James Freeman on thu 8 apr 10
Shula...
This post surely will be immediately and harshly rebutted by one
admonishing us that one should never have barium in one's studio, nor
run with scissors, and will bring up stupid people and cats.
Nonetheless, I offer these few tidbits:
Your fear of barium is likely completely unfounded. There was a very
long and contentious thread about barium a year or two ago. It will
all be in the archives. I believe the title of most of the thread was
"Barium Enemy", or some such, though it started under another name and
spawned some sister threads. It is filled with detail and
calculations, and even discussion of barium glazes on functional ware.
Barium carbonate will not hurt your kiln in any way. It will also not
hurt you in any way unless you eat a rather large quantity of it, on
the order of a teaspoonful. It is not terribly threatening either
through inhalation or skin absorption. Even in the case of accidental
ingestion, it is not cumulative and is quickly eliminated by the body.
Don't take my word for any of this. Read any MSDS on barium
carbonate, or read our own Dr. Bastarache's toxicology information.
Google is filled with information backing these statements.
Most of the scare seems to have originated from a single book on
safety in the studio, but I am told that the claims about barium in
this book do not cite any references whatsoever, authoritative or
otherwise. There seems to be no such supporting data, and a search of
Google turns up no cases of accidental poisoning death, even amongst
folks who work around barium all day, every day manufacturing and
bagging the stuff or mixing it by the truckload into brick clay.
Assuming that you are a rational person of normal intelligence, it is
likely that you do not go about eating random substances from your
studio, or under the sink, or in the garage, or in your paint cabinet
or medicine cabinet, so your terror seems unfounded.
You may also receive advice to simply substitute nontoxic strontium
for the barium. Try, if you wish, but you will likely find it a very
poor substitute in terms of color response and a somewhat poor
substitute in terms of glaze texture. It is also quite prone to
pinholing. At least, this has been my experience.
I am certainly not an expert on lead, but from my readings have
gathered that the "condensing onto the kiln walls and furniture"
problem is only an issue in reduction or above cone 7. I have also
been told that chrome and copper can theoretically do the same, but
have never seen it myself nor read anything scientific to confirm it.
Salt can certainly contaminate your kiln, as evidenced by so-called
residual salt firings in which some salt glazing will occur without
the addition of any fresh charge.
Have fun.
...James
James Freeman
"All I say is by way of discourse, and nothing by way of advice. I
should not speak so boldly if it were my due to be believed."
-Michel de Montaigne
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesfreemanstudio/
http://www.jamesfreemanstudio.com/resources
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Shula wrote:
> In the past, I have avoided barium in glazes like the plague. However, I =
=3D
bought a book on dry glazes and I have fallen in love with those beautiful =
=3D
barium blue glazes. I'm thinking of creating some sculptural forms and usin=
=3D
g barium glazes. But before I do, I want to know whether firing barium cont=
=3D
aining glazes in my kiln will negatively effect my kiln and the functional =
=3D
pieces I subsequently fire in the kiln (L&L fired outside with a vent). I r=
=3D
emember reading that if you fire lead containing glazes, the lead contamina=
=3D
tes the kiln and may effect pieces that are subsequently fired in the kiln.=
=3D
Does barium do the same thing? Are there any other chemicals that contamin=
=3D
ate the kiln and could negatively impact subsequent firings of functional w=
=3D
are?
>
> By the way, I do use a respirator and gloves when weighing and mixing gla=
=3D
zes and spray glazes outside. I have lots of allergies and asthma and don't=
=3D
want to aggravate either.
Taylor Hendrix on fri 9 apr 10
Just for the record, here is the first sentence of Monona Rossol's
(note the spelling) three-part Series on barium beginning in the
December 1995 issue of Clay Times:
"Barium glazes do not present an unreasonable hazard to potters as
long as they understand barium's health effects, use local ventilation
(a spray booth or other area in which powdered materials can be
handled safely), wear protective equipment, and practice good hygiene.
Potters with heart or blood pressure problems should be especially
careful because barium can worsen these conditions."
Now that's bald-faced tirade if ever I saw one. Glad you folks are on the c=
ase.
---end dose of reality---
You may now resume your character assassinations.
Tag, you're it,
Taylor, in Rockport TX
wirerabbit1 on Skype (-0600 UTC)
http://wirerabbit.blogspot.com
http://wirerabbitpots.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirerabbit/
2010/4/8 Ric Swenson :
...
> There is scant evidence of Barium leaching or absorbtion in humans...unle=
ss ingested in pretty large amounts...this in response to M. Rossenols back=
less tirad in her book on safety. My apologies. The science of fear abounds=
.
