[Problems & Solutions]

Q During the PCT Termite Summit in Houston, Texas, in November, I learned that the best way to carry out termite inspections is to first use an infrared camera device to locate areas of high moisture. Then, the AED-2000 is used in areas with high moisture to detect if there is any activity. Finally, Termatrac also can be used to pinpoint termites’ actual activities so that treatment can be applied. What are your thoughts on this inspection protocol?

A These detection devices — cameras, audio devices and ones that detect movement — provide the newest technologies in inspections for wood-destroying organisms and other pests.

Moisture detection is always an indication of moisture, but not necessarily a wood-destroying organism. But it is an indicator of some sort of "structural" problem, i.e., a roof or plumbing leak, or a termite infestation. Listening devices also have come a long way. These devices can detect termite activity (and ant activity as well since these pests make a lot of noise). As we perfect such devices, maybe they’ll detect other organisms. I imagine in the not-too-distant future that there will be digital tools that can detect sounds and indicate what organism is making the sound.

Termatrac (or microwave technology) detects movement of virtually anything in the walls (or passing behind the wall). There is also another piece of technology that detects CO2, an indication of termite activity. And don’t forget the dogs that detect termites.

All this technology leads us to a conclusion. That is, in my mind, we pinpointed something, opened the wall and now let’s see what it is. I believe as we gain more experience with these devices that we will be able to discover more infestations we now mark as inaccessible. Is this a good thing?

The use of these devices offers some food for thought since they indicate previously hidden situations. Technology changes our "visual" inspection — or does it? Could these be construed as devices that increase our "visual abilities"? Finally, these devices are being used by inspectors to determine how extensive problems are after visual evidences have been found. But they aren’t inexpensive and this may drive up inspection costs. They could certainly increase the professionalism of our services...if someone is willing to pay for us to identify a difficult problem.

The author is president of George Rambo Consulting Services, Central, S.C. Fax questions to him at 864/654-2447 or via e-mail at grambo@pctonline.com.