Bay Area school districts spent millions of dollars on air cleaning systems, which some air quality experts say could endanger students’ health. An NBC Bay Area Investigation reveals why scientists, including those at the Environmental Protection Agency, are now questioning the efficacy and safety of new technology utilized in some devices that are supposed to clean indoor air.

Industry experts say fears of the pandemic and a willingness of consumers to pay out big bucks have transformed the air cleaning industry into a sort of Wild Wild West. Online advertisements, which seek to recruit new salespeople to hawk the products, promise six-figures in a single month for those willing to sell air purifiers to school districts. 

Research scientists have found air cleaners are adding dangerous substances into the air, such as ozone and formaldehyde – toxins considered especially dangerous to the developing lungs of young students.  

Millions’ Worth of Air Cleaning Devices Sit Unused in Storage Containers

Thousands of air cleaning units, worth millions of dollars, sit in storage at the Sacramento City Unified School District, while school officials question whether the air purifiers live up to claims that the devices can remove COVID-19 from the air. After signing a contract with Johnson Controls Industries for more than $6 million, the school district wrote the company a letter stating the “District will not accept deliveries of the … units until the company has satisfied its concerns …including but not limited to the claim by [Johnson Control Industries] that the units’ … technology is effective in neutralizing the COVID-19 virus.”

The school district publicly voiced those concerns even after analysis by Forensic Analytical Consulting Services, an environmental health company, did not find any hazardous conditions when testing the units, according to officials with the school district.

“We are actively working with the District to find an alternative that will be beneficial to the District’s students, staff and community,” wrote Kellie Harris, a public relations representative for Johnson Controls Industries, who provided a statement to NBC Bay Area. The company would not say whether it intends to refund the Sacramento City Unified School District any of the millions it paid for the devices.

Harris said the devices, which utilize ultraviolet light, use “science-based, time-tested technology that is safe and effective when applied appropriately.” According to the industry group ASHRAE, formerly known as the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers, “ultraviolet-C lamps and systems have been used to disinfect room and air streams since around 1900.”

After testing air purifiers for 40 years, Bud Offermann, a mechanical engineer, is convinced the best route to clean air is a properly installed heating and cooling system with a top quality filter.

Air Quality Expert Warns of ‘COVID-19 Snake Oil Salesmen’

Bud Offermann begs to differ. Offermann is a Stanford trained mechanical engineer who has been studying air cleaning systems for 40 years. While Offermann has serious concerns about the technology, he acknowledges ultraviolet light has a long history as a successful sterilizing device. 

“In a surgery ward, they’ll have the instruments for surgery in a cabinet with an ultraviolet light left overnight – all that radiation overnight disinfects the surfaces.”

Offermann, however, said that’s quite different than putting an ultraviolet light inside a vent where air is moving quickly.

“You put this UV light in it and it’s moving at three to five hundred feet per minute – it’s pretty quick, so there’s just not enough time to inactivate the virus or bacteria or oxidize anything. It’s really just bells and whistles.”

Offermann is also critical of another newer technology known as “Needlepoint Bi-Polar Ionization,” which adds positive and negative ions to the surrounding air in effort to eliminate toxins. According to companies that sell air ionizing devices, the ions attach to unwanted particles in the air and either neutralize them or make them larger, so they get trapped by a building’s air filtration system.

“It is playing chemistry with the indoor air,” said Offermann. “Because they are putting things in the air and reacting with chemicals in the air, they have the potential to create bad things such as formaldehyde, ozone, ultrafine particles.”

Offerman says this often pricey technology is in contract to more conventional air purifiers, which do not release any particles in the air and, instead, focus on eliminating pollutants by trapping them with an air filter.

Charlie Waddell is the founder and chief technology officer of Global Plasma Solutions, which describes itself as the “leaders in indoor air quality.”

Maker of Ionizing Air Purifiers Says Technology Keeps Students Safe

“We’ve gone through the gauntlet of tests … to prove that it is safe and that it is effective and is doing what we claim without creating any unhealthy type environment,” said Charlie Waddell, the founder and chief technology officer of Global Plasma Solutions. The company, which manufacturers ionizing air cleaners, calls itself the “leader in indoor air quality.”

Speaking at a meeting of the Berkeley Unified School District last March, Waddell applauded school officials for buying his products.

We’ve gone through the gauntlet of tests … to prove that it is safe and that it is effective and is doing what we claim without creating any unhealthy type environment.

