Talk:Wood preservation

message: I had some work done on a deck today, and voiced concern about the green strips
running through the wood and was told only that they won't sell that to you any more.
Rblythe1 14:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Likely referring to Wolmanite-CX 8/10 treatment, I'd say it's the most common way to make treated pine for outdoor use in Europe today, though I have no figures on that Raymond Holmoey (talk) 17:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are there any other green tinted pressure treated woods than CCA ? 

message: Daibhre 11:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Likely referring to Wolmanite-CX 8/10 treatment, I'd say it's the most common way to make treated pine for outdoor use in Europe today, though I have no figures on that Raymond Holmoey (talk) 17:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's "Wolmanized" lumber? My dad always called the green stuff that, but I don't see the term here. 

message: asked 203.164.150.59.
A sawmill is a facility where logs are cut into boards. njh 22:45, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  what does a sawmill do? 

message: This article includes a biblical reference to Noah applying pitch to the ark. I wouldn't consider this wood treatment. It's my understanding that pitch waterproofs a boat by filling cracks between wood, but the pitch isn't applied to the entire surface of the lumber and is not there to preserve the wood, so much as to preserve the buoyancy of the boat. If no one objects on this talk page in the next 2 or 3 weeks, I'm going to delete the reference. --Osbojos 05:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pitch can be/was used do deter seaclamps/shells and other water dwelling species. --Lumber Jack second account 18:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pitch=Treatment? 

message: From the "Chromated copper arsenate (CCA)" section:
::However some consumer outlets such as Home Depot were still reported to be selling CCA lumber long after the ban went into effect.
This should probably be cited; I've deleted it in the meantime.
The words common, modern, generally or typical are indefinite.  These words are all present in the “LOSP”-posting. Indefinite terms should have no place in an Encyclopedia.  That is why I will edit this posting.  Hopefully future anonymous authors make serious Posting that are balanced and don’t just try to sell a product. 
--Lumber Jack second account 00:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited reference 

message: All tiles in teak wood, unfinished, sanded, FEQ, KD 10-12%.
I dont know what is FEQ, anyone could be explain??
:Niether do I
--Lumber Jack 16:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FEQ (First European Quality) is a common wood industry acronym for top quality wood. Googling the phrase +"first european quality" -"life survey" will elicit numerous references. JimScott (talk) 04:22, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  FEQ 

message: Hi RickBeton,
I find it great that you've added some usefull information to the article, however I disagree some what with the placement of it.
The Pressure treatment described under Tanalisation fits that of the Fluctuation Pressure Process, and therefore I feel it is not a seperate process.
Chemical Preservatives fits that of Water borne / Chromat copper arsenate (CCA)
I think we should put the term Tanalisation under Chromat copper arsenate (CCA)
High pressure sap displacement is a mechanised version of the Boucherie Process, and I feel it should therefore be a sub catogory of that process. 
"a trade mark of Hicksons Ltd", I'm sure that Tanalisation is a "trademark" of Hicksons Ltd. but it Hicksons Ltd. is not the only company to do so, therefor I think we should take thier name out of the article.
--Lumber Jack 16:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tanalisation

message: About 80% down the page is what appears to be an orphan header:
פעס====Osmosis process====
And whatever are the first three characters?  Hebrew?  Paulburnett (talk) 04:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Osmosis process 

message: My father use to work for a compeny where thy treated there wooden doors with normal car oil.
Is there some one that can tel me why cant i do it with my wooden deck.
THANX
Jan  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.17.141.233 (talk) 08:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like it would make your deck flammable. I've seen creosoted railroad tie fires and they can burn for quite a while. It isn't a large fire (flame-wise) but goes and goes and goes ... and in the end nothing left but ash. As far as I know, non-latex modern deck stains and such are flammable right out of the can but lose that aspect as the flammable carrier evaporates as the stain dries. JimScott (talk) 15:51, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wood treated with car oil 

message: What is AC2 treated lumber? Can this info be added to the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.6.126.209 (talk) 13:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is AC2 treated lumber? 

message: Maybe someone could research proper hardware options for use with various treated woods. JimScott (talk) 15:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  hardware options 

message: I read somewhere that the products sold as Tung Oil are not always Tung Oil.  Some are petroleum distillates that are labeled Tung Oil for marketing purposes.  Can anyone address this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Longinus876 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tung Oil? 

message: The paragraph about Neem seed oil is in the "marketing" section, whereas it should be in the "natural preservatives" section. DWorley (talk) 22:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neem seed oil misplaced 

message: people should be reminding (or instructed) of this.  when "pressure treated" wood floors are weathered on top they are often nice on the underside, and simply need to be turned over - not treated with $200 paint job :)
Disagree, wood exposed to elements such as a deck should always be installed with the curve of the grain shedding water rather than retaining it. By flipping the wood, if initially installed correctly, will cause the boards to no longer shed water but collect it, causing warping, swelling, cracking, and promoting fungal decay. Additionally, reapplication of a water repellent or sealer will take significantly less man hours, justifying the small cost of the product. 
76.79.12.235 (talk) 23:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  wood turning 

