What is mass deacidification in the context of library and information science?

Mass deacidification is a measure used in library and information science to combat the degradation of paper in old books, often referred to as 'slow fires.' Its primary goal is to increase the pH of acidic paper, thereby neutralizing existing acid and preventing further decay.

What problem does mass deacidification aim to address?

Mass deacidification aims to address the degradation of paper in old books, a phenomenon known as 'slow fires,' which causes paper to yellow and become brittle over time due to its acidic nature. This process is intended for objects on acidic paper that would otherwise be lost.

Why do books made after the 1850s often contain acidic paper?

Books made after the 1850s often contain acidic paper because its production methods were cheaper and simpler compared to acid-free paper. This widespread use of acidic paper led to a large body of books susceptible to degradation.

How does acidic paper degrade over time?

Acidic paper degrades over time by yellowing and becoming brittle, especially when exposed to environmental factors such as light, air pollution, or high relative humidity. This degradation is a result of chemical reactions that break down the paper fibers.

What is the chemical mechanism by which mass deacidification works?

Mass deacidification works by depositing an alkaline agent into the paper. This agent neutralizes the existing acid within the paper and establishes an alkaline reserve, which helps to prevent further decay and maintain the paper's structural integrity.

When was mass deacidification developed, and what other preservation methods emerged around the same time?

Mass deacidification was developed during the early and mid-20th century. Alongside it, other preservation methods such as microfilm and lamination were also developed as responses to the chemical degradation of paper.

What chemical process causes paper fibers to break down and become brittle?

The chemical process that causes paper fibers to break down and become brittle is hydrolysis. This process breaks the chemical bonds within the cellulose fibers that constitute paper, leading to a loss of its structure and strength.

How do environmental pollutants contribute to paper degradation?

Environmental pollutants contribute to paper degradation by reacting with the paper to form acids. These acids then promote oxidation, which in turn creates more acid as a by-product, leading to a positive feedback loop of autocatalytic destruction where the paper essentially destroys itself.

What organization was formed in 1960 in response to concerns about research library materials preservation?

In response to the concerns about the rapid decay of research library materials, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) formed a Standing Committee on the Preservation of Research Library Materials in 1960.

What type of deacidification process did William J. Barrow invent?

William J. Barrow invented an aqueous process for deacidification. This method involved neutralizing acid in paper while simultaneously depositing an alkaline buffer to slow down the rate of decay.

Besides Barrow's aqueous method, what other types of deacidification methods have been researched?

In addition to Barrow's original aqueous method, both non-aqueous methods, which employ organic solvents, and vaporous methods, such as the Library of Congress' DEZ (diethyl zinc) treatment, have been researched. These alternative approaches aimed to reduce the time, labor, and cost requirements of deacidification.

Describe the theoretical application of the diethylzinc (DEZ) technique for mass deacidification.

The theoretical application of the diethylzinc (DEZ) technique involved placing books in an evacuated chamber and then introducing diethylzinc. The expectation was that the diethylzinc would react with acidic residues in the paper, leaving behind an alkaline residue that would protect the paper from further degradation.

What were the practical challenges encountered with the diethylzinc (DEZ) process?

In practice, the diethylzinc (DEZ) process faced several challenges, including accelerated paper degradation caused by the heating required to remove trace water, chemical reactions between DEZ and other book components like glues and bindings that caused further damage, and the production of unpleasant aromas.

What incident occurred in 1986 at the NASA pilot plant for DEZ mass deacidification?

In 1986, it was discovered that diethylzinc (DEZ) had not been properly removed in one of the deacidification runs at the NASA pilot plant, leading to it pooling in the chamber and possibly within the plumbing. Since DEZ is violently flammable when exposed to oxygen or water vapor, the vacuum chamber could not be opened. Explosives were eventually used to rupture the suspect plumbing, confirming the presence of residual DEZ through a subsequent fire that destroyed the plant.

Which author discussed the failure of the NASA DEZ program in his book?

The failure of the NASA diethylzinc (DEZ) program was discussed at great length by Nicholson Baker in his book, 'Double Fold'.