Charlie Waddell, founder and chief technology officer of Global Plasma Solutions

“I want to commend you for all you are doing,” he said. “I wish all the schools across the country were doing so many things to make sure the kids are staying safe.”

Offerman says in an effort to sell more air cleaning devices, some companies have turned into “COVID-19 snake oil salesmen,” touting new technology that doesn’t work.

“The research I’ve done on these devices, they’re not better,” said Offermann. “There are real adverse health effects.”

Offerman says harmful byproducts can wind up in human lungs, and respiratory experts say the lungs of young children are especially vulnerable to damage from toxins, such as ozone. 

Over the past year, however, schools and businesses have been bombarded with advertisements for devices claiming to make their indoor spaces safe. Offermann says since the start of the pandemic, he’s seen at least 10 times the number of misleading or false claims about air cleaning devices. 

Bud Offermann says some of the newer technology used in air purifiers can expose consumers to “potentially carcinogenic and irritating contaminants, such as formaldehyde.”

EPA Details Warning About Certain Air Purifiers

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, newer air cleaners that use bipolar ionization are part of an “emerging technology,” where “evidence for safety and effectiveness is less documented.”

The EPA also says these devices have the “potential to generate ozone and other potentially harmful by-products indoors.”

The Berkeley Unified School District spent more than $1million on air purifiers from Global Plasma Solutions and a total of $3.2 million upgrading its HVAC system.  After contracting an engineering firm, Shoreline Environmental Resources, to test the units, the district tells NBC Bay Area it is satisfied they are working properly, adding it will continue to use them in the classroom.  

The nearby Newark Unified School District, however, isn’t convinced about the devices’ effectiveness and safety record. After purchasing $360,000 worth of air cleaning devices from Global Plasma Solutions, the district disconnected the equipment in May.

“When we learned the safety and effectiveness of the GPS ionization devices was being questioned, we disabled the devices immediately,” wrote Superintendent Mark Triplett in a statement sent to NBC Bay Area. Triplett added that the district has yet to make any decision on whether to demand a refund from Global Plasma Solutions.

“We are in the process of investigating this situation with our lawyers, and based on the information we obtain, we will make a decision,” Triplett wrote. “No decision has been made yet. Our main concern is safety for students and staff. You can be sure that we feel a tremendous obligation to ensure that the tax dollars allocated to public education are optimized to provide our students with an excellent education and provide our dedicated staff and students with the resources they need to succeed.”

This all comes as a proposed class-action lawsuit is accusing Global Plasma Solutions of making “false, misleading, and deceptive” claims, adding that its products “make the air worse for people.”  Global Plasma Solutions says the lawsuit was built on “faulty assumptions” and has filed a motion to dismiss the case. (link to motion to dismiss)  

“They’re definitely misleading,” said Bud Offermann, whose been hired to testify as an expert witness in the lawsuit against Global Plasma Solutions and says he reviewed the company’s own performance data.

I used their test data, which shows that the device does hardly anything.

Bud Offermann, describing his review of performance data from Global Plasma Solutions

“They had the most test data up on their website, which is all gone now.  It’s all been removed from their website,” he said.  “I used their test data, which shows that the device does hardly anything.”

In the 1980s, Offermann worked for the Federal Trade Commission, the national agency in charge of investigating deceptive business practices.  During the pandemic, consumer complaints to the FTC about fraudulent practices have spiked 45%, with consumers reporting more than $500 million in COVID-related losses.  While the FTC said it has issued warning letters to some air purifying companies for deceptive marketing during the pandemic, NBC Bay Area has learned the agency has not issued any official enforcement action against air purifying companies since the start of the global health crisis. Offermann says a lack of oversight is allowing companies to profit from fear of the coronavirus.  

“There’s no government regulation,” Offermann said. “I think we need to get the Federal Trade Commission to step in here and do a little policing.”

Emerging Technology Allows You to Monitor Indoor Air Quality

As consumers attempt to sort out which indoor purifying products are actually delivering clean air and which are full of hot air, an entire industry has emerged devoted to giving consumers the power to find out.

“I think when you walk into a building, it’s going to become almost expected that there’s a display showing the quality of the air in that facility,” said Dustin DeVan, CEO of Awair, which sells indoor air quality monitors. The sensors are designed to detect dangerous pollutants in the air, and warn consumers about a lack of ventilation in their space. 

