Star Trib: ‘More Than 40% of Minnesota Homes That Tested for Radon Had Elevated Levels’
“Finding elevated levels of radon is becoming less of a surprise, but it’s still generally a surprise. ‘Can’t see it, can’t smell it, can’t taste it.'”
–Pat Brennan, radon remediation contractor; “State is a Radon Hotbed” (Star Tribune 2/10/2013).
Not all my Buyer clients have heeded my advice, but for several years now I have been routinely recommending that Buyers purchasing a home test for radon as part of their home inspection.
That stance puts me in a distinct minority amongst Minnesota Realtors; anecdotally, I’d estimate fewer than 20% of my colleagues uniformly recommend a radon test.
At least, that was as of today.
Thanks to the front page article in today’s Star Tribune . . . I think that percentage just went up.
See also, “Testing for Radon: Cost-Benefit Analysis;” “Recommending a Radon Test (or Not).”
40% . . . or 25% to 33%?
The range I’ve been quoting prospective Buyers for the likelihood of finding radon — 25% to 33% — is actually a bit lower than the Star Trib’s 40%.
I think the difference is explained by two things: 1) there’s more radon in the southern part of Minnesota, outside the Twin Cities; and 2) radon tests tend to be done where nearby homes have already tested positive.
So, you could say that there’s some subtle self-selection operating.
