The difference to other methods and algae elimination from facades:

 

Surface foam technique on the basis of peracetic acid:
Affected walls and surfaces are covered with foam with the spray/foam technique, and this process is repeated several times. In that, it is to be achieved that, due to the foam surfactants used, the active agents hydrogen and peracetic acid penetrate into the top-most wall layer, and thus bleaching in combination with disinfection is achieved. Although it is stated for this method, that there is a reaction and extraction of the top-most organic materials from the wall surface treated, a degree of dryness must be achieved with this process, so that the walls can be subsequently sucked off with industrial suction units. This mechanical surface process directly on the wall sections treated must then be additionally secured with HEPA filter systems.


Advantages:
The surfaces treated can be visualized with the foam technique


Disadvantages:
Residues of acetic acid in combination with a strong change in the pH value remain on the wall
No removal of the mycelium
Mechanical processing of the surfaces required
Long odor impairment of the rooms treated – vinegar odor!
Allergic potential remains in the wall
Use only possible on very dry walls
Since this is a BIOCIDAL method, hazardous substances permanently remain in the top-most wall layers.
With the retention of acetic acid, after disinfection, there is an additional food supply for newly approaching mold!!

 


 

 

Nebulization method:

The affected room is treated with a disinfectant in the dry nebulization method. The disinfectants used are diluted such that they can be applied in the interiors without any concerns. Quite often, incense sticks are used in order to visualize the air circulation. Since this method only has an inactivating effect on the surface, in the professional area, mechanical processing (e.g. microfiber cloths) of the visually affected wall sections is performed in order to be able to add a mold removal success.

 

Advantages:
Rooms can be used again very quickly

 

Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold!
No removal of the mycelium!
Only short-term disinfecting effect of the room air!
Not applicable outdoors
Mechanical processing of the surfaces required
Use of hazardous substances, since this is a BIOCIDAL method!


 

 

 

Painting method – Alkalization:

The wall surfaces infested with mold are either pre-treated with lye and subsequently painted over with wall paint, or the paint is directly added to the lye. The pH values on the treated wall are always higher than pH 10 and thus inhibit the growth of mold. The growth of mold is visually perceived again in a very delayed manner only.

 

Advantages:
A positive visual effect very quickly


Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold!
No removal of the mycelium!
Allergic or pathogenic potential, resp., remains in the masonry
Hazardous substances permanently remain on the wall surfaces – just not visible!!


 

 “Do it yourself” method:

For do-it-yourselfers, there are a multitude of mold removal agents on offer. It is very easy to buy a small bottle and to then spray the section infested with mold with it. These methods are mostly two-stage processes, since mold stabilization agents are offered as well. Since these biocides are freely available and are thus used in an uncontrolled manner, these products are offered in highly diluted application solutions.

 

Advantages:
Quick execution


Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold!
No removal of the mycelium!
Allergic or pathogenic potential, resp., remains in the masonry
Biocides remain permanently on the wall surfaces
No disinfection of the air


 

 

 

“Eco” method:
Since many people are highly skeptical, mostly unjustified, towards chemicals, there are quite a few attempts to tackle the mold problem with household remedies. Here, a multitude of supposedly harmless substances are used. These are, among others, alcohol, vinegar, soda, dishwashing liquid, etc. Their use is combined with a lot of scrubbing mechanics (brushing, scrubbing, wiping).

 

Advantages:
Execution single-handedly
Positive visual result after the treatment


Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold!
No removal of the mycelium!
Allergic or pathogenic, resp., potential remains in the masonry
Chemicals (soda, dishwashing liquid) remain permanently on the wall surfaces
No disinfection of the air
Mechanical destruction of the surface treated
Using vinegar, the food supply for mold is increased further!

 


 

 

 

Milling method:
With plastered walls, the mortar layer can be removed after mold infestation. Using this method, mold and mold mycelium are removed from the wall. Since the machine application is considerable, this work can only be performed by experienced companies.

Advantages:
Removal of the mold’s mycelium

Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold
Due to the high dust pollution, an allergic and pathogenic potential remains in the form of dust
Major structural renovation measures required subsequently
Affected rooms cannot be used for long periods
Application exclusively on plastered masonry
High pollution of the room air
High costs

 


 

 

 

Painting method in combination with disinfectant:
In order to achieve visual results on painted surfaces in a quick and cost-effective manner, for this method, a disinfectant is directly added to the wall paint. The surface inactivation of the existing wall mold is already taking place within a few minutes after the treatment.

 

Advantages:
Quick positive visual results
Rooms can be used again quickly


Disadvantages:
No killing off of wall mold!
No removal of the mycelium!
The entire allergic and pathogenic potential remains in the masonry
High pollution due to the retention of biocides in the top-most paint layer
Application exclusively on painted surfaces


 

 

Mold removal/algae elimination of insulating façades – comparative methods!