“We believe that everyone has a right to know…what’s in the air they breathe,” said DeVan.

Dustin DeVan is the CEO of Awair, which sells indoor air quality monitors.

To help consumers determine if their indoor conditions are safe, Awair monitors track a wide-range of factors, including temperature and humidity, volatile organic compounds, carbon dioxide, fine dust particles, and even lighting and noise. Individual Awair devices for the home cost $149, while air quality monitors designed for use at a workplace retail for $499 per device. According to DeVan, the monitors are designed to be placed in each enclosed room of a building. For larger open areas, he recommends installing a device about every 3,000 square feet.

Data collected by the monitors is constantly uploaded into the cloud, so users can check air quality levels at any time and even receive alerts on their cell phones.

“You want to monitor it in real time, because often there is an event that triggers something that changes the environment,” DeVan said. “If you’re not doing real-time monitoring and, say, you do sporadic (monitoring), then you might never know that you had a spike and you’re never going to be able to resolve that problem.”

Awair sold 35,000 air quality monitors over the past year and expects to sell double that number in 2022, according to company officials.

Poor Indoor Air Quality Can Lead to Wide Range of Health Problems

Studies have shown that poor indoor air quality, especially when too many fine particles are present – can lead to a host of health problems, including lung and heart diseases.  

According to the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, indoor air pollution is a serious threat to human health, causing millions of deaths each year.

“The quality of the air you breathe can have an impact on how you function on a daily basis,” DeVan said.  “At a high carbon dioxide level, your mental efficiency goes down.”

Companies that sell air quality monitors hope to arm consumers with the tools they need to make informed decisions about their own air quality as well as the air purifying products they use. However, even the technology behind air quality monitors has its critics.  Studies have questioned their accuracy and warn they may underestimate the amount of pollution in the air. 

According to the EPA, the “more affordable prices” offered by low-cost air quality monitors has allowed for an increase in “access to air quality information” that “allows more people to be involved.”

An EPA spokesperson, however, notes “the performance and reliability of low-cost sensors can also vary greatly depending upon the device or manufacturer” and may produce data that “systemically over-or-under estimates the actual pollutant concentration.”

Awair tells NBC Bay Area its monitors have a high level of accuracy and say using even more precise sensors, like what you’d find in a laboratory, would make the devices too expensive for the average consumer.

“This sort of technology is very, very new,” DeVan said.  “Actually being able to commercialize it into a reasonable cost that almost any business can afford is a breakthrough.”

Over the past year, Awair sold 35,000 air quality monitors and plans to double its sales and triple its 40-person staff in 2022, according to a company spokesperson.

“Now that the technology is available, you’re starting to see adoption,” DeVan said. “We’ll monitor more square footage next year than we’ve done in the entire history of Awair.”

Some California Schools to Receive CO2 Monitors

While air quality monitors aren’t required in buildings, California lawmakers recently made $375 million dollars in funding available for 6,000 schools to install carbon dioxide monitors as well as complete other ventilation system upgrades and improvements. A high level of CO2 can be an indication of poor ventilation, so the monitors can be used to warn consumers about potentially dangerous indoor air conditions.

The program is the result of Assembly Bill 841, which was signed into law last year. About 60% of public schools in the state are eligible to apply for the funding, which is expected to be distributed later this year.

“We know we have a problem with indoor air quality,” said Andrew McAllister,  a commissioner with the California Energy Commission, the state agency that oversees the new program and helps formulate new building requirements as part of California’s building code.

About 6,000 public schools in California, serving more than 3 million students, are eligible to apply for new funding to complete improvements to their ventilation systems, including the installation of carbon dioxide monitors, which can identify the prevalence of poor ventilation.

California to Mandate New Inspections for Heating/Cooling Systems

While the debate continues over newer air cleaning technologies, McAllister notes that many buildings are still ignoring basic safety protocols, such as utilizing highly-rated filters, ensuring proper ventilation, and undergoing routine maintenance for heating and cooling systems. 

The prevalence of improperly installed heating and cooling systems is why the state is instituting a brand new certification program this October. 

The Acceptance Test Technician Certification Provider Program (ACTTCP) will require all new, non-residential buildings to undergo mandatory inspections of their heating and cooling systems prior to opening their doors.