message: There is not a section for copper naphthenate, even though copper naphthenate has been used effectively as a wood preservative for over 100 years. With many railroad ties, fence posts, and utility poles pressure treated with copper naphthenate each year in North America it seems like a huge oversight especially when neem seed and tung oil get mentioned. AWPA recently released a paper with the results of a 60 year field test on the efficacy of copper naphtenate. Additionally, copper naphthenate (2% copper as metal) is one of the select non-restricted use labeled preservatives approved for field treating end-cuts, holes, and abrasions of pressure treated wood in AWPA M4 standard [Section 7.1.1] (which is included in it's entirety in both the International Building Codes [IBC 2303.1.8] and International Residential Codes [IRC R319.1.1]).
Copper naphthenate is also required as an end treatment by the limited warranties of many wood products pressure treated with micronized copper.
The National Park service has also approved copper naphthenate as a substitute for pentachlorophenol, creosote and inorganic arsenicals. Beekeepers for many years have treated beehives with copper naphthenate (while the EPA has prohibited the practice in the United States in an attempt to combat colony collapse disorder, the practice is still widespread in places such as New Zealand and Australia).
For these reasons a section on copper naphthenate should be added to Wood Preservation.
76.79.12.235 (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  There should be a section on copper naphthenate 

message: In the Hazards section: "... industrial wood preservation operations are notifiable industrial activities ..."
I suspect this means that some authority must be notified if you are running a wood preservation operation, but if you already have a license, what's the point? There are notifiable diseases that doctors must report to health central, and notifiable crimes that must be reported to copper central, but notifiable industrial activities? I couldn't find anything. Pergelator 50.43.36.155 (talk) 12:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notifiable? 

message: The ALSC reference toward the end of the AWPA section is intentionally misleading.
directly from ALSC's website reads:"In addition to the lumber accreditation program, the ALSC also administers accreditation programs for the quality marking of treated lumber produced under standards written and maintained by the American Wood Protection Association (AWPA)" -- http://www.alsc.org/geninfo_summary_mod.htm
This is completely different from as currently reads in the aricle: "Wood preservative systems produced under the AWPA standards system for the residential market are required to be inspected under the stringent American Lumber Standards Committee (ALSC) third party inspection system in order to assure compliance with AWPA standards."
I suggest that the ALSC mention in the AWPA be removed. If others feel that ALSC needs mentioning (keep in mind it is merely a third-party testing group and not standard setting) then it should have it's own section. If that is done however it then becomes necessary and incumbent to include testing bodies who actually create standards regarding wood preservation systems such as ICC-ES as well.
In my humble opinion ICC-ES deserves mention long before ALSC since preservation systems such as [] micronized coppers which could never pass the stringent requirements set forth by AWPA use ICC-ES reports to circumvent AWPA standards and be permitted for use under IBC/IRC.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.12.235 (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALSC reference in AWPA section is intentionally misleading, suggest that it be removed 

message: This section seems to be very confused. Assuming that 'mud treatment' means the various wattle and daub based techniques used around the world it is a very effective way of weatherproofing and prolonging the life of a timber structure. There are wattle and daub walls in the UK that are hundreds of years old and intact in a a notoriously damp environment. 'Wet' mud is not preserving wood by keeping it wet - mud coverings for buildings all rely on the mud drying out. The clay content is important for strength although dung can be used to help keep it together and things like horsehair can be added as a reinforcement.Stub Mandrel (talk) 10:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Mud Treatment

message: I mentioned on the "tar" and  " creosote" talk pages that I wanted to have the authors of those articles (or someone competent)address the issues about the lack of effectiveness of coal tar on the preservation or waterproofing of wood raised in this article (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-tar-and-its-products-as-preser/?redirect=1). None of those concerns appear in either Wikipedia article, and I don't know if they are spurious (, because the scientific american article is a little confusing with a lot of typo-graphical errors) or not.  I asked because I was curious about the ability of tar, in both its cruder and commercially available forms, to prevent rust on iron nails, and wondered if they would inadvertently have a severe impact on the wood the nail was in.
     However, the primary reason I  ended up here is that I cannot find any detailed information about the methods and species (such as old growth cypress found in the region in which I live) used to address rotting, such as whether rot-resistant tree species were even commonly used and what was the typical time between and methods of repairs for whatever was commonly used, before the use of industrialized chemicals, such as in colonial times.  Nearly everyone on wikipedia (and the internet) seem to be obsessed with industrialized chemistry or processes , which have no resemblance to the raw materials or methods accomplish-able by human motion and hand tools.  Yet, I can find almost no information about the responses to the effects of moisture on wood in earlier times.Amoss1985 (talk) 21:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rot-Resistance Prior To Common Reliance On Industrialized Chemicals 

message: I note the article doesn't include mention of pine tar, which has a long history of use as a wood preservative, especially on boars. I don't know much about pine tar, but it'd be good to have it included in this article. LittleDwangs (talk) 01:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pine tar 

message: oil based /linseed oil subsections last sentence goes like this: "There is an ongoing promotional campaign in Australia for this type of treatment. " - which is highly problematic because reading it now or a hundered years later leaves the reader of the encyclopedia clueless of when the given statement was added to the article and what relevance it has at the time of reading the article. propose to delete it/or mark with a citation needed tag as the citation would hopefully put it into a perspective regarding the actual timing of the observation of the ongoing campaign.
92.221.117.18 (talk) 22:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  time of statement unspecified