        

Façades (Styrofoam-insulated with plastic-based color plaster) combine many problematic characteristics. With high solar irradiation, plastered (brick) walls or monolithic building structures absorb the temperature in the masonry. Therefore, with these walls, there is “only” limited surface heating. In the cool of the night, the wall emits this thermal energy to the environment again. Therefore, there is no strong cooling of the wall surface. These regulating circumstances can also be noticed in winter. Therefore, there is no or only very minimal, resp., undercutting of the dew point in the masonry and the dew/frost point is permanently located in the outer wall area.
With external insulation, the wall’s volume cannot undertake this regulation anymore, since due to the insulation, thermal energy cannot penetrate into the masonry anymore. Therefore, it can be noticed that upon solar irradiation, the insulated surfaces become incredibly hot and that upon cooling, the surface immediately cools off as well. This can be perfectly detected with thermal imaging cameras, because at cold outside temperatures, the façade surfaces are always cold – whereas with uninsulated buildings, the absorbed thermal energy is emitted again, and thus the façades are always warmer than their surroundings.
It is always noticed, that after an outer shell of a building has been insulated, the moisture in the interiors increases, the interior climate highly deteriorates, and the tendency to form algae/mold is boosted by that. The general moisture in the masonry increases, since “drying off” can now only take place via the interiors. Once the external insulation has been undertaken, there must be a completely different ventilation and living behavior, since otherwise the growth of mold and algae is always promoted.
Due to the missing temperature-balancing effect, the plastic plaster on Styrofoam and grid is subject to high temperature fluctuations, which after a short time already (due to the omission of plasticizers) result in the formation of micro-cracks. These micro-cracks enable continuous penetration of moisture, microorganisms and organic particles (e.g. pollen, dust, etc.), which build up a breeding ground in the plaster. This breeding ground is used as food by highly adapted microorganisms (green/red algae), which after only a few years represent a visual problem.

 

 

Metabolism and life of these microorganisms have a far-reaching destructive effect on façades, durability and bonding between the individual layers. In many cases, there can be penetration of the microorganisms through joints and dowel holes, so that algae growth can be detected even right into the living space. The mutual presence of mold (inside) and algae (outside) additionally promotes the mutual growth and thus the general acceleration of the destruction of the building’s substance. This represents a problem for solid constructions – for insulated timber frame/wooden buildings, this can even result in static problems due to the promoted growth of wood-destroying dry rot.


Thus, with pigments in joints and dowel holes visible from the outside, penetration right into the building structure can always be assumed.
Comprehensive rehabilitation of a building affected in this manner would then only be possible by taking off the external insulation. In case of algae growth over larger sections, complete extraction of the embedded microorganisms and dirt particles is the only possible way of rehabilitation.


- Painting over (paintwork) would cover the problems with paint and only represent a temporary visual measure. After a short time already, the surface would form micro-cracks again and continue promoting the growth of the still embedded colonies.


- Treatment with biocides would result in surface disinfection = killing off of microorganisms. If, in addition, bleaching agents (e.g. chlorine) are used, here, too, positive visual effects are achieved, which, however, do not address the core problem in the façade at all. The embedded particles and the mycelia are completely spared by such measures, and after a short “rest period” already, the microorganisms find dead organic material of their own kind and use this as a reliable nutrient for even faster growth.


- Mechanical methods (e.g. high-pressure cleaning) use the effectiveness of the impacting mechanic action for bodily removal of undesired material and pigments. The particles and parts of the microorganisms stated above are partially slung away from the plaster layer, but partially also worked even further into deeper plaster layers. Such methods have the additional disadvantage of the high mechanical stress on a plastic material already pre-damaged by omitting the plasticizers. Large quantities of moisture are pressed into the façade and manufacturer’s guarantees of the façade companies (which are effective up to 30 years!!) become void.


- When combining chemical pre-treatment with mechanical cleaning processes, upon using bleaching or surfactant, resp., pretreatment, the subsequent mechanical effects are enhanced. The visual results are better, however, the degree of damaging of the entire building substance is also several times higher.


How can the alleged “sustainability” be ensured for such “treatments”?


Since façades are always located in the outside area, there is inevitable contact of all surfaces with the outside air. The outside air carries a considerable number of microorganisms and particles, so that there is immediate occupancy. Performing microbiological smear tests at external facades, microbiology can be detected at any time – thus, no “guarantee” for sterility can be given.
Thus, the sustainability can only be given via visual parameters. Visual limitations due to microbial activities always result from colony formation, which becomes perceivable to the human eye with the increasing dimension. Thus, the task can only be interference with the colony formation on façades. This is either undertaken by germ-reducing blocking coatings or by massive application of aggressive chemicals. In all cases, the visually perceivable colony/pigment formation can be prevented over a certain period of time, however, the actual problem of algae formation in/on insulating façade plasters has been enhanced. The moisture introduced into the façade can only exit towards the inside and subsequently represents an increased risk for mold growth. Such pseudo-guarantees are normally given up to max. 5 years, but these “guarantee” periods represent a very brief period for façades at building structures, because a solid use of a building should at least be ensured for one or several generations.

The patented BMB method is not a painting over, high-pressure, cleaning or disinfection method, but a mold/algae removal method. Any organic particles and any microbiology, incl. pigments, are completely extracted from the insulating plaster without introducing moisture and mechanical forces. Following completion of the process, the patented BMB method ensures the complete extraction of algae and mold and any organic particles. There is no change in the pH value, so that the plaster material applied cannot be damaged. The adhesive bonds (plaster/mesh/insulating material/façade) are not damaged, and thus the unlimited durability can be ensured. The micro-pores, which represent the problematic access gates into the façade, are not closed subsequently, but passivated and slightly constricted by the patented BMB method. Thus, subsequently, it can be ensured that new infestations find fewer points of attack due to the altered surface texture. Due to the enlarged surface at the façade’s surface, surface drying after rain and snow is faster, and colony formation is thus impeded.
The patented BMB method assures the sustainability of results after mold/algae removal on façades due to the complete removal of the triggering microorganisms. The building’s substance is not affected at any time. Visual “guaranties” for certain periods of time of non-assessable parameters are not given by BMB Gebäudehygiene GmbH in connection with reputable façade work.

MOLD HOTLINE: +43 (0)660 262 0262

 




Unbenanntes Dokument Untitled Document