In the past, said McAllister, once a building was constructed and a local building department signed off on it, there was no further inspection required of the air filtration system.  The new program, however, adds an additional layer of oversight to heating and cooling systems, which have become more complex in recent years.

“They do require a level of competence and installation that I think historically hasn’t really been the case,” said McAllister. “We’re requiring … this next level of technical evaluation to make absolutely sure that the system is installed properly.” 

The reform effort, however, will be far from a panacea since it will only impact newly built structures, leaving out the state’s aging building stock.

As confusion continues over what types of purifying devices might serve as the best form of protection against dangerous pollutants, some believe mandating the installation of indoor air quality monitors may be one way to finally clear the air.

“As the technology improves, and it is rapidly improving, I think, yeah, that will be mandated either by government or insurance companies,” said Offermann.  “I believe we’re headed that way.”

Watch Our Entire Investigative Series

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

When we asked environmental toxin expert and certified holistic health coach Lara Adler about keeping home air fresh during chilly winters, she had one majorly helpful tip that only takes a few minutes.

The routine? Open up one window (it doesn’t have to be open very wide but more than a crack), then move to the next nearest window and open that one up too. Work your way around your entire home, opening up every window. When they’re all open, go back to the first window and close it. Then, close the second one you opened, and so on, until all your windows are closed again.

And voilà—your home’s air should get a quick refresh, without ever getting too unbearably chilly (or hard on your heating bill). Adler says just a few minutes of open windows can do wonders for our home’s circulation and overall air quality. And given that keeping windows constantly closed can result in a buildup of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), allergens, and other irritants, it’s well worth it to get some fresh air in.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Banner image: Ground level ozone, shown here in Denver, is a growing problem in the western United States. (Credit: National Renewable Energy Laboratory) 

It’s no secret: The air quality is bad in Colorado this summer.  

Thus far, the state has issued 59 Ozone Action Day alerts since May 31—the most in a single year since record-keeping began a decade ago. At least one day in August, Denver boasted the worst air quality of any major city in the world.

But what’s in that air?

Marina Vance in her lab at CU Boulder, before the COVID-19 pandemic. (Credit: CU Boulder)

“In the Front Range, we are mostly concerned about two types of air pollutants, especially in the summer: particulate matter and ozone. And then when you’re indoors, there’s now this extra concern about the COVID viruses spreading through the air,” said Marina Vance, an assistant professor in the Paul M. Rady Department of Mechanical Engineering who was awarded an NSF CAREER Award to study how pollutants transform as they move between indoors and out.

So how do we keep ourselves healthy? 

“It can be overwhelming for people to figure out what the least risky situation is,” said Vance, who is also faculty in the environmental engineering program. “We’re hoping that with some simple measures, people can alleviate some anxiety that’s driven by this co-occurrence of the wildfires and COVID persisting.” 

On high ozone days, go inside and shut the windows

First, ozone—it’s been a big part of this summer’s air quality warnings. 

Ozone is a highly reactive gas that forms naturally in the Earth’s upper atmosphere, where it protects us by reducing the amount of harmful UV radiation that reaches the Earth’s surface. But when it forms closer to where we breathe, known as ground-level ozone, it can be harmful. 

Notably, it’s not emitted directly by any air pollution source: It forms in a chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sunlight, and can be amplified by hot temperatures. Colorado’s abundance of sunlight and heat, combined with VOCs emitted from numerous chemical plants and gasoline pumps (among other sources), and NOx emitted from power plants and motor vehicles—of which Colorado has plenty—makes it a particular hot spot for ozone. 

This ground-level ozone doesn’t just gray our blue skies and obscure our beloved mountains. It doesn’t feel good to breathe. And studies suggest that chronic exposure to this pollutant can lead to lower birth weights, asthma and higher rates of premature death. 

Vance’s advice for high ozone days: Stay inside and close the windows and doors. 

“The ozone is so reactive it will react with the building exterior before it gets inside,” said Vance. 

While VOCs can make their way indoors (no building is completely airtight), ozone cannot form indoors because windows filter out the UV light needed to catalyze the chemical reaction. 

Relying on smell to detect air pollution can be really deceiving.”
—Marina Vance, assistant professor in the Paul M. Rady Department of Mechanical Engineering

Can’t smell it? Don’t ignore it. 

While the air quality is worse this year compared to last year, there’s one major difference: We’re not smelling the smoke. 

