Mandatory or not, the fume hood is useful for more than just  
countering toxic fumes.  The more that I consider the build up of  
airborne dust and dirt in our lab -- dust primarily caused by dry- 
bushing metal artifacts like iron nails for example -- I worry about  
long term exposure to the particulate matter.  From black lung to  
potter's rot, we all know that breathing dust and dirt over the long  
term is bad, whether or not the government requires this work done  
under a fume hood.  I worry much more about long term staff than I do  
about a student who does it for one semester during her or his studies.

We plan to install at least one large fume hood in our lab when we get  
to remodel.

Cheers,
Tim



On Apr 9, 2009, at 1:09 PM, geoff carver wrote:

> Regardless of experiences, anecdotes, etc., you should maybe check the
> health & safety laws to see whether one is mandatory... of if it's  
> easier to
> build one early rather than try to renovate later; among other  
> things, I
> tried to cast some epoxy resin in my kitchen once, and realized how  
> much I
> would have rather done that in the proper environment...
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> I am looking for experiences, anecdotes, opinions about the  
> necessity of
> a fume hood in an archaeology laboratory setup. The laboratory in
> question will have a general exhaust fan as well as Nederman  
> extraction
> trunks for targeted fume removal. A fume hood is also planned, but I'm
> beginning to think it may be redundant. Some conservation entailing  
> the
> use of chemicals will occur in the laboratory, but that is not the
> primary purpose/intended use of the space. (The lab supports a  
> resource
> management and research-based government archaeology program