...
jonathan byler on fri 9 apr 10
from my personal and professional observations, most people are not as
good with the industrial hygiene practices as they (or we) wish they
were. especially students. who of you dips your hand occasionally
in your glaze bucket while glazing? or throws with minor cuts on
their hands (a hangnail will do)? use caution.
We proactively pulled barium from our glaze room to help satisfy the
health and safety people here at the university. they didn't want it
in the waste stream, and we didn't have a pressing need for it for the
most part. it makes safe disposal of our spray booth filter screens
that much easier for all involved.
On Apr 9, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Taylor Hendrix wrote:
> Just for the record, here is the first sentence of Monona Rossol's
> (note the spelling) three-part Series on barium beginning in the
> December 1995 issue of Clay Times:
>
> "Barium glazes do not present an unreasonable hazard to potters as
> long as they understand barium's health effects, use local ventilation
> (a spray booth or other area in which powdered materials can be
> handled safely), wear protective equipment, and practice good hygiene.
> Potters with heart or blood pressure problems should be especially
> careful because barium can worsen these conditions."
>
> Now that's bald-faced tirade if ever I saw one. Glad you folks are
> on the case.
>
> ---end dose of reality---
>
> You may now resume your character assassinations.
>
> Tag, you're it,
>
>
>
> Taylor, in Rockport TX
> wirerabbit1 on Skype (-0600 UTC)
> http://wirerabbit.blogspot.com
> http://wirerabbitpots.blogspot.com
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirerabbit/
>
>
>
> 2010/4/8 Ric Swenson :
> ...
>> There is scant evidence of Barium leaching or absorbtion in
>> humans...unless ingested in pretty large amounts...this in response
>> to M. Rossenols backless tirad in her book on safety. My apologies.
>> The science of fear abounds.
> ...
Randall Moody on sat 10 apr 10
Taylor,
I believe that he was referencing "Keeping Clay Work Safe and Legal", not a=
n
article in Clay Times. I still have not found any confirmed scientific
studies backing up the claims made about barium in her book. When this all
went around the last time I think that I gave the direct quote from that
source. It isn't "character assassination" to point out that it appears to
be unfounded. The simple point is that if we toss out materials based on
fear or "the possibility of..." rather than research and science we wouldn'=
t
have anything in our studio.
--
Randall in Atlanta
http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Taylor Hendrix wrot=
e:
> Just for the record, here is the first sentence of Monona Rossol's
> (note the spelling) three-part Series on barium beginning in the
> December 1995 issue of Clay Times:
>
> "Barium glazes do not present an unreasonable hazard to potters as
> long as they understand barium's health effects, use local ventilation
> (a spray booth or other area in which powdered materials can be
> handled safely), wear protective equipment, and practice good hygiene.
> Potters with heart or blood pressure problems should be especially
> careful because barium can worsen these conditions."
>
> Now that's bald-faced tirade if ever I saw one. Glad you folks are on the
> case.
>
> ---end dose of reality---
>
> You may now resume your character assassinations.
>
> Tag, you're it,
>
Vince Pitelka on sat 10 apr 10
Jonathan Byler wrote:
From my personal and professional observations, most people are not as
good with the industrial hygiene practices as they (or we) wish they
were. especially students. who of you dips your hand occasionally
in your glaze bucket while glazing? or throws with minor cuts on
their hands (a hangnail will do)? use caution.
We proactively pulled barium from our glaze room to help satisfy the
health and safety people here at the university. they didn't want it
in the waste stream, and we didn't have a pressing need for it for the
most part. it makes safe disposal of our spray booth filter screens
that much easier for all involved.
Jonathan -
I can understand how in some situations it is easier to just give in, rathe=
r
than to fight for what is right. It is a shame that you are put in a
position where you have to give up barium. That should not be the case in
any academic studio in a university, because barium is an important glaze
material, and students need to learn about it. None of my students would
ever stir a glaze with their hands, but no one is going to experience a
problem doing that with a barium glaze. The small amounts of barium in the
"waste stream" are no concern at all. There are FAR worse things going dow=
n
the drain in any university. The small amount of barium ending up in the
spray booth filters is also of no concern at all as long as the filters are
disposed of in a responsible manner.