This can lead people to underestimate just how bad the air quality is. If you wait until your eyes feel itchy, you start coughing, you smell it or see ash falling, you’re not paying enough attention, according to Vance. 

“Relying on smell to detect air pollution can be really deceiving,” said Vance. 

Alex Huffman, associate professor at the University of Denver, built these DIY box fans with MERV 13 filters, which protect against COVID-19, for his daughter’s preschool classroom. (Credit: Alex Huffman) 

Smoke from wildfires as far away as California doesn’t carry its smell when it arrives in Colorado, but it can still carry particulate matter, according to Christine Wiedinmyer, associate director for science at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at CU Boulder. 

And we know wildfire smoke can be quite harmful to our health, whether from near or far away, something studied by Colleen Reid, assistant professor of geography.

To check if smoke is at unhealthy levels, Vance recommends using airnow.gov. The overall Air Quality Index incorporates five major pollutants that are regulated by the Clean Air Act into its rating, including PM2.5: The term used for tiny bits of particulate matter in smoke which can be harmful if breathed in. 

This regularly updated index ranges from “Good” to “Moderate” at the low end, all the way up to “Hazardous.” If PM2.5 or the overall rating is at “Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups” or above, it’s wise to take appropriate precautions inside and out.

To catch and filter wildfire smoke particulate matter indoors, Vance recommends first sealing up your house: Close windows and doors. If you live in a house, replace your furnace filter with a high quality one (MERV13 is a popular and inexpensive one). And if you have air conditioning, recirculate the indoor air within the house to further reduce particulate matter. 

If living in an apartment or condo, she recommends purchasing a portable air cleaner, which often use high quality HEPA (high efficiency particulate air) filters, a type of pleated mechanical air filter. Keep the portable filter in the room you’re in. 

If you don’t have central air conditioning or a window unit, and can’t keep doors and windows closed while indoors, Vance recommends a DIY approach. Place a high-quality furnace filter, such as a MERV13, on the intake side of a box fan blowing air into the room; then seal the window opening surrounding the fan. This will let outdoor air in to cool the room but filter out much of the particulate matter from wildfire smoke. Adding a portable air cleaner (with a HEPA filter) can help further reduce particulate matter and viruses within the room. However, this approach does not filter out ground-level ozone.

Build your own DIY air filter

Need a portable, affordable air filter that will do the trick in a pinch? Vance and Jose-Luis Jimenez, chemistry professor at CU Boulder and fellow at CIRES, recommend going the DIY route. These box fan filters are great for removing airborne virus particles and particulate matter from dorm rooms, offices and other small spaces—all for about $40. 

You’ll need three things: A 20″ box fan, a 20″ x 20″ MERV 12 or 13 furnace/HVAC filter, and some heavy-duty tape. 

Simply place the filter on the back of the fan (where the air comes in, not out) and make sure it’s facing the correct direction for air to flow through. Then tape the edges of the filter securely to the fan, creating a seal between the box fan and the filter. Find more information and a how-to video here. 

If using this system to blow air in through an open window, Vance recommends only using it on days when it’s not too hot and ozone levels are not high, as this method does not filter out ozone. 

Pay attention to more than one pollutant 

What about days with high ozone and high smoke levels? 

Be careful with what online tool you use, because it might be only telling you half the story, Vance notes. She recommends airnow.gov, which is based on good data from EPA air quality regulatory stations, and measures both ozone and particulate matter. 

While Purple Air is a popular online site many reference, it does not measure ozone levels. 

“The overall air quality index is only driven by whatever is the worst thing. But if both ozone and particulate matter are rated orange, that’s extra bad,” said Vance. 

But we can take advantage of how these pollutants vary throughout the day. For example, ozone levels are higher in the afternoons and evenings. So if you can’t resist exercising outdoors, do it early.

Get clean air, no matter where

COVID-19 further complicates the equation, as spending time indoors with other people is something we’ve now been advised to avoid. 

But fortunately, the same MERV13 or HEPA systems which filter out particulate matter from fires can also help catch and keep viruses out of the air. And when changing your filter, you don’t need to worry that it’s COVID-laden, because the virus is simply not going to survive on it, said Vance.  

Either way, avoid ionizing bipolar, ionizers and UV light air purifiers at home—there’s no need for them, and some types of UV light can be harmful, said Vance. 

