December 4, 2018 Pollutants + Mold + Pests 14 commentsSimple processing, good static properties and a low price have helped OSB panels to achieve a high market share (OSB = oriented strand board / coarse chipboard).Negative experiences with increased exposure to pollutants, but also with dubious pollutant test reports, have persuaded me to exclude OSB boards for allergy sufferers, people suffering from environmental diseases and particularly "groups of people who need to be protected" such as small children, schoolchildren, pregnant women or people with a weakened immune system.Even the strongly perceptible inherent odor of the OSB board is often perceived as "disturbing".This odor is mainly due to the natural emission components of the wood such as terpenes and acetic acid as well as oxidants (various aldehydes, but above all the odor-intensive hexanal).While renowned institutes and also the "Standard for building biology measurement technology SBM" published by the Institute for Building Biology + Sustainability IBN require TVOC values ​​of < 100 μg/m3 in the room air, I was often able to do this in the long term in buildings in which OSB boards were installed detect a few thousand μg/m3 TVOC (TVOC = sum of all volatile compounds).In July 2016, the ZDF television program "Länderspiegel" said about the "eco-kindergarten in Wallercatching" (ZDF = Second German Television): "The interior was equipped with OSB panels - these panels became a problem - the benchmark was around 40- times exceeded".This kindergarten could not be used even after 2 years.” In the meantime, a demolition and new construction with a damage sum of over 1 million euros has been decided.As early as 2009 there were massive problems at a school in Weilheim with OSB panels, which, according to the press report, carried "numerous certificates".In Munich (Obermenzing elementary school) "formaldehyde-free glued boards" were ordered and guaranteed for a school - formaldehyde-contaminated boards from a south-eastern European production facility were installed.The result was months of arguments between parents and school authorities due to massive symptoms of illness in schoolchildren, triggered by increased levels of formaldehyde.In the meantime, most of the OSB panels produced in Germany no longer contain any formaldehyde, there are increased loads mainly due toHowever, while terpenes are mainly found in the most frequently produced OSB boards made from pine wood, OSB boards made from spruce and deciduous wood often contain an increased concentration of acetic acid.Test reports suitable for health assessment are not available, partly because they do not clearly state how old the material samples are (it is well known that the level of pollution decreases over time!).Unfortunately, I have not been able to obtain independent and neutral product tests in the last 15 years - in the few VOC and formaldehyde test reports submitted to me, (allegedly fresh) samples "sent in by the manufacturer" were always examined (note in the test report: production date unknown).In contrast to quality marks such as those from natureplus or the eco-Institute, the samples were not taken from ongoing production by the testing institute or by a commissioned external company (statement from a sales manager: this would not be organizationally feasible!) - a credible "age determination" of the tested product is therefore impossible.Until 2016, OSB panels were even awarded the Blue Angel "because they have low emissions", although the criteria that applied up to that point did not include any VOC emission tests!At least one requirement regarding limit values ​​for VOCs has been included in the UZ-76 (= award criterion for the Blue Angel), which has been in force since 2016 (also for OSB boards), but with limit values ​​that are much too generous for allergy sufferers and those sensitive to chemicals: 800 μg/m3 TVOC after 28 days, 80 μg/m3 formaldehyde (for comparison: inconspicuous value < 20 μg/m3 according to the standard of building biology measurement technology SBM, 30 μg/m3 = AGÖF orientation value).However, we do not yet know of any OSB panels that have been certified with the Blue Angel in accordance with the new award criteria.However, as with many other building products, advertising is mostly done with the “ecological product declarations” (EPDs), which are meaningless for a health assessment and which any manufacturer can have created, as these do not represent an assessment but merely a “declaration”.Emission values ​​for OSB boards are not given there - sometimes with hair-raising arguments: In one such EPD from 07/09/2017 (declaration number EPD EHW-2012113-D) we find the following statement: "VOC emissions: the VOC proof is still pending , since there is no recognized test and assessment procedure." Surprisingly, the same manufacturer does state VOC values ​​for other wood products in other EPDs from the same registration office (on the "test basis of the AgBB scheme" - example: EPD EGG20140035IBB1DE from 23.06. 