Hi There,

We are starting a new build shortly and are looking at building with Insulated Concrete Forms and would like to know if they emit toxins into the home?
I understand that they have flame retardant EPS and contains HBCD but does that get released?

Any info would help

Cheers

HBCD is used as a fire retardant in ICFs, but there is no evidence that it is at all harmful to humans or pets, despite much rhetoric to the contrary.

Better yet, as a homeowner, you will not even come into contact with it, as it is not released.

Here's a link to a white paper put out by the EPS Molders Association: http://www.epsmolders.org/PDF_FILES/HBCD_Fact_Sheet_final_web.pdf

I hope that helps.

From what i know, no they are not.....

But as someone who recently built an ICF home, your local inspector might think they are either

A : tOXIC
B : A fire hazard
C : Both

In my home, I was forced to drywall my entire basement because the local inspector said it was a fire hazard .... even though the foam wont really burn, it will melt before it actually catches fire.... Gave the county all kinds of info on burn rates, tried to explain to them that you are asking me to put something more flammable on top of the foam, unofficially he agreed, but because they didn't really know what this stuff was i had to drywall over it.

I've also heard some people tell me that other inspectors have said its quasi toxic and they had to put a vapor seal on top of it

Basically from all of my research it inst toxic, but be prepared to drywall or vapor seal it based on your local inspectors general lack of knowledge

I am  also looking to build an ICF home next year. 
One of the things to think about is that when we all first discovered the problems with asbestos coverings for pipes, it was common place to "encapsulate" them in the home.  I actually had a 1909 home with encapsulated pipes.  The problem comes (and came for us in 2001 when we sold) is that when you go to sell a home, buyers become very afraid of anything that requires disclosure. We had the reports in place to prove our encapsulation was effective and our sale went through. 
As of right now, HBCD is not like asbestos.  And in most states (we will be in WI) it is required that you cover the foam on the inside as they consider it flammable.
But if you read the August 2010 Action Plan (here is link) http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/existingchemicals/pubs/actionplans/hbcd.html
you will see the thought process that EPA has already begun.  If you look at page 7-9, EPA states its intent to consider placing HBCD under regulation (TSCA-see the EPA doc) on the grounds that it "may present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment".  That could make it more difficult in the future to sell a home. EPA and all the other studies I have read say that there is no alternative to HBCD for foam right now.  However that would not necessarily stop EPA from regulating it.  Just something to think about.
That being said, we will be building an ICF home.  We are just beginning to research builders in our area and will be discussing what wall coverings will go over the foam.  Or, we may try to find a builder who could do our first choice: ICF but with no foam on the inside.  That would solve every issue in my mind as no exposure would result into the environment since the foam will be completely covered on the exterior.

Posted By JPM1730 on 14 Mar 2011 12:54 AM
In my home, I was forced to drywall my entire basement because the local inspector said it was a fire hazard .... even though the foam wont really burn, it will melt before it actually catches fire.... Gave the county all kinds of info on burn rates, tried to explain to them that you are asking me to put something more flammable on top of the foam, unofficially he agreed, but because they didn't really know what this stuff was i had to drywall over it. 

Are you governed by the International Residential Code? If so, it has some very tight requirements for requiring fire resistant barrier over foam. It's almost impossible to not have to cover the foam with something.

www.greensciencepolicy.org/sites/default/files/Green%20Building%20HFR%20Insulation%20fact%20sheet%20November%202010.pdf

The testing for toxic release is done at ambient temperature--not at the in-service temperatures likely to happen in the real world.
EPS burns quite well once it gets started. I was in Las Vegas when the facade caught on fire at the Monti Carlo.
I agree it has a relatively high flash point but it sure makes a good fire full of black toxic smoke when it does catch fire.
Take a piece of EPS and hold it close to a lighter and see what happens.
If you want even more fun, put some into a solvent and observe how much will dissolve in such a small amount of solvent.

For all of you who will not look any deeper than your pre-conceived notions bio-accumulative means it does not get expelled from the body. It accumulates as long as you are exposed to it.
The testing is done at ambient--not in conditions that can be encountered in-service. The acceptable limits are set presuming periodic or non-continuous exposure.
Ask yourself what the accumulative risk is in a tightly sealed structure over the life of the structure. When something is bio-accumulative and it is 60% of your environment and you are exposed to it night and day for decades, it is not pertinent that the PPm for a 24 hour periodic exposure in a lab setting is below the acceptable limit. Add up the PPM of each of the elements of your built environment (curtains, rugs, furniture, formaldehyde based products, EPS, etc. etc. Add it all up and then tell me that the combination is totally safe if you always have a mechanical device bringing in fresh air.

I know that I am in an ICF forum but if someone is concerned about exposed foam, then why not encapsulate it inside the concrete like they do with EASI-Wall or Thermomass walls.  That way, you can have the benefits of the foam insulation and not have to worry about the code official or any other unknown factors.

For me the short answer is that EPS foam has adsorption of .03 to .1 It has a DE-sorption rate of zero Concrete is a capillary structure with macro and micro capillary tracts. It's in-service moisture content is influenced by it's environment and is NEVER totally dry--almost always at or above mean relative humidity for the environment it is in. If a saturated insulation is satisfactory and one believes it does not lower the insulative ability by having an elevated moisture content then I would say having the foam encased is at least better than than having it separated from the living environment only by a 1/2" thick 15 minute thermal barrier that has to have retained moisture to even achieve that paltry of a termal resistance value. (sheetrock) The rats and mice will find it harder to tunnel through the EPS behind the wallboard also--a problem with every ICF structure I built. Maybe they should put more toxins in the EPS to kill the mice?? (don't suggest it or some will think that is a good idea)

why not use the next generation of plaster that offers previously unavailable strength, durabilty and eas of installation. Installing PlasterMax will make walls fire rated, insect/rodent resistant and high abuse. See more info at www.TheGreenBuildingProductsStore.com look for PlasterMax~ the Green alternative to drywall over ICF.

Just for the record, an admixture such as Xypex or Krystol can be added to the concrete mix to control capillary action if one is concerned about the encased EPS absorbing moisture that might lower its insulation value.  Although we may be away from the original intent of this thread, I find the latest postings quite interesting.

As a master distributor for Xypex in a multi-state area in decades past as well as a proponent of the Capillary Crystalline Reactive technology on a worldwide stage as a free-lance consultant, I concur with you about the ability of products such as Xypex and Kryton's Krystol Internal Membrane (which I was a distributor for in our most northern, most western and most eastern state (Alaska) to mitigate the capillary action of portland cement based concrete(sometimes called rising damp) I no longer benefit directly from promoting their product so am not guilty of the shameless disregard for the rules of this forum exhibited by our friend from Gigacrete. I do not think we have deviated from the intent of the thread. I think it is time to take an objective look at the issue from all perspectives.

I have looked into it a little more and the company we have here in Australia use ICF s that are 100% flame retardant EPS. I have read that the forms only contain 0.7% of HBCD and are enclosed in the cells of the product and can't be released. We are still planning on covering the inside of the walls with plaster too. I have also heard of another product called 'Durisol' which works the same as the polystyrene forms but uses Cement bonded wood fibre. Not sure how good the insulation properties are.

Hi There,

Thanks for that, Plastermax product seems great, would anyone know if they supply to Australia?