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Introduction

We tend to think of air pollution as a risk faced outside, but the air we breathe indoors can also be polluted. Smoke, vapors, mold, and chemicals used in certain paints, furnishings, and cleaners can all affect indoor air quality and our health.

Buildings affect overall well-being because most people spend most of their time inside. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates Americans are indoors 90% of their time – in built environments such as homes, schools, workplaces, places of worship, or gyms.

Environmental health researchers study how indoor air quality affects human health and well-being. Studies suggest that indoor concentrations of air pollutants are increasing, driven by factors such as the types of chemicals in home products, inadequate ventilation, hotter temperatures, and higher humidity.

Indoor air quality is a global issue. Both short- and long-term exposure to indoor air pollution can cause a range of health issues, including respiratory diseases, heart disease, cognitive deficits, and cancer. As one prominent example, the World Health Organization estimates 3.8 million people worldwide die every year from illnesses attributable to harmful indoor air from dirty cookstoves and fuel.

Certain populations may be affected more than others. Children, older adults, individuals with preexisting conditions, Native Americans, and households of low socioeconomic status are often exposed to higher levels of indoor pollutants.

Types of Pollutants

Many factors contribute to poor indoor air quality. Indoor air includes pollutants that penetrate from the outdoors, as well as sources that are unique to the indoor environment. These sources involve:

• Human activities within buildings, such as smoking, burning solid fuels, cooking, and cleaning.
• Vapors from building and construction materials, equipment, and furniture.
• Biological contaminants, such as mold, viruses, or allergens.

Some contaminants are described below:

• Allergens are substances that can trigger the immune system, causing an allergic reaction; they can circulate in air and remain on carpets and furniture for months.
• Asbestos is a fibrous material formerly used for making incombustible or fireproof building materials, such as roof shingles, siding, and insulation. Disturbing asbestos minerals or asbestos-containing materials can release fibers, often too small to see, into the air. Asbestos is known to be a human carcinogen.
• Carbon monoxide is an odorless and toxic gas. It is found in fumes produced any time you burn fuel in cars or trucks, small engines, stoves, lanterns, grills, fireplaces, gas ranges, or furnaces. Proper venting or exhaust systems prevent build up in the air.
• Formaldehyde is a strong-smelling chemical found in some pressed wood furniture, wood particle cabinets, flooring, carpets, and fabrics. It can also be a component of some glues, adhesives, paints, and coating products. Formaldehyde is known to be a human carcinogen.
• Lead is a naturally occurring metal that has been used in a wide variety of products including gasoline, paint, plumbing pipes, ceramics, solders, batteries, and even cosmetics.
• Mold is a microorganism and type of fungus that thrives in damp places; different molds are found everywhere, indoors and outside.
• Pesticides are substances used to kill, repel, or control certain forms of plants or bugs that are considered to be pests.
• Radon is a colorless, odorless, naturally occurring gas that comes from the decay of radioactive elements in soils. It can enter indoor spaces through cracks or gaps in buildings. Most exposures occur inside homes, schools, and workplaces. EPA estimates radon is responsible for about 21,000 U.S. deaths from lung cancer annually.
• Smoke, a byproduct of combustion processes, such as from cigarettes, cookstoves, and wildfires, contains toxic chemicals like formaldehyde and lead.

What is NIEHS Doing?

NIEHS supports research on the health effects of indoor air pollutants, such as those listed above, found in homes, schools, and workplaces. Because individuals move between indoor and outdoor environments, researchers are also developing specialized technologies to measure and collect data on personal exposures.

Respiratory Disease

• Actions to reduce mold exposure in early life may have long-term health benefits, potentially decreasing prevalence and severity of asthma.
• Among inner-city children with asthma who live in homes with high levels of indoor air pollution, those children with sufficient vitamin D levels had fewer symptoms.
• Household air pollution exposure likely affects lung development prenatally. Indoor air pollution exposure during pregnancy was associated with impaired lung function in infants. This altered infant lung function may then increase risk for pneumonia in the first year of life.
• Outdoor air quality can affect indoor air. Air pollution levels have been trending downward over several decades in southern California, due to air quality-control policies. These improvements in air quality are associated with improved lung development in children.
• The school environment contributes to childhood asthma illness. A study found that airborne mouse allergens in inner-city schools are linked to increased symptoms and decreased lung function in asthmatic children. School-based environmental interventions may be beneficial for curbing the public health problem of childhood asthma.