As I said, sometimes it is easier to just go along with such institutional
policies, but the problem is that every time we do that, we are sanctioning
fear-mongering and over-the-top enforcement by university "environmental
health" officers, who are known for such abuses. Because they are rarely
trained to deal with a specialization like glaze materials, they overreact,
and that is not acceptable. They need for people in our situation to stand
up to them and say "no, the small amount of barium we use is not a problem
in the "waste stream" or in the spray booth filters, and we need to have
barium in our glaze lab. We will be teaching our students to use barium
responsibly, as we do with so many other materials in studio art classes."
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
Taylor Hendrix on sat 10 apr 10
I believe the phrase was "backless tirad [sic]" rather than "appears
to be unfounded." I doubt very seriously that Ms. Rossol's sentiments
regarding the use of barium by potters differs in any significant way
between her 1990 book and her 1995 article.
I care not one whit that the actual or alleged health risks of barium
leaching are disputed in the halls of Scientifica or that barium
carbonate shouldn't be eaten on one's buttered toast but rather I
speak directly to the issue of characterization, characterization that
ALWAYS takes place when these issues eruct from the fermenting sands
of ClayArt's verge. These characterizations have nothing whatsoever to
do with facts or working principles -- things apparently of some
importance to a few of you -- but are often called upon to serve as
PROOF that someone is overreacting and should be dismissed.
And just for good measure, please remember this my fellow ClayArters:
Ax grinding should be done in a well ventilated place away from
flammable liquids or solids, and persons who wish to grind an ax
should wear OSHA-approved hearing and eye protection.
Taylor, in Rockport TX
wirerabbit1 on Skype (-0600 UTC)
http://wirerabbit.blogspot.com
http://wirerabbitpots.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wirerabbit/
On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Randall Moody wr=
ote:
.... It isn't "character assassination" to point out that it appears to
> be unfounded. ...
Vince Pitelka on sun 11 apr 10
John Hesselberth wrote
"One suggestion for ceramics teachers who have to deal with this issue. If
you have a chemistry department at your school get the chemistry lab
supervisor's to advise on how to handle this. They are dealing with far mor=
e
toxic materials than potters use and have somehow made peace with the
environmental folks. Maybe they would even be willing to be with you when
you are being visited by the environmental folks. It is at least worth
talking with them."
This is a good point and an excellent suggestion. At the Appalachian Cente=
r
for Craft, we are lucky that we do not have to deal with this situation.
Our physical plant director at the Craft Center is very pro-art, pro-craft,
pro-safety, and pro-environment, and we address these things responsibly
without spreading fear. We teach our students how to deal safely with
dangerous situations, rather than making the student afraid of them.
I hope that those of you who teach in universities where you occasionally
have to deal with powerful environmental health inspectors will take John's
advice. The people in chemistry and biology have to deal with some pretty
nasty stuff, far worse than anything we encounter.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft
Tennessee Tech University
vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
Ric Swenson on sun 11 apr 10
How right you are....Fear is rampant....in all venues. more is the pity.
IMHO
Ric
"...then fiery expedition be my wing, ..."
-Wm. Shakespeare, RICHARD III, Act IV Scene III
Richard H. ("Ric") Swenson, Teacher,
Office of International Cooperation and Exchange of Jingdezhen Ceramic Inst=
itute,
TaoYang Road, Eastern Suburb, Jingdezhen City.
JiangXi Province, P.R. of China.
Postal code 333001.
Mobile/cellular phone : 86 13767818872
< RicSwenson0823@hotmail.com>
http://www.jci.jx.cn
> Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 09:25:19 -0400
> From: randall.moody@GMAIL.COM
> Subject: Re: toxic chemicals in the kiln - which contaminate the kiln?
> To: Clayart@LSV.CERAMICS.ORG
>
> Taylor,
> I believe that he was referencing "Keeping Clay Work Safe and Legal", not=
an
> article in Clay Times. I still have not found any confirmed scientific
> studies backing up the claims made about barium in her book. When this al=
l
> went around the last time I think that I gave the direct quote from that
> source. It isn't "character assassination" to point out that it appears t=
o
> be unfounded. The simple point is that if we toss out materials based on
> fear or "the possibility of..." rather than research and science we would=
n't
> have anything in our studio.
>
> --
> Randall in Atlanta
> http://wrandallmoody.com/home.html
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Taylor Hendrix wr=
ote:
>
> > Just for the record, here is the first sentence of Monona Rossol's
> > (note the spelling) three-part Series on barium beginning in the
> > December 1995 issue of Clay Times:
> >
> > "Barium glazes do not present an unreasonable hazard to potters as
> > long as they understand barium's health effects, use local ventilation
> > (a spray booth or other area in which powdered materials can be
> > handled safely), wear protective equipment, and practice good hygiene.
