Question 9

Encapsulation of damaged asbestos can be safer than removal.

Encapsulation is often considered a safer approach for managing damaged asbestos, as it involves sealing the material to prevent the release of fibers, rather than removing it entirely.

A) Encapsulation of damaged asbestos can be safer than removal.

This option is correct because encapsulation can effectively contain asbestos fibers, minimizing the risk of exposure. It is often preferred in situations where removal may disturb the asbestos more, potentially leading to greater health hazards.

B) Latex paint should be used to seal damaged sections of asbestos.

This option is incorrect. While sealing is a method of managing asbestos, latex paint is not a recommended material for this purpose. Specialized encapsulants are designed specifically to bind and seal asbestos fibers safely and effectively.

C) Most lenders will not provide mortgage funds to homes with asbestos.

This option is also incorrect. While some lenders may have concerns about asbestos, it is not universally true that they will refuse mortgage funds based solely on the presence of asbestos. Other factors, such as the condition and management of the asbestos, play a significant role.

D) It should be removed from houses and public buildings, regardless of its condition.

This statement is incorrect. Removal of asbestos is not always necessary or advisable, especially if it is in good condition and properly managed. Encapsulation can be a safer alternative, making removal unnecessary in many cases.

Conclusion

The correct answer, encapsulation, addresses the management of asbestos in a way that can mitigate risks without the dangers associated with removal. Options B, C, and D present misconceptions about the handling of asbestos, emphasizing the importance of informed and safe practices in asbestos management.