Asbestos-containing materials in abandoned residential dwellings in Detroit

Our plain-English summary of Asbestos-containing materials in abandoned residential dwellings in Detroit, by A. Franzblau, A.H. Demond, S.K. Sayler, et al (The Science of the Total Environment, 2020).

The study

• Authors: A. Franzblau, A.H. Demond, S.K. Sayler, H. D'Arcy, R.L. Neitzel
• Journal: The Science of the Total Environment
• Published: 2020;714:136580
• Cited by: 6 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text

Abstract

Objective: The efforts of many municipalities to demolish abandoned residential dwellings (ARDs) are hampered by the presence of asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) in these structures. However, the extent of such materials is unknown. Our study sought to characterize ACMs present in ARDs demolished in Detroit.

Methods: Working with the City of Detroit, we obtained information on all ARDs demolished from 2014 to 2017. We randomly sampled 605 ARDs and analyzed the presence, type, and amount of ACM present, and the associated abatement and demolition costs.

Results: Asbestos was present in about 95% of the sampled ARDs. The most common types of ACMs were flooring, roofing, siding, and duct insulation. The material containing the greatest fraction of asbestos was duct insulation. The type of asbestos generally present was chrysotile. Only eight (1%) ARDs contained commercial amphibole asbestos; another 36 contained vermiculite. The total cost of demolition averaged $13,645 per home, of which 20.1% was asbestos abatement.

Conclusions: The majority of the ACM in the ARDs was nonfriable and consisted of chrysotile. This study contributes information about the nature and extent of ACM in ARDs, which can provide part of the foundation for making an assessment of possible asbestos-containing air emissions during the demolitions of ARDs, and the nature or extent of pre-demolition abatement that may be needed (if any) to protect the public's health.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

In plain English

This study reviewed city records on demolished abandoned Detroit homes. The authors excluded emergency demolitions of unsafe homes from a database of demolitions from January 1, 2014 to February 14, 2017. They randomly chose 605 of the remaining 9811 homes and abstracted data from their inspection reports, mostly based on bulk samples tested by microscopy; nine had no report. Asbestos-containing materials were recorded in 566 of the 605 homes (94%). Setting aside the nine without a report, the authors put this at about 95%. The most common were flooring (51% of homes), roofing (48%), siding (34%) and duct insulation (32%). The asbestos was mostly chrysotile. Duct insulation had the highest average chrysotile content, 54.9%. Eight homes (1%) had amosite, and one of these also had crocidolite. Vermiculite was noted in 36 homes (6%), but labs did not test it. Asbestos inspection and abatement averaged $2740, which was 20.1% of the $13,645 average total cost. The authors concluded that asbestos is likely present in about 95% of abandoned homes in Detroit. They noted that no studies have measured asbestos emissions during such demolitions, and that differing inspectors and laboratories could have caused bias.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Descriptive study of records: data were taken from the City of Detroit's public demolition database and from pre-demolition asbestos inspection reports for a random sample of demolished homes
• Who was studied: 605 abandoned residential dwellings demolished in Detroit between January 1, 2014 and February 14, 2017. They were randomly selected from 9811 non-emergency demolitions, out of 11,043 in the database. Emergency demolitions, about 10% of the total, were excluded because they usually had no inspection report. Information on asbestos was missing for 9 of the 605 sampled homes.
• Exposure: Asbestos-containing building materials in the homes. Accredited inspectors took bulk samples of suspect materials, and accredited laboratories analyzed them by polarized light microscopy for asbestos content and type (actinolite, amosite, anthophyllite, chrysotile, crocidolite and/or tremolite). The method's detection limit was 1% asbestos. Vermiculite insulation was not analyzed and was assumed to contain asbestos.
• Main results:
  • Information on asbestos was missing for 9 of the 605 homes. Table 1 lists 566 of the 605 homes (94%) as containing asbestos, and the authors report asbestos as documented in 95% of the homes. Most of these homes had several types of asbestos-containing material. One of the 566 was counted only because its untested vermiculite was assumed to contain asbestos.
  • The most common asbestos-containing materials were flooring (51% of homes), roofing (48%), siding (34%) and duct insulation (32%).
  • Chrysotile was the main asbestos type. Its mean content ranged from 54.9% in duct insulation down to 1.6% in plaster.
  • 8 of the 605 homes (1%) had commercial amphibole asbestos, generally amosite only. One home had both amosite and crocidolite. Amounts were mostly small (up to 23 square feet) and in basements. The exception was one home with 1400 square feet of exterior transite siding containing 2% amosite.
  • Vermiculite was found in 36 homes (6%). The amount was not characterized, and laboratories did not actually test it for asbestos.
  • Across the 605 sampled homes, asbestos inspection and abatement averaged $2740. This was 20.1% of the average total removal cost of $13,645.
  • Total cost was positively correlated with abatement cost (r = 0.71). The amounts of asbestos-containing flooring, siding, plaster and 'other' materials were each significantly correlated with both abatement cost and total cost.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that asbestos is likely present in about 95% of abandoned homes in Detroit, and that chrysotile was the predominant form. They noted that no studies have assessed asbestos emissions during demolition of such homes.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The authors said the results could be biased in some way, although they believed this was unlikely because the homes were randomly sampled.
  • Samples were collected by inspectors from different companies and analyzed by different laboratories, and the reports differed in format. The authors said this could introduce bias, which they believed would most likely be random.
  • Vermiculite may have been more common than the inspection reports recorded.

Topics

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Asbestos-Containing Material (ACM), Abatement, Chrysotile, Amphibole Asbestos, vermiculite.

Related studies

• Response to Letter to the Editor regarding Franzblau et al., Asbestos-containing materials in abandoned residential dwellings in Detroit, from Prof. Arthur Frank, MD, PhD — A. Franzblau, A.H. Demond, et al. (2020)
• Letter to Editor regarding Franzblau et al. 2020: Asbestos-containing materials in abandoned residential dwellings in Detroit, Science of Total Environment, v714,1-8 — A.L. Frank (2020)
• Measurement of asbestos emissions associated with demolition of abandoned residential dwellings — R.L. Neitzel, S.K. Sayler, et al. (2020)
• Risk assessment of asbestos containing materials in a deteriorated dwelling area using four different methods — Y.L. Zhang, H.S. Byeon, et al. (2021)
• Accuracy of a mobile app to identify suspect asbestos-containing material in Australian residential settings — M.H. Govorko, L. Fritschi, et al. (2018)
• Measurement and removal of asbestos in residential dwellings to be demolished-urban transformation experience in Izmir, Turkey — Y.Ö. Tetik, İ.B. Zümrüt, et al. (2024)

Browse more research in The Science of the Total Environment, or return to medical research.