<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pure Sulfur May Be Culprit in Chinese Drywall Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ebuild.com/wallboard-paneling-tile-ceilings/pure-sulfur-culprit-chinese-drywall-problem/20091118/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ebuild.com/wallboard-paneling-tile-ceilings/pure-sulfur-culprit-chinese-drywall-problem/20091118/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Nov 2011 14:12:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Odle</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ebuild.com/wallboard-paneling-tile-ceilings/pure-sulfur-culprit-chinese-drywall-problem/20091118/comment-page-1/#comment-5042</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Odle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 19:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ebuild.com/?p=441#comment-5042</guid>
		<description>First, it is plausible that multiple mechanisms could be in play depending on individual circumstances. Another mechanism that should be considered is the reaction of reactive metal sulfides with moisture, especially slightly acidic moisture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, it is plausible that multiple mechanisms could be in play depending on individual circumstances. Another mechanism that should be considered is the reaction of reactive metal sulfides with moisture, especially slightly acidic moisture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Webster</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ebuild.com/wallboard-paneling-tile-ceilings/pure-sulfur-culprit-chinese-drywall-problem/20091118/comment-page-1/#comment-1026</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Webster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ebuild.com/?p=441#comment-1026</guid>
		<description>The belief that the elemental sulfur (Orthorhombic cyclooctasulfur) found in greater amounts in contaminated drywall is the source of observed sulfide gases is implausible and cannot be demonstrated scientifically.  Yes, there is more elemental sulfur in contaminated drywall, but there is another, far more plausible, explanation its appearance and the source of noxious sulfide gases.

One peer-reviewed analysis and massive high quality field sampling and analysis by two different companies have both confirmed that sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB) are present in 100% of contaminated drywall samples and do not exist in uncontaminated drywall.

Several attempts to discredit these findings have been shown to be laced with errors, misrepresentations, and improper protocols and are simply not credible.  This includes the most recent report from a CPSC contractor (March 2010) that was cited with the posting of CPSC&#039;s &quot;unapproved&quot; interim protocol guidance, itself without scientific foundation.

Every attempt to produce an explanation for how elemental sulfur becomes sulfide gases in the prodigious amounts observed has been found to be implausible in the environments of homes with contaminated drywall.  If one attempts to calculate the amount of sulfur in the year after year high concentrations of sulfide gases that continue to be emitted from the drywall, the calculation will reveal an amount larger than the elemental sulfur can supply!  And the elemental sulfur isn&#039;t being depleted!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The belief that the elemental sulfur (Orthorhombic cyclooctasulfur) found in greater amounts in contaminated drywall is the source of observed sulfide gases is implausible and cannot be demonstrated scientifically.  Yes, there is more elemental sulfur in contaminated drywall, but there is another, far more plausible, explanation its appearance and the source of noxious sulfide gases.</p>
<p>One peer-reviewed analysis and massive high quality field sampling and analysis by two different companies have both confirmed that sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB) are present in 100% of contaminated drywall samples and do not exist in uncontaminated drywall.</p>
<p>Several attempts to discredit these findings have been shown to be laced with errors, misrepresentations, and improper protocols and are simply not credible.  This includes the most recent report from a CPSC contractor (March 2010) that was cited with the posting of CPSC&#8217;s &#8220;unapproved&#8221; interim protocol guidance, itself without scientific foundation.</p>
<p>Every attempt to produce an explanation for how elemental sulfur becomes sulfide gases in the prodigious amounts observed has been found to be implausible in the environments of homes with contaminated drywall.  If one attempts to calculate the amount of sulfur in the year after year high concentrations of sulfide gases that continue to be emitted from the drywall, the calculation will reveal an amount larger than the elemental sulfur can supply!  And the elemental sulfur isn&#8217;t being depleted!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