> > Potters with heart or blood pressure problems should be especially
> > careful because barium can worsen these conditions."
> >
> > Now that's bald-faced tirade if ever I saw one. Glad you folks are on t=
he
> > case.
> >
> > ---end dose of reality---
> >
> > You may now resume your character assassinations.
> >
> > Tag, you're it,
> >
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft=A1=AFs powerful SPAM protection.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=3D60969
John Hesselberth on sun 11 apr 10
On Apr 10, 2010, at 9:50 PM, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> over-the-top enforcement by university "environmental
> health" officers, who are known for such abuses. Because they are =3D
rarely
> trained to deal with a specialization like glaze materials, they =3D
overreact,
> and that is not acceptable. They need for people in our situation to =3D
stand
> up to them and say "no, the small amount of barium we use is not a =3D
problem
> in the "waste stream" or in the spray booth filters, and we need to =3D
have
> barium in our glaze lab. We will be teaching our students to use =3D
barium
> responsibly, as we do with so many other materials in studio art =3D
classes."
One suggestion for ceramics teachers who have to deal with this issue. =3D
If you have a chemistry department at your school get the chemistry lab =3D
supervisor's to advise on how to handle this. They are dealing with far =3D
more toxic materials than potters use and have somehow made peace with =3D
the environmental folks. Maybe they would even be willing to be with you =
=3D
are being visited by the environmental folks. It is at least worth =3D
talking with them.
Regards,
John=3D
Edouard Bastarache on mon 12 apr 10
In the case of chromium compounds they should make a difference between the
trivalent forms (green chromium oxide), and the hexavalent ones, mainly the
insoluble
Our exposure limits as of today :
Chrome, m=E9tal [7440-47-3] 0,5 mg/m=B3
Oxyde de Chrome Vert 0,5mg/m=B3
Chrome VI, compos=E9s inorganiques
hydro-insolubles (exprim=E9e en Cr) 0,01mg/m=B3
C1,RP,EM,S
Chrome VI, compos=E9s inorganiques
hydro-solubles (exprim=E9e en Cr) 0,05mg/m=B3
C1=3DKnown carcinogen to humans
AS for BARUM :
Google "bastarache+barium
Gis,
Edouard Bastarache
Spertesperantisto
Sorel-Tracy
Quebec
http://edouardbastarache.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30058682@N00/
http://blogsalbertbastarache.blogspot.com/
http://cerampeintures.blogspot.com/
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/smart2000/index.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "jonathan byler"
To: "Clayart"
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: toxic chemicals in the kiln - which contaminate the kiln?
> In my experience, the biology and chemistry departments are also much
> better staffed and funded than our poor art department. They have
> more people and financial resources available to ensure safety and
> environmental compliance. They also must follow stricter rules due to
> the fact that they tend to produce greater quantities of hazardous
> waste than your average clay program. I suppose I could lock down the
> glaze room whenever I am not there to watch over it, but that is not a
> very good option for us. That is more limiting than not allowing a
> few chemicals that we would like to keep out of the waste stream.
>
> Our Risk Management and Safety Department lists as "toxic waste" any
> waste containing arsenic, BARIUM, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury,
> selenium, and silver. They didn't seem to care about the small amount
> of chrome oxide that we were using (makes up less than 1% of our waste
> stream and is in relatively benign form). if you aren't using these
> things according to them, you can pretty much dump it down the drain
> or put in the regular trash as long as you are using relatively small
> quantities (under 2 lbs.) of listed hazardous chemicals, as would be
> found in a university glaze lab. This is all following EPA guidelines.
>
> so you guys say barium is A - OK. but the EPA and our RMS people say
> it is not. I'll stick with the scientists on this one. it may only
> pose a minor health hazard in the way that we use it, but the
> environmental hazard is large enough for the EPA to say it is bad
> news. really not a big deal for me, since the only glaze that we used
> that had it (jeff's red) subbed nicely for strontium and didn't come
> out any different. I don't feel like we are being restricted, but
> then, i don't get all that excited about barium matte glazes at the
> moment. They didn't tell us to not use the stuff, but it made a nice
> goodwill gesture on our part and I do like having a simple to manage
> waste stream. Keeping my friends at RMS happy and our proactive
> stance on ensuring a clean waste stream makes it a lot easier to get
> help from them where we need it, which is more often than one might
> think, such as when you need your studio vents re-designed. Who has
> money to pay for that? they do and they do pay for it (something they
> don't have to do).
>
>
> best solution for now was to just remove the stuff considered to be
> problematic.
