and residents remaining on the premises-also will be confirmed and demonstrated in a Phase II project.
References:
1. Keller, et al. Electrochemically assisted paint removal from a metal substrate. U.S. Patent Number 5,507,926; April 16, 1996.
2. Keller, et al. Electrode pad for debonding paint from a metal substrate. U.S. Patent Number 6,030,519; February 29, 2000.
3. Provisional Patent Application Number 60/480,639. Modified electrode pad for debonding paint from a nonconductive substrate. Filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on June 23, 2003.
4. Jacobs DE, et al. The prevalence of lead-based paint hazards in U.S. housing. Environmental Health Perspectives 2002;110(10):599-606.
Supplemental Keywords:
lead-based paint, remediation, ElectroStrip Process, ElectroPad, cathode, debonding, airborne particulates, graffiti removal, small business, SBIR., RFA, Health, PHYSICAL ASPECTS, Scientific Discipline, INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION, Waste, TREATMENT/CONTROL, POLLUTANTS/TOXICS, Chemical Engineering, Remediation, Environmental Chemistry, Health Risk Assessment, Chemicals, Technology, Risk Assessments, Physical Processes, Hazardous Waste, Hazardous, Environmental Engineering, chemical exposure, hazardous waste disposal, hazardous waste treatment, electrochemical paint stripping, paint removal, clean technologies, environmental risks, exposure, lead, remediation technologies, adverse human health affects, human exposure, occupational hazard, lead based paint removal, heavy metals, human health risk, electrochemical treatmentThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.