About This Archive  | DCHAS-L 2011 Index   | DCHAS-L Yearly Index   | DCHAS-L Home Page
person wearing a disposable face shield and surgical style mask

Check out Safety Emporium for your N95, N99, and face shield needs.

Previous by Date:
Subject: Re: Fume Hoods
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:09:47 -0400
Author: Beltis.K**At_Symbol_Here**TIAXLLC.COM 		Next by Date:
Subject: New on-line open access safety journal
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:32:05 -0400
Author: ILPI

(Note: This post is 14 years old and may contain outdated information.)


Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:42:27 -0400
Reply-To: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Peter Zavon <pzavon**At_Symbol_Here**ROCHESTER.RR.COM>
Subject: Re: Fume Hoods
In-Reply-To: <B06FE04AACB936438D57258499897CD91630D6DA6F**At_Symbol_Here**phxe2k7.tusa.tkinet.com>

With the materials you list as intended for current use, I would never accept a recirculating hood.
 
However, there is one other issue to consider in addition to all the points already mentioned on this topic.  Even if you have ductless hoods for low hazard uses, which would be the only really acceptable application in my opinion, how confident can you be that a change next month, next year, or in five years will not result in the use of other materials, not really suitable for use in a recirculating hood? It is hard enough in industrial labs to ensure that a hood in not improperly applied that way. In my opinion, in academia it is virtually impossible.
 
I don't believe that lab buildings should be designed so narrowly that only a limited number of very specific items are suitable for use in the lab without major renovation.  Plan for the unknown future, or at least to permit its arrival, without the need to completely rework your physical plant.

Peter Zavon, CIH
Penfield, NY

PZAVON**At_Symbol_Here**Rochester.rr.com


From: DCHAS-L Discussion List [mailto:DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**list.uvm.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Hojjatie
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 11:08 AM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: [DCHAS-L] Fume Hoods

Dear colleagues:

We are in the process of building a new Laboratory and contemplating between using Dustless Fume Hoods vs. Ducted Exhaust Hoods. We will be using a variety of hazardous chemicals including carbon disulfide, acetonitrile, toluene, benzene, some carcinogenic suspect chemicals, hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide gases.

I appreciate sharing your experiences with ductless fume hoods and whether you recommend these type of hoods for hazardous chemical work using the aforementioned chemical examples as well as advantages and disadvantages of these hoods vs. the ducted exhaust hoods (safety concerns, costs, maintenance, etc.)

Thanks,

Michael Hojjatie, Ph.D.

R&D director, TKI

   

Previous post   |  Top of Page   |   Next post


The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to secretary@dchas.org.
The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.