Cardiovascular Disease

• A study partially supported by NIEHS found that markers of cardiovascular disease risk appear when ozone levels are even lower than current EPA air quality standards. In healthy adults, exposure to short-term indoor and outdoor ozone was linked to increased blood platelets, a risk factor for clotting, and increased blood pressure.

Cognitive Effects

• Indoor exposures to air pollutants, including particulate matter, allergens, oxides of nitrogen, endotoxin, and mold, have been associated with impaired health and performance in children and adults.
• Characterization of indoor air pollution in schools is a public health concern for children, given the large amount of time spent there. Some inner-city schools exceeded WHO guidelines for interior air quality, particularly for nitric oxide, an indoor air pollutant that can affect cognitive outcomes, verbal abilities, and executive functioning. Physical defects and lack of proper ventilation contributed to the poor air quality in schools. The results suggest that improving building conditions and facilities, as well as consideration of the school’s outdoor surroundings, could create healthier environments.
• Office workers scored higher on performance measures when working in “green” environments with low indoor pollutants and low carbon dioxide levels.
• The air quality within an office can affect employees’ cognitive function, including response times and ability to focus, and it may also affect their productivity, according to NIEHS-funded research led by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Cancer

Community Involvement

NIEHS grant recipients work directly with communities affected by indoor air pollution to help reduce exposures and improve quality of life. Examples follow.

Citizen Science

• Together with researchers at two NIEHS-funded core centers — the University of Kentucky Center for Appalachian Research in Environmental Sciences and the University of Cincinnati Center for Environmental Genetics — high school students developed and pilot-tested a family-centered home radon testing toolkit with the ultimate goal of preventing lung cancer.
• To enable community-based research, NIEHS-funded researchers invented a low-cost, portable sensor for detecting indoor pollutants. The development of such high quality and affordable real-time sensors provides new opportunities to conduct research and inform individuals or communities on daily health risks.
• Engaging youth as partners in environmental health research can motivate them to pursue careers in science, build self-esteem and leadership skills, and educate their communities. At the University of California, Berkeley, the Lifting Up Communities by Intervening with Research (LUCIR) study involved high school students in characterizing chemicals in household cleaning products and estimating exposures to those chemicals. They repeated the process with “green” cleaning products, and noted reductions in harmful chemicals. Then to educate their target audience of Latina household cleaning staff, they developed engaging videos about choosing safer cleaning products. Learn more in a podcast linked below.

Tribal Nations

• Hopi tribe members in the American Southwest identified indoor air quality, as well as arsenic in drinking water, as environmental exposures of concern. These perceptions derive from actual experiences with health problems such as cancer and asthma. Study authors emphasize including traditional values and practices in future interventions to reduce environmental health risks.
• Patricia Nez Henderson, M.D., vice president of the Black Hills Center for American Indian Health and a NIEHS-funded researcher, is working to create culturally-relevant smoking cessation and secondhand smoke reduction interventions in Lakota communities. Learn more from a podcast listed below.
• Residential burning of biomass for heat leads to elevated indoor levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) that often exceed health-based air quality standards. NIEHS-funded grant recipients are developing and testing low-cost, educational, and sustainable interventions for improving residential heating to reduce young children’s risk of respiratory diseases in Native American communities.

Low- and Middle-income Countries (LMICs)

Examples of clean cookstoves
(Photo courtesy of U.S. Mission Geneva)

• NIEHS participates in the Household Air Pollution Intervention Network trial, a randomized controlled study of liquefied petroleum gas stove and fuel distribution to 3,200 households in four countries. The largest global source of indoor pollution, particularly in LMICs, comes from cooking and heating with solid fuels, including dung, wood, agricultural residues, and coal. Data from studies, such as this one, are needed to inform policies on interventions to reduce household air pollution among vulnerable populations.
• In LMICs, about 3 million infants and children younger than 5 years die every year from pneumonia, according to WHO. Exposure to household air pollution from burning biomass fuels was implicated in about a third of these cases. NIEHS has funded research related to cookstoves, which contributes to understanding health effects of this form of household air pollution.
• NIEHS also partnered with the American Thoracic Society, the European Respiratory Society, and the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves on an international workshop on respiratory health effects of household air pollution. The workshop task force concluded, in 2018, scientific evidence supports the potential to develop scalable solutions that can reduce these exposures and improve lives. Respiratory diseases from household air pollution are preventable for 2.8 billion people worldwide.
• Research, co-funded by NIEHS, shows that prenatal household air pollution exposure increased the chance of developing pneumonia in the first year of life. The authors concluded that clean-burning interventions, such as cookstoves, may be most effective when begun before children are born.

