Difference between environmental damage and corrosion?
Vetter
Posts: 875 ✭✭✭✭✭
Could someone explain the differences between environmental damage and corrosion, especially on a nickel? Is one “better” to have than the other? Do they affect the surfaces differently and how can you tell the difference?
The reason I’m asking is one of my coins is graded by PCGS as environment damage. Although it’s there and dark still has some decent eye appeal (at least to me) and I’m trying to learn.
Members I have done business with:
Silverman68, jfoot13, GAB, ricman, Smittys, scrapman1077, RyGuy, Connecticoin, Meltdown, VikingDude, Peaceman, Patches and more.
Silverman68, jfoot13, GAB, ricman, Smittys, scrapman1077, RyGuy, Connecticoin, Meltdown, VikingDude, Peaceman, Patches and more.
0
Comments
I see "environmental damage" as a broad term generally covering lots of things, such as staining, corrosion, etc.
To me corrosion is a form of environmental damage. Corrosion can be caused by a coin being
buried which would be environmental damage. Toning is another form of ED caused by being
exposed to certain elements.
ED is a broad category that includes corrosion.
I think it is less about which is "better" and more about the type of coin out is found on. Early copper with ED is very common that it is often tolerated. The same surface porosity on an Indian cent or later would not be tolerated.
With any damage, it depends on the buyer. I may tolerate things you wouldn't and vice versa.
Source: https://www.pcgs.com/grades#grade97
The video was insightful.
Edited to Add:
As others have 'implied/stated', there is no dedicated "corrosion" code. Just "environmental damage", which includes "corrosion", among other issues. For example, "excessive toning", and "verdigris".