Kaivac Inc. University Of Washington: ICM Spray-and-vacuum Water-only Test The University of Washington tests a variety of products as part of its commitment to Integrated Cleaning and Measurement™ (ICM) and does not endorse particular products. M Many custodial managers have already discovered the successful strategy of reducing cleaning chemical inventories and usage to an absolute minimum. This can cut costs while contributing positively to sustainability efforts. As an additional benefit, it may allow for maintaining or improving cleanliness levels through simplification and stan-dardization. But, what about taking the next, seem-ingly unthinkable step of removing chem-icals from the cleaning equation? This would obviously reduce the num-ber and amount of cleaning chemicals introduced into the environment. But, would effective cleaning still occur? A recent comparative beta test con-ducted at the University of Washington in Seattle suggests that, at least for certain applications, cleaning without chemicals may be as good if not better than clean-ing with them. One worker cleaned and wiped off faucets, sinks and counters with traditional tools, disinfected toilets with a correctly diluted product registered with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and mopped floors with a correctly diluted EPA-registered product and a microfiber wet mop in two rest-rooms: One men’s room and one women’s room located on the second and third floors of the Health Sciences Building. Another worker used a 12-gallon spray-and-vacuum machine from Kaivac filled with water but no chemicals to clean an identical men’s and women’s room on the same two floors. The procedure with the Kaivac machine included pressure-washing ver-tical and horizontal surfaces, wiping down fixtures, squeegeeing countertops and squeegeeing and vacuuming the floor. Spraying, agitating and vacuuming restroom surfaces using the Kaivac machine produced, on average, an 89 percent reduction in adenosine triphos-phate (ATP) in two restrooms tested, while the “microfiber-traditional” method utilizing an EPA-registered disinfectant produced a 56 percent reduction. Machine cleaning with just water pro-duced 58 percent better results than microfiber-traditional cleaning. In both cases where the machine was utilized, the ATP reading decreased to below 30; in two test sites, the count dropped to zero. Labor times were similar in this com-parison; though, in many cases, the spray-and-vacuum method has demon-strated significant labor reductions. The university found that spray-and-vacuum agitation presents a special advantage in the cleaning process. Pressurized plain water agitates soil, as does the motion of a squeegee. Immediate vacuuming of soil on the surfaces sampled in this study seems to represent the essential final step in achieving favorable cleaning results. Dissolved soil held in solution cannot resettle on surfaces if it is vacuumed immediately after agitation. CM Circle Product Information no. 167 This content was provided by Kaivac Inc. as part of a paid advertisement. For more information, please contact Kaivac directly at 1-800-287-1136 or www.kaivac.com. www.cmmonline.com 27
CMM – Archives Nov 2010: 27
