Use of Eco insulation...not advised

Not necessarily these days, although pyrethroid insecticide, or permethrin are the usual names for the synthetic version. But bearing in mind the article was written by a journalist, I wouldn't expect any better.

I can see asbestos coming back into fashion.

Owain

Anyone fancy a straw-bale house with or without vermin? post Grenvil

I doubt it. Glass and rock wool would have to be banned first.

Of course there are some who claim there are forms of asbestos that are safer than some currently used forms of silica.

Except a case of criminal negligence could be successful against the directors if there was evidence where the wool wasn't treated.

I would also be equally concerned over the combustibility aspect.

But I do notice that Grand Designs is back next Wednesday ...

So why was this not treated in some way to kill pests. It seems to be a rater obvious thing to do with a substance that insects can eat. Brian

Because chemicals that kill insects aren't environmentally friendly. Insects are part of the environment too.

They should be grateful it's only moths and not fleas.

Owain

This is not so obvious - on the face of it, sheep's wool is a good idea

- similar U values to glass wool, less health hazards, actually "green".

So is the moth problem unavoidable, or is it down to poor treatment of the wool?

Watched Grand Designs plastering mud on to straw bales and wondered if anyone told them that farmers stash rat/mouse bait in bale stacks for less than 12 months storage.

And some of the chemicals that are more environmentally friendly are only effective for 10s of days. The insulation may have been treated before installation but an infestation months/years later maybe cannot be treated effectively without completely saturating the insulation which may be impossible with it in situ.

All companies have to have insurance and it usually also covers claims due to their negligence. The insurance company would remain liable even after the company has folded.

SteveW

Not usually; the insurer insures the company against its liabilities. No company, no liability.

Regulated professionals (eg surveyors) are sometimes required to have run-on insurance to cover them against claims arising after they've stopped practicing.

Owain

Doused in DDT it would presumably have been fine.

Its rare for a director to be liable with the exception of some professions. I doubt that is the case here, but nevertheless if the director knowingly sold the product without the claimed treatment then fraud has taken place.

Most organics sublime, or degrade, to a degree over time, and I'm wondering if that is also the case for these insecticides.

I've never understood the liability of asbestos company insurers for the defunct companies' actions half a century later, but it was certainly the exception rather than the rule. Do you know how that worked?

Traditional guarantee period for woodworm treatment is 20 years. I think they use Permethrin.

I don't, but it may be that the 'defunct' companies were actually bought by newer companies as going concerns with the new company taking on the assets *and liabilities* of the older ones.

Also, many asbestos claims will have been by former employees for injury which occurred during the period of insured cover, rather than for product failure after the period of insured cover.

Owain

And it's essentially a waste product.