2014! – AgBB = Committee for Health-related Evaluation of Building Products).As early as 2013, the Federal Environment Agency described a determination of the VOC emissions from OSB boards and their evaluation in a UMID publication (UMID = magazine "Umwelt und Mensch").In an EPD from another OSB panel manufacturer with the issue date June 15, 2015, valid until June 14, 2020 (declaration number: EPD-Krono-20150067-IBD2-EN), we find the following statement: "Evidence of VOC is optional when the EPD is valid for a shorter period of time (1 year)."(VOC proof is optional if the EPD is valid for less than one year.) However, this declaration is issued for 5 years!We know from current research projects that there are processes to reduce emissions from OSB boards by changing production methods and adding oxidants and other substances during production.However, we do not yet know of any products on the market that are produced using such methods and for which a correspondingly reduced emission behavior has actually and credibly been proven.Numerous press and TV reports as well as personal experiences with increased emission values ​​and health complaints as well as the fact that we do not receive any test reports that we consider to be sufficiently neutral mean that we are currently rejecting OSB panels for schools, day-care centers and the living and working area.Other posts you might be interested in:Building biology advice centers IBN – also in your area!➔ beratungsstellen.baubiologie.de distance learning course building biology IBN - find out now ➔ fernlehrgang.baubiologie.de Seminars and qualification: ➔ building biology measuring technology IBNPollutants + Mold + Pests Keywords: wood-based panels, OSB panels, pollutantsNow how does the formaldehyde get into the board?1. via wood glue containing synthetic resin (as explained above, there are also panels that are made formaldehyde-free) 2. as a disinfestation agent during production and transport - to kill parasites and mold, especially formerly very popular on ships 3. it is a natural one part of the wood.Even natural resin, such as that found in coniferous wood, emits terpenes when it dries, and these in turn break down into formaldehyde and other aldehydes.Why is this suddenly becoming a problem with OSB panels and other pressboards?Because OSB panels contain a particularly large amount of trunk parts on the edge!The heartwood is used for the KVH, the areas next to it for Raupunt etc., but before the trunks are sawn into boards or beams, all the crap is milled off - and that's where the proportion of resin is particularly high!And then you take “formaldehyde-free” wood glue and bake fancy OSB boards!cheers meal!I don't know why everyone is attached to the OSB disk.It doesn't matter whether OSB or ESB.Also in the ESB board are melamine urea formaldehyde components as an adhesive, as can be read on the manufacturer's website.In the event of a fire, every OSB panel produces hydrocyanic acid gases.Not to mention isocyanates, TVOCs, etc.The question to the client, whether he wants it in or on the house or not, clarifies the further procedure.There are alternatives, for example with the GFM plate from Junker or other products, depending on the requirements.Of course, the following applies: the further inside, the higher the quality, but hazardous waste on the outer facade is perhaps not the goal of every builder.Dear Mr. Rößner The question is still there: What advice would you give a building contractor (architect) who would like to use OSB panels?Ultimately, the answer was: Ask the experts!Which experts should be “listened” to here?According to what criteria would "experts" select an OSB panel (currently which one?) with regard to health(!) harmlessness (the technical requirements, fire protection, etc. are of course covered by the building inspectorate approval), as long as it is approved by the manufacturers no credible, comprehensive emission test reports?Or would you, in view of the recurring cases of increased indoor air pollution from OSB panels, also advise against OSB panels in principle?Building Biology Advice Center IBN – Find out moreDear Mr. Rößner, what is your advice to a building contractor who would like to use OSB panels and does not know whether his building still meets the health requirements of the state building regulations?(Link “hammer of the week” mentioned in the report.)Building Biology Advice Center IBN – Find out moreDear Mr. Bernhardt If you choose a product for your building project, it must first meet the requirements of load-bearing capacity/serviceability and fire protection.This severely limits the choice of materials.Only then do I consider how biologically “clean” my product has to be.It makes a difference whether I use the product outdoors or visibly indoors.In addition, OSB is not just OSB.Seriously only OSB3 and OSB4 are traded.Anything below that, while cheap, is also cheap;will therefore not meet the admission requirements.And that brings me to our client, the mayor back in 2013, when construction began.I assume you know how such a building tender works: - the architect plans - the client says yes, that's what I want - the engineer materializes and now it comes: he describes a product and says this or something equivalent!