What were AkzoNobel's attempts to refine the DEZ process, and why did they cease their research?

AkzoNobel made later attempts to refine the diethylzinc (DEZ) process, successfully reducing the risks of fire and explosions through better process design. However, issues with damage to books and persistent odors remained a problem. Ultimately, AkzoNobel determined that the process was not a viable commercial proposition and consequently shut down their research at the end of 1994.

According to the Library of Congress in 1994, what were the expected results of an ideal mass deacidification treatment?

In 1994, the Library of Congress expected an ideal mass deacidification treatment to neutralize acidic paper and add an alkaline reserve, produce an evenly distributed pH value between 6.8 and 10.4, avoid causing any damage to adhesives, inks, or dyes, not cause any odor or change in paper color, and prevent the loss of pliancy or mechanical strength.

What specific pH range did the Library of Congress consider ideal for deacidified paper?

The Library of Congress considered a pH value between 6.8 and 10.4, evenly distributed throughout the book, as ideal for deacidified paper in 1994. This range ensures the paper is no longer acidic and has a protective alkaline buffer.

What additional requirements for mass deacidification were proposed by faculty members of the Slovak University of Technology?

Faculty members of the Slovak University of Technology proposed additional requirements for mass deacidification, stating that the chemicals used must be safe, the process must be applicable to any kind of paper, and it should not cause swelling or warping of the paper.

What general finding did early and mid-nineties studies on mass deacidification processes reveal regarding pH levels?

Studies conducted by the European Commission on Preservation and Access, the Library of Congress, and the Centre de Recherches sur la Conservation des Documents Graphiques in the early and mid-nineties generally found that all tested mass deacidification processes imparted an adequately high pH to the treated materials.

What pH range did the BookKeeper process achieve in studies?

In studies conducted in the early and mid-nineties, the BookKeeper process achieved a pH range of 9 to 10. This indicates a successful neutralization of acidity and the establishment of an alkaline reserve.

What pH range did the CSC Book Saver process achieve in studies?

Studies in the early and mid-nineties showed that the CSC Book Saver process yielded a pH range of 8.78 to 10.5. This falls within the desired alkaline range for paper preservation.

What pH range did the Papersave process achieve in studies?

The Papersave process, according to studies from the early and mid-nineties, achieved a pH range of 7.5 to 9. This indicates that the paper was successfully deacidified and given an alkaline buffer.

What pH range did the Wei T'o process achieve in studies?

In studies from the early and mid-nineties, the Wei T'o process resulted in a pH range of 7.5 to 10.4. This demonstrates its effectiveness in neutralizing acidity and providing an alkaline reserve for paper.

What adverse cosmetic side effects were observed with the BookKeeper process?

Studies found that the BookKeeper process left a 'palpable residue,' caused clamp marks on book covers, and led to some colored inks rubbing off, indicating cosmetic side effects despite its effectiveness in deacidification.

What adverse cosmetic side effects were observed with the CSC Book Saver process?

The CSC Book Saver process was found to leave a 'white powdery deposit' on books, which was an adverse cosmetic side effect noted in studies.

What adverse cosmetic side effects were observed with the Papersave process?

The Papersave process caused several adverse cosmetic side effects, including discoloration, a white deposit, Newton's rings (an optical phenomenon), bleeding of inks and dyes, an odor, and a different 'feel' to the paper.

What adverse cosmetic side effects were observed with the Wei T'o process?

The Wei T'o process was associated with several adverse cosmetic side effects, such as odor, white residues, rings, cockling (wrinkling or buckling), yellow discolorations, and adhesive bleeding.

What is the British Library's stance on the current state of mass deacidification processes?

Conservators from the British Library acknowledge that existing mass deacidification processes are still under development and emphasize the need for further research into their chemical and mechanical effects. This indicates an ongoing effort to improve and refine these preservation techniques.

What chemical agent does the BookKeeper process use, and what is its nature?

The BookKeeper process is a non-aqueous, liquid phase process that uses magnesium oxide as its chemical agent. Magnesium oxide is an alkaline compound that neutralizes acids in paper.

Where are the commercial plants for the BookKeeper process located as of 2008?

As of 2008, commercial plants for the BookKeeper process were available through Preservation Technologies, L.P. in the U.S., Spain, Japan, Poland, The Netherlands, South Africa, and Qatar. Additionally, another plant was available through Fratielivi in Italy.

What chemical agent does the CSC Book Saver process use, and where is it available in Europe?

The CSC Book Saver process uses carbonated magnesium propylate for deacidification. In Europe, it is available through Conservación de Sustratos Celulósicos S.L. (CSC), located in Barcelona, Spain.

What chemical agent does the Papersave process use, and by what other name is it sometimes known?

The Papersave process uses magnesium titanium alkoxide as its chemical agent. It was developed by Battelle Ingenieurtechnik GmbH and is therefore sometimes referred to as 'the Battelle Process'.

Where is the Papersave process available in Europe?

In Europe, the Papersave process is available through Nitrochemie Wimmis (known as Papersave Swiss) in Wimmis, Switzerland, and through the Zentrum für Bucherhaltung in Leipzig, Germany.

What chemical agents are used in the Wei T'o process, and how is it typically used?

The Wei T'o process uses methoxy magnesium methyl carbonate or isopropoxy magnesium isopropyl carbonate as its chemical agents. While it can be used for mass deacidification, it is less commonly applied for that purpose and more frequently used for single-item deacidification.

Are mass deacidification treatments available for individual items?

Yes, BookKeeper, CSC Booksaver, Papersave, and Wei T'o are also available as hand-held sprays, which allows for deacidification treatment of individual items rather than entire collections.

Which major research libraries have adopted deacidification?

Major research libraries such as the Library of Congress and the New York Public Library have adopted deacidification as a preservation method for their collections.

How has the adoption of mass deacidification differed between libraries and archives, particularly in the United States?

While major research libraries have adopted deacidification, its adoption by archives, especially in the United States, is less clear. Some European national archives have tested the techniques, but the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) chose to invest its preservation funds elsewhere, despite pioneering an aqueous technique.

What reasons did the Chief of the NARA Document Conservation Laboratory provide in 2000 for not having a mass deacidification program?

In 2000, the Chief of the NARA Document Conservation Laboratory defended the absence of a mass deacidification program by noting that many NARA papers were of higher quality than library collections, records were received after 30 years when acidic paper would already be irrevocably weakened, and limited resources might be better applied elsewhere, such as climate control. The Archives' Twenty-Year Preservation Plan emphasized achieving 'maximum benefit for the greatest number of records'.

What was the estimated cost per volume for deacidification treatment in the early 1990s, excluding transportation and handling?

During the early 1990s, the estimated cost for deacidification treatment, excluding transportation and handling, was between $5 and $10 per volume.

How much did the Library of Congress spend on deacidifying books using the Bookkeeper method between 1995 and 1997, and what was the actual cost per book?

Between 1995 and 1997, the Library of Congress received $2 million in appropriations to deacidify 72,000 books using the Bookkeeper commercial method. The actual cost per book for this initiative was $11.70.

How did the cost of deacidification compare to reformatting options like microfilming and scanning in a 2003 cost comparison?

In a 2003 cost comparison, deacidification, based on a New York Public Library project, cost $16.20 per volume. This compared to $125 for microfilming and $50 for scanning with minimal indexing per volume, indicating deacidification was a more cost-effective preservation method than these reformatting options at the time.

How many mass deacidification plants were in operation globally as of 2022?

As of 2022, there were five mass deacidification plants operating in the world. These facilities are dedicated to preserving large collections of acidic paper materials.

What is 'slow fires' in the context of paper degradation?

'Slow fires' is a metaphorical term used in library and information science to describe the gradual degradation of paper in old books, which is primarily caused by the acidity of the paper. This process leads to the paper becoming yellow and brittle over time, akin to a slow, internal combustion.

Mass Deacidification Wiki: Preserving Legacies: The Science of Mass Deacidification

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

What is Mass Deacidification?

The "Slow Fires" Threat

Mass deacidification is a critical intervention in library and information science, designed to combat the pervasive degradation of paper in older books, often termed "slow fires." This phenomenon, prevalent in books produced after the 1850s, stems from the widespread use of cheaper, simpler acidic paper manufacturing methods. Over time, especially when exposed to light, air pollution, or high humidity, this paper yellows and becomes increasingly brittle.^[1]

The Chemical Solution

The fundamental goal of mass deacidification is to elevate the pH of acidic paper, thereby neutralizing existing acids and depositing an alkaline agent. This alkaline reserve acts as a buffer, preventing further decay and extending the lifespan of invaluable documents and books.^[2] This process is specifically targeted at acidic paper objects that face irreversible loss without intervention.

A Race Against Time

The urgency of mass deacidification is underscored by historical research. William J. Barrow's studies revealed that a staggering proportion—no more than three percent—of books published between 1900 and 1949 would survive beyond fifty years due to acid degradation. This alarming prognosis spurred the formation of the Association of Research Libraries' Standing Committee on the Preservation of Research Library Materials in 1960, highlighting the long-standing recognition of this preservation challenge.^[4]

History & Evolution

Early Research & Hydrolysis

The development of mass deacidification, alongside techniques like microfilm and lamination, emerged in the early to mid-20th century as a direct response to the chemical process of hydrolysis. Hydrolysis breaks down the fibers that give paper its structural integrity, leading to increasing brittleness. Environmental pollutants exacerbate this by reacting with paper to form acids, which in turn promote oxidation and create more acid, initiating a destructive autocatalytic feedback loop.^[3]

Barrow's Aqueous Method

William J. Barrow pioneered an aqueous process designed to neutralize acid within paper. This method simultaneously deposited an alkaline buffer, effectively slowing the rate of decay. His foundational work laid the groundwork for subsequent research into more efficient and scalable deacidification techniques.^[5]

Non-Aqueous & Vaporous Approaches

Following Barrow's initial success, researchers explored alternative methods to reduce the time, labor, and cost associated with deacidification. These included non-aqueous processes utilizing organic solvents and vaporous treatments, such as the Library of Congress's Diethylzinc (DEZ) method. The aim was to achieve the same preservation results through different chemical pathways.^[6]

The DEZ Debacle

A Volatile Experiment

The diethylzinc (DEZ) treatment, a vaporous method, was theoretically promising. It proposed placing books in an evacuated chamber, introducing DEZ to react with acidic residues, and leaving an alkaline buffer.^[7] However, practical application proved disastrous. The heating required to remove trace water from books (DEZ reacts violently with water) accelerated paper degradation. Furthermore, DEZ reacted with other book components like glues and bindings, causing additional damage and producing unpleasant odors.^[8]

In the 1980s, NASA constructed a pilot plant for mass deacidification using the DEZ process, testing it with books from the Library of Congress. A critical incident occurred in 1986 when DEZ was not fully removed in one run, pooling at the bottom of the chamber. Given DEZ's violent flammability upon contact with oxygen or water vapor, the chamber could not be safely opened. Ultimately, explosives were used to rupture the suspect plumbing, confirming the presence of residual DEZ through a subsequent fire that destroyed the plant. This significant failure is extensively documented by Nicholson Baker in his book Double Fold.

Subsequent attempts by the chemical company AkzoNobel to refine the DEZ process managed to reduce the risks of fire and explosions through improved design. However, issues of damage to books and persistent odors remained problematic. Ultimately, AkzoNobel concluded that the process was not commercially viable and ceased its research at the end of 1994.

Ideal Outcomes

pH Balance & Distribution

An ideal mass deacidification treatment, as envisioned by the Library of Congress in 1994, must effectively neutralize acidic paper and introduce an alkaline reserve. Crucially, it should achieve a pH value between 6.8 and 10.4, ensuring this alkaline state is uniformly distributed throughout the entire book.^[9]

Material Integrity

Beyond chemical efficacy, the process must be benign to the physical components of the book. This means it should not inflict any damage upon adhesives, inks, or dyes. Furthermore, it should not induce any undesirable odors or alter the original color of the paper, preserving the aesthetic and sensory qualities of the artifact.^[9]

Structural & Chemical Safety

Maintaining the mechanical integrity of the paper is paramount; there should be no loss of pliancy or mechanical strength. Faculty members from the Slovak University of Technology further emphasized that the chemicals employed must be safe for both the materials and operators, the process should be universally applicable to any type of paper, and it must not cause swelling or warping of the paper.^[9]^[10]

Practical Effects

pH Achievement

Studies conducted by the European Commission on Preservation and Access, the Library of Congress, and the Centre de Recherches sur la Conservation des Documents Graphiques in the 1990s confirmed that all evaluated processes successfully imparted an adequately high pH. For instance, BookKeeper achieved a pH of 9–10,^[9] CSC Book Saver yielded 8.78–10.5,^[11] Wei T'o ranged from 7.5 to 10.4,^[12] and Papersave produced a pH of 7.5–9.^[13]

Unintended Cosmetic Changes

Despite achieving the desired pH, these studies also revealed various adverse cosmetic side effects across different processes:

BookKeeper: Left a "palpable residue," caused clamp marks on covers, and some colored inks to rub off.^[9]
CSC Book Saver: Resulted in a "white powdery deposit" on books.^[14]
Papersave: Led to "discoloration, white deposit, Newton's rings, bleeding of inks and dyes, odor and different 'feel' of the paper."^[15]
Wei T'o: Caused "odor, white residues, rings, cockling, (yellow) discolorations and adhesive bleeding."^[16]

Conservators at the British Library acknowledge that existing mass deacidification processes are still under development, necessitating further research into their long-term chemical and mechanical effects.^[17]

Commercial Solutions

BookKeeper Process

The BookKeeper process is a non-aqueous, liquid-phase method that employs magnesium oxide as its active alkaline agent.^[18] This service is globally available through Preservation Technologies, L.P., with operational plants in the U.S., Spain, Japan, Poland, The Netherlands, South Africa, and Qatar. Additionally, Fratielivi in Italy also offers the BookKeeper process.^[19]

CSC Book Saver

The CSC Book Saver utilizes carbonated magnesium propylate for its deacidification treatment.^[20] This process is primarily accessible in Europe through Conservación de Sustratos Celulósicos S.L. (CSC), based in Barcelona, Spain.^[21]

Papersave Process

Developed by Battelle Ingenieurtechnik GmbH, the Papersave process, sometimes referred to as "the Battelle Process," uses magnesium titanium alkoxide.^[20] In Europe, this service is provided by Nitrochemie Wimmis (known as Papersave Swiss) in Switzerland and the Zentrum für Bucherhaltung in Leipzig, Germany.^[22]^[23]

Wei T'o Process

The Wei T'o process utilizes methoxy magnesium methyl carbonate or isopropoxy magnesium isopropyl carbonate.^[16] While new products were anticipated in 2008, Wei T'o is more commonly applied for single-item deacidification rather than mass treatment. Wei T'o products are available through Wei T'o Associates Inc. in Matteson, U.S.^[24] All these commercial solutions are also available in convenient hand-held spray formats for localized application.

Adoption & Economics

Library vs. Archive Adoption

While prominent research libraries, such as the Library of Congress and the New York Public Library, have embraced deacidification, its adoption by archives, particularly in the United States, has been less widespread. European national archives have experimented with these techniques, but the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), despite pioneering an improved aqueous technique, opted to allocate its preservation funds to other areas.^[5]

In 2000, NARA's Chief of the Document Conservation Laboratory articulated several reasons for not implementing a mass deacidification program. These included the observation that many papers entering NARA's collections were of higher quality than typical library materials. Furthermore, records from federal agencies are not transferred to NARA until they are at least 30 years old, by which point acidic paper would have already suffered irreversible weakening. Given limited resources, NARA prioritized other preservation efforts, such as climate control, aiming for the "maximum benefit for the greatest number of records" under its Twenty-Year Preservation Plan.^[25]

Interestingly, studies by the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center and the General State Archive of the Netherlands suggested that the DEZ method, despite its historical failures, might be particularly suitable for archival materials.^[26]

