Search

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.02.027 Byline: William P. Racine Abstract: Healthcare facilities undergoing renovation have specific concerns that are exacerbated when the restoration requires asbestos abatement of aged floor tile and mastic. The current state of the art for removal of these materials involves manual removal of floor tile and chemical stripping of mastic. Utilization of these stripping chemicals is a concern for facilities whose perception is based on a safe, caring, and healthy environment. In this study, wet grinding is evaluated as an alternative to chemical stripping of asbestos-containing floor tile mastic. This study endeavors to answer the question; what is the difference between these two methodologies in terms of their operational efficacy and suitability in the healthcare setting. Wet grinding and chemical stripping are evaluated in a side-by-side comparison using a mixed methods approach. The data shows that the methodologies are statistically similar in terms of their cost and emissions data. The data indicates that the benefits associated with the wet grinding method offer advantages that are not present using the chemical stripping method. This study also demonstrates that wet grinding is a viable alternative to chemical stripping especially in healthcare facilities. Author Affiliation: Environmental Support Network, Inc., 5376 Fulton Drive, NW, Canton, OH 44718, USA Article History: Received 27 July 2009; Revised 5 January 2010; Accepted 7 February 2010