– Client says it's too expensive for me, and instead of saying it costs so much, someone "fell over" and just didn't order "or equivalent", replanned or simply installed in a Saarland style.The architect is now unemployed.The mayor is playing dumb and the process has not yet been completed to this day.You asked what to recommend to the builder?Listen to the experts.Actually, security mechanisms such as standards and laws are there to protect the planners.In this case it all went haywire.I am happy to provide information on this extensive topic and send my best regards, Jens RößnerDear Mr. Rößler, I think the discussion on the Construction Products Act completely goes beyond the statements on the subject of the report, in which I only wanted to point out • that there have actually been health problems with the use of OSB boards and that there can still be, • that the architect, who has to comply with the health requirements of the MVV-TB, currently has no credible instrument with regard to OSB boards to be able to estimate future emissions when selecting a product - especially since he has to take into account the space load from all other products and their emissions and thus liable for the "overall result buildings".This problem is currently being dealt with intensively between the Institute for Construction Technology and building material manufacturers - but particularly intensively with OSB producers.http://www.eggbi.eu/aktuelles-literatur/#c1637 Why I went into particular detail about the EPDs at all (which are never used as a basis for "health" assessments for my advice to allergy sufferers, those who are sensitive to chemicals and particularly health-conscious builders ): In my numerous inquiries to OSB manufacturers with the request for proof of health safety, I have always been referred to the already mentioned and "criticized" "health statements" in their respective EPD - instead of "comprehensible" VOC test reports (including keyword credible "sampling") I received at best test reports on formaldehyde, PCP and lindane - the latter two pollutants should actually no longer be an issue today anyway.I therefore consider the further discussion on the Construction Products Act at this point to be insufficiently fair to the subject of the report - but I would not like to withdraw under any circumstances from such a discussion (preferably direct, but optimally moderated by the IBN due to the topicality)!There is also an opportunity to do this at an event organized by the Baden-Württemberg Chamber of Architects on May 15, 2019 in Stuttgart: https://www.akbw.de/fortbildung/ifbau/ifbau-seminar-suche/detail/seminar/nachhaltiger-holzbau- in-kommunen-19912.html Yours sincerely, Josef SpritzendorferThose who use their senses in construction cannot endorse and use products containing isocyanates.No hair-splitting will help.Only ever go to a construction site if isocyanate based screed primer and/or parquet adhesive are used and smell and experience eye and respiratory irritation.Please make the reference to OSB panels yourself.Kind regards, Gyan J. SchneiderBuilding Biology Advice Center IBN – Find out moreI'm sorry Mr. Spritzendorfer You can't just mix the instruments of the Construction Products Act, the very specific proofs on precisely defined topics, and then think that you can expect results.Statements about formaldehyde with regard to "health" can be quite different from those about "sustainability".And that's important to keep apart, because otherwise nonsense really comes out.The new BauPG has been in force since 2013 and with it the DoP declaration of performance for the products.There, the declared services are divided into the seven basic requirements for buildings.And Basic Requirement 3 (in full): hygiene, health and environmental protection, e.g.B. During the entire life cycle of the structure, neither the hygiene nor the health and safety of employees, residents and residents is endangered, etc. Is this a different topic than Basic Requirement 7 (in the full text): Sustainable use of natural resources, e.g.B. reuse or recycling of building materials and components after demolition is possible.7 There are three types of eco-labels.An EPD is one of the currentlythe strictest environmental declarations, which are not only important in the EU, but also internationally.However, in terms of content, it only describes the topics of basic requirement 7 and is not to be used for health issues.