Language
Country/Area
No result found
Amazing graffiti removal technology: Which one is more effective, chemical removal or environmentally friendly methods?
Graffiti has long been viewed as an act of vandalism, a symbol of urban decay and damage to local property values. As a result, most governments view graffiti as harmful and prohibit it. However, given that graffiti mostly occurs in public spaces, local governments are responsible for removing graffiti to maintain the aesthetics of their communities.
Graffiti as negative externality
Governments view graffiti as a negative externality because it often inhibits or impairs the beautification of a community and often results in a neighborhood being labeled as a low socioeconomic area. This puts pressure on house prices among other things and has strong correlations with local crime and gang activity. Given the huge cost graffiti imposes on communities, the government has taken on responsibility for its removal, although with legislation changing to increase fines for such offences, eradication remains elusive.
Clear method
Governments take different approaches to graffiti removal, often based on their allocation of resources. These methods evolve and change with changes in the movement of the cleanup industry, changes in material costs, and the final results of the cleanup.
Paint coverage
This method, which involves covering graffiti with paint so that it cannot be seen, is considered a low-cost method and has been widely used by governments. Over time, however, the negative effects of this removal method began to emerge.
While effective on painted walls, on other surfaces this option often results in poor results, painting a "collage effect". Additionally, if used frequently on the same wall, the paint will begin to peel, making this method ineffective for long-term graffiti removal.
Chemical removal
This method virtually removes graffiti completely. These cleaning products contain active chemicals that can remove graffiti from surfaces, but if the chemicals are not applied correctly, they can damage the surface, especially if it is painted. This will cause the spray paint to be stripped off along with the primer and the end result will be poor.
As environmental sustainability issues become increasingly important, this approach is becoming obsolete.
Environmentally friendly removal
This method uses organic products to remove graffiti from surfaces. This practice is comparable in cost to methods of chemical removal or paint coverage and generally has lower or no safety and health risks. Using baking soda or dry ice blasting is an environmentally friendly method of removal.
Graffiti on the surface of history
Many graffiti removal methods involve abrasive processes (such as metal brushing, sandblasting, etc.) or strong chemical solvents, which can damage the fabric of a historic building. For example, although the cost of using O molecule laser cleaning (Nd:YAG wavelength) is higher, it is more suitable from the perspective of being suitable for historical buildings.
Management methods
The government found that the sooner graffiti was removed, the less graffiti would occur in the area in the future. Therefore, several different graffiti removal management methods have been developed to locate and remove graffiti more efficiently.
Reactive management
Reactive removal methods rely on governments waiting until they are informed of the presence of graffiti. This method works well in terms of civic concern and reward for the community, although in areas where graffiti occurs frequently, this method may not report effectively.
Proactive management
Forward-looking governments with more resources will include censorship to manage graffiti, which is far more effective than reactive management. Further, proactive management will use sealants to protect areas prone to graffiti marking, which will significantly reduce the cost of removing graffiti.
Predictive management
Predictive removal management is an emerging approach. This includes using a database of data on graffiti incidents within the city, allowing for more accurate inspections and resource allocation.
Ultimately, both environmentally friendly removal methods and chemical removal technologies have their own merits. Local governments are faced with a difficult choice: between aesthetics and environmental protection, how should we choose the graffiti removal method in the future?
