New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Better Home Insulation Needed to Ward Off Chemical Exposure

Alternatives to methylene diphenyl diisocyanate are more expensive but perhaps safer for your lungs and more

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Dear EarthTalk: The cold winter we’re having here in the Northeast has convinced me to finally beef up my home’s insulation, but I’ve heard that spray foam can off-gas noxious chemicals and pollute the indoor environment. Are there safer options? — Rose Donahue, Framingham, MA

Making your home more energy efficient is certainly good for the planet and will cut your heating/cooling bills, but you’re right to worry about chemical off-gassing. According to the non-profit Environmental Working Group (EWG), most common spray polyurethane foam insulation contains methylene diphenyl diisocyanate, or MDI, a synthetic chemical that has been linked to asthma, lung damage and even death.

Because of the chemical’s risks, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration has set the maximum legal limit for MDI exposure among workers who handle it and related chemicals at 0.02 parts per million in workplace air,” reports EWG. “However, independent contractors and the general public, including homeowners who take on DIY insulation projects, may not be aware of these federal regulations or the risks associated with MDI exposure.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it was studying whether to regulate, restrict or even ban MDI in consumer products. (MDI is also used in a variety of adhesives and coatings like Gorilla Glue.) “Four years later, the agency has yet to take real action to protect ordinary people who go to their local hardware store and pick up a product that contains MDI,” adds EWG.

There is hope from the West, though, as the state of California has made finding safer alternatives to MDI a priority in its Safer Consumer Products program, which requires manufacturers to look for greener, healthier alternatives. Time will tell if this new initiative in California will move manufacturers there and elsewhere away from MDI. Meanwhile, EWG wants the federal government to step up on the issue and restrict or ban MDI insulation across the country.

Homeowners willing to spend a little extra do have some safer alternatives to polyurethane spray foam at their disposal. Soybean-based spray foam doesn’t rely on MDI or any other synthetic chemicals but has a similar R-value (measuring the strength of the insulation in blocking air) as conventional spray foam. Leading soy-foam manufacturers include Biobased and Demilec. Castor oil-based Icynene is another chemical-free spray foam alternative great for green-minded home renovators.

Cotton denim batting—typically made from recycled scraps from denim factories—is another healthy alternative, but can’t be sprayed in and costs almost twice as much in material costs as spray foam. Sheep’s wool insulation is another effective choice, but also can’t be sprayed in and costs significantly more than foam. These and other greener insulation options are available at mainstream and specialty home improvement stores, and also online via vendors including Green Depot, Green Home Solutions and Green Building Supply.

CONTACTS: Environmental Working Group,

www.ewg.org; Biobased, biobased.rhinolinings.com; Demilec, www.demilecusa.com; Icynene, www.icynene.com; Green Depot, www.greendepot.com; Green Home Solutions, www.ghsproducts.com; Green Building Supply, www.greenbuildingsupply.com.

EarthTalk® is produced by Doug Moss & Roddy Scheer and is a registered trademark of Earth Action Network Inc. View past columns at: www.earthtalk.org. Or e-mail us your question: earthtalk@emagazine.com.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe