Due to the toxicity of copper compounds, we aimed to find an alternative through experimentation that is less toxic, has good protective properties, and does not leach out of the wood. We treated samples of Scots pine in three different ways. The samples were treated with a 0.5% suspension of copper carbonate, a 1% suspension of copper carbonate, a 0.5% solution of copper sulfate, a 1% solution of copper carbonate, a 0.5% solution of copper sulfate with additional impregnation using sodium carbonate, and a 1% solution of copper sulfate with additional impregnation using sodium carbonate. In the reaction between copper sulfate and sodium carbonate, a basic copper carbonate is formed, which is practically insoluble in water and is expected to have fungicidal properties. The samples were subjected to a leaching test according to the EN84 standard and a protective efficacy test according to the EN113 standard, using the fungi Coniophora puteana and Gloeophyllum trabeum. The leaching test results showed that the samples that underwent two-step impregnation lost significantly less copper during leaching compared to the samples treated only with copper sulfate. In the case of the samples treated with a copper carbonate suspension, the copper did not penetrate the wood, making this treatment ineffective. The EN113 test results showed that for Gloeophyllum trabeum, the best protection at equal copper concentrations was achieved with the two-step impregnation, followed by copper sulfate treatment, while the least effective was the copper carbonate suspension, due to poor penetration into the wood. For Coniophora puteana, the two-step impregnation was more effective only at a 1% copper concentration; at 0.5%, the protection was very poor. Treatment with copper sulfate was slightly more effective than the two-step impregnation, and the copper carbonate suspension was again the least effective.
|