> On Apr 11, 2010, at 8:10 PM, Vince Pitelka wrote:
>
>> John Hesselberth wrote
>> "One suggestion for ceramics teachers who have to deal with this
>> issue. If
>> you have a chemistry department at your school get the chemistry lab
>> supervisor's to advise on how to handle this. They are dealing with
>> far more
>> toxic materials than potters use and have somehow made peace with the
>> environmental folks. Maybe they would even be willing to be with you
>> when
>> you are being visited by the environmental folks. It is at least worth
>> talking with them."
>>
>> This is a good point and an excellent suggestion. At the
>> Appalachian Center
>> for Craft, we are lucky that we do not have to deal with this
>> situation.
>> Our physical plant director at the Craft Center is very pro-art, pro-
>> craft,
>> pro-safety, and pro-environment, and we address these things
>> responsibly
>> without spreading fear. We teach our students how to deal safely with
>> dangerous situations, rather than making the student afraid of them.
>>
>> I hope that those of you who teach in universities where you
>> occasionally
>> have to deal with powerful environmental health inspectors will take
>> John's
>> advice. The people in chemistry and biology have to deal with some
>> pretty
>> nasty stuff, far worse than anything we encounter.
>> - Vince
>>
>> Vince Pitelka
>> Appalachian Center for Craft
>> Tennessee Tech University
>> vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
>> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
>
jonathan byler on mon 12 apr 10
In my experience, the biology and chemistry departments are also much
better staffed and funded than our poor art department. They have
more people and financial resources available to ensure safety and
environmental compliance. They also must follow stricter rules due to
the fact that they tend to produce greater quantities of hazardous
waste than your average clay program. I suppose I could lock down the
glaze room whenever I am not there to watch over it, but that is not a
very good option for us. That is more limiting than not allowing a
few chemicals that we would like to keep out of the waste stream.
Our Risk Management and Safety Department lists as "toxic waste" any
waste containing arsenic, BARIUM, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury,
selenium, and silver. They didn't seem to care about the small amount
of chrome oxide that we were using (makes up less than 1% of our waste
stream and is in relatively benign form). if you aren't using these
things according to them, you can pretty much dump it down the drain
or put in the regular trash as long as you are using relatively small
quantities (under 2 lbs.) of listed hazardous chemicals, as would be
found in a university glaze lab. This is all following EPA guidelines.
so you guys say barium is A - OK. but the EPA and our RMS people say
it is not. I'll stick with the scientists on this one. it may only
pose a minor health hazard in the way that we use it, but the
environmental hazard is large enough for the EPA to say it is bad
news. really not a big deal for me, since the only glaze that we used
that had it (jeff's red) subbed nicely for strontium and didn't come
out any different. I don't feel like we are being restricted, but
then, i don't get all that excited about barium matte glazes at the
moment. They didn't tell us to not use the stuff, but it made a nice
goodwill gesture on our part and I do like having a simple to manage
waste stream. Keeping my friends at RMS happy and our proactive
stance on ensuring a clean waste stream makes it a lot easier to get
help from them where we need it, which is more often than one might
think, such as when you need your studio vents re-designed. Who has
money to pay for that? they do and they do pay for it (something they
don't have to do).
best solution for now was to just remove the stuff considered to be
problematic.
On Apr 11, 2010, at 8:10 PM, Vince Pitelka wrote:
> John Hesselberth wrote
> "One suggestion for ceramics teachers who have to deal with this
> issue. If
> you have a chemistry department at your school get the chemistry lab
> supervisor's to advise on how to handle this. They are dealing with
> far more
> toxic materials than potters use and have somehow made peace with the
> environmental folks. Maybe they would even be willing to be with you
> when
> you are being visited by the environmental folks. It is at least worth
> talking with them."
>
> This is a good point and an excellent suggestion. At the
> Appalachian Center
> for Craft, we are lucky that we do not have to deal with this
> situation.
> Our physical plant director at the Craft Center is very pro-art, pro-
> craft,
> pro-safety, and pro-environment, and we address these things
> responsibly
> without spreading fear. We teach our students how to deal safely with
> dangerous situations, rather than making the student afraid of them.
>
> I hope that those of you who teach in universities where you
> occasionally
> have to deal with powerful environmental health inspectors will take
> John's
> advice. The people in chemistry and biology have to deal with some
> pretty
> nasty stuff, far worse than anything we encounter.
> - Vince
>
> Vince Pitelka
> Appalachian Center for Craft
> Tennessee Tech University
> vpitelka@dtccom.net; wpitelka@tntech.edu
> http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka
| |
|