Cost Considerations

Estimates from the early 1990s placed deacidification costs, excluding transportation and handling, at $5–10 per volume.^[27] Between 1995 and 1997, the Library of Congress, with a $2 million appropriation, deacidified 72,000 books using the BookKeeper method at an actual cost of $11.70 per book.^[28]

A 2003 cost comparison with reformatting options highlighted the economic viability of deacidification: microfilming cost $125 per volume, scanning with minimal indexing was $50, while a New York Public Library project showed deacidification at $16.20 per volume.^[6] However, by 2004, Google Books was able to scan books for a competitive $10–20 each.^[29] As of 2022, there are five mass deacidification plants operating worldwide.^[30]

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio

Click here to open the "Mass Deacidification" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about mass_deacidification while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.

Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

white hispanic and latino americans

noaa commissioned officer corps

power law

woolly mammoth

wciv

References

Cheradame, H et al. (2003). Mass Deacidification of paper and books: I: study of the limitations of the gas phase process. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material, 24, 227.

Lienardy, A. & Van Damme, P. (1990). Practical Deacidification, Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material, 11,2.

Library of Congress. (1994). An evaluation of the BookKeeper mass deacidification process: Technical Evaluation Team Report for the Preservation Directorate, Library of Congress, Appendix E.

Cedzova, M. et al. (2006). Patents for Paper Deacidification. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material,27, 36.

Dupont, A. et al. (2002). Testing CSC Book Saver, a commercial deacidification process. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material,23, 40.

Wittekind, J. (1994). The Battelle mass deacidification process: A New method for deacidifying books and archival materials. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material,15, 195.

Dupont, A. et al. (2002). Testing CSC Book Saver, a commercial deacidification process. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material,23, 45.

Banik, G. (2003). Mass deacidification technology in Germany and its Quality Control. Restaurator: International Journal for the Preservation of Library and Archival Material,26, 64.

A full list of references for this article are available at the Mass deacidification Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.

This is not professional preservation, chemical, or archival advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for professional consultation with qualified conservators, chemists, or archival specialists. Always refer to official guidelines and consult with experts for specific preservation needs. Never disregard professional advice because of something you have read on this website.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.

Preserving Legacies

💡 Dive in with Flashcard Learning! 💡

What is Mass Deacidification? 📚

🔥 The "Slow Fires" Threat

🔬 The Chemical Solution

⏳ A Race Against Time

History & Evolution 📜

🧪 Early Research & Hydrolysis

💧 Barrow's Aqueous Method

💨 Non-Aqueous & Vaporous Approaches

The DEZ Debacle 💥

🔥 A Volatile Experiment

Ideal Outcomes 🎯

⚖️ pH Balance & Distribution

🎨 Material Integrity

💪 Structural & Chemical Safety

Practical Effects ⚠️

📈 pH Achievement

🎨 Unintended Cosmetic Changes

Commercial Solutions 🛒

📦 BookKeeper Process

💧 CSC Book Saver

⚙️ Papersave Process

✨ Wei T'o Process

Adoption & Economics 📊

🏛️ Library vs. Archive Adoption

💰 Cost Considerations

Teacher's Corner 🧑‍🏫

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

True or False? 🤔

❓ Test Your Knowledge! ❓

Gamer's Corner 🎮

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Explore More Topics

📜 Discover other topics to study!

References

📜 References

Feedback & Support 👍

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer ⚠️

📜 Important Notice

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

What is Mass Deacidification?

The "Slow Fires" Threat

The Chemical Solution

A Race Against Time

History & Evolution

Early Research & Hydrolysis

Barrow's Aqueous Method

Non-Aqueous & Vaporous Approaches

The DEZ Debacle

A Volatile Experiment

Ideal Outcomes

pH Balance & Distribution

Material Integrity

Structural & Chemical Safety

Practical Effects

pH Achievement

Unintended Cosmetic Changes

Commercial Solutions

BookKeeper Process

CSC Book Saver

Papersave Process

Wei T'o Process

Adoption & Economics

Library vs. Archive Adoption

Cost Considerations

Teacher's Corner

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Discover other topics to study!

References

Feedback & Support

Disclaimer

Important Notice