-wrong tool- If you want to consider the health aspect of a product, then you can and must only use the values ​​from basic requirement 3.These values ​​then come from the corresponding ETA or ETB, which in turn are secured by a corresponding evaluation system.There and only there you will find meaningful information on the subject of health.I admit that the topic of standards/BauPG/approvals and declarations is quite extensive.However, it still has to be interpreted correctly.And I'm happy to help with that. Kind regards Jens RößnerOSB panels are often used to quickly and inexpensively plank areas that are not statically relevant.Instead, for example, it would be very well possible to plan an installation level with clay building boards.Interior walls that have no load-bearing or stiffening effect can also be built with clay building boards.When using clay building boards, the advantages are very clear, the room climate is positively influenced by the clay.The new clay building boards are also fire protection tested A1, so they can also be used for apartment partitions.In terms of acoustics, the clay building boards are also significantly better than an OSB board in combination with gypsum fiber board due to the high bulk density.The area weight of a 22 mm clay building board is given as 32 kg.With the many advantages, it shouldn't really be an issue that the plates are more expensive, they are also more valuable.Building Biology Advice Center IBN – Find out moreI had a house built by the “new Kampa”, because I know a prefabricated house owner who sits in an OSB hut and has developed polyneuropathy, I insisted on pure plaster walls and got it.I also asked about clay building boards and the answer was “Yes, it may be the same or better, but we build more than 100 square meters of wall an hour and if a board crumbles, it sets us back tens of square meters before we can redo the component usually we build new components and scrap the blank.Then we know exactly what requirements we have to make on the forwarders so that our houses arrive in one piece and with how much "hepp" the crane can pull up so that the component lands in place without crumbling and we also know how much rain the components are exposed to during assembly deal with before problems arise.We buy everything from Knauff (gypsum fibreboard) and we just don't have any specific experience with other panel building materials or hemp insulation or whatever!But we see ourselves as a premium provider, come back in 10 years and you can order houses made of all conceivable materials.Great right?Dear Mr. Rössner, regarding your statement: "The declarations on the health assessment have no place in an EPS (?)" and your explanations.In the report, I did not use the term or the abbreviation EPS (I only know this as an abbreviation for expanded polystyrene) and made no reference to the Construction Products Act (BauPG).It is well known that "healthy living" is currently not sufficiently guaranteed with the general legal regulations alone.Rather, I am referring to “environmental product declarations” (EPDs) as they are created in Germany, primarily by IBU, using the example: OSB Swiss Krono: https://epd-online.com/Epd/PdfDownload/6029?stat =trueThese EPDS offer the opportunity to make health statements, which are also used by some manufacturers, very "greatly" under 2.12 Environment and health during use (page 3)...and the statements under 7. Evidence (page 7) on the emission behavior and thus on the health assessment can actually be expected:Here, however, the manufacturers of OSB boards do not provide any "really comprehensible" values ​​- in the specific case KRONO even with regard to VOCs the original statement "The VOC proof is optional with a shortened validity of the EPD (1 year)" - although this EPD according to the cover sheet from 2015 is “valid” until 2020.Sincerely, Josef SpritzendorferDamage cases that led to the demolition of the entire OSB planking, I could also contribute a few.A real alternative in terms of price, strength, smell and controlled pollutant values ​​is the ESB Plus from Elka.Ouch, the main thing is abbreviations.But one does not know the connections at all.The declarations about the health assessment also have no place in an EPS.Because according to BauPG, the health assessments belong to basic requirement 3 (hygiene, health and environmental protection) and the EPD to 7 (sustainable use of natural resources. I'm happy to help. Jens RößnerIn addition to measuring and weighing, you should perhaps concentrate more on seeing, feeling and smelling, then you would not buy such a material at all.The only tempting thing is the price.Comment rules: We look forward to your opinion, statement or additional information.Please do not place any advertising or questions here.If you have any questions, you can ask them directly to the authors - you can find their contact details in the author info box.Please stay constructive and polite!All comments (max. 3,000 characters) are checked by the editors and do not appear immediately.Your email address will not be published.Required fields are marked with *.Save my name, email and website in this browser for the next time I comment.Josef Spritzendorfer is a specialist journalist, guest lecturer, building materials expert and operator of the information portal "European Society for Healthy Building and Indoor Hygiene" (EGGBI)We would be happy to inform you regularly by e-mail about new contributions from building biology.The building biology magazine is an offer from the Institute for Building Biology + Sustainability IBN.Institute for Building Biology + Sustainability IBN Erlenaustraße 24, 83022 Rosenheim, GermanyWe are independent and neutral.Our focus is the further training and qualification of building biologists IBN.