Further Reading

Stories from the Environmental Factor (NIEHS newsletter)

Press Releases

Podcasts

• Engaging Youth in Research (2021) – The NIEHS-funded Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas (CHAMCAOS) shares experiences with youth-led research, what they have learned, and how the program prepares the next generation of environmental health leaders.
• Using Culturally Appropriate Messages to Promote Smoke-free Homes (2021) – NIEHS-funded researchers work with tribal communities to encourage smoke-free homes and improve health.
• Vapor Intrusion and Your Health (2018) – Better characterization and prediction of vapor-forming chemicals that can migrate into homes can help communities understand what they mean for their health.

Additional Resources

• Environmental Health Disparities and Environmental Justice – NIEHS supports many research programs, community-engaged activities, and training and education programs to reduce the disparate health effects of environmental hazards in disadvantaged communities and improve health equity.
• Fungal Diseases webpage from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases covers fungal diseases caused by a variety of fungi commonly found in the environment. You can inhale fungi spores, or they can land on you. As a result, fungal infections tend to start in the lungs or on the skin.
• Indoor Air in Homes and Coronavirus (COVID-19) is a how-to guide by the EPA on improving ventilation to preserve indoor air quality and halt the spread of COVID-19.
• Indoor Environmental Quality is a resource from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health with information on indoor environmental contaminants and ways to control them.
• Prescription for Prevention: Indoor Air is a resource for healthcare professionals developed by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai through an NIEHS grant.
• The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air Quality is a safety guide prepared by EPA and the Consumer Product Safety Commission with steps for reducing indoor air pollution in your home.

Related Health Topics

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

The air you breathe outside is more heavily regulated than the air you breathe in your home, and air quality advocates want more protection for indoor air quality issues—especially as climate change impacts like fires and heat force people to seek shelter indoors.

Harmful indoor air quality has been listed as one of the top five environmental risks to public health, according to Environmental Protection Agency comparative risk studies. Yet there’s no comprehensive regulation that addresses those harms outside of a patchwork of protections and standards of care.

And the stakes for indoor pollution mitigation have only continued to rise, American Lung Association Director of Environmental Health Kevin Stewart told Bloomberg Law.

“Climate change and the Covid crisis are certainly helping to bring that more into the public consciousness and into the consciousness of policymakers,” he said.

The Biden administration’s increased focus on environmental justice also raises the ante on a pollution issue that disproportionately affects low-income communities, others say.

Asbestos from building materials, particulate matter released from cooking, outdoor pollution seepage, and even popular scented candles contribute to indoor emissions that lead to more than 4 million premature global deaths a year, according to World Health Organization data.

Indoor pollution sources including adhesives, mold, manufactured wood, and cleaning supplies can contribute to short- and long-term illnesses like asthma in concentrated doses. People living and working inside inadequately ventilated buildings can also experience “sick building syndrome,” which results in nausea and dizziness.

‘Never Been Enough’

WHO has set minimum standards for indoor air pollutants, such as benzene and carbon monoxide, while some European Union countries like France and Germany have taken steps to draft legislation or national plans for indoor air quality.

Other countries “take the science a little bit earlier out of the gate and put it in policy, and we tend to take 20, 30, 40 years,” according to Gillian Mittelstaedt, executive director of the Tribal Healthy Homes Network, an organization that advocates for healthy indoor air in tribal communities.

The Clean Air Act led to major improvements for U.S. air, but that’s “never been enough” to mitigate harm from indoor environments where Americans spend 90% of their time, University of Nottingham professor and retired Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory senior scientist Max Sherman told Bloomberg Law.

“The current problems are different,” he said. “And either the Act must be reinterpreted or changed or evolved to be able to include the sources that are of growing importance.”

Indoor air quality advocates continue to push for better protections, including through better model standards that can be adopted into building codes.

“One of the best things we can do to improve things is to raise minimum standards by however much we can,” said William P. Bahnfleth, an architectural engineering professor at Pennsylvania State University.

Advocates are hopeful that increased funding for research, more robust guidance, and the adoption of local solutions could also ease the burden.

“The solution is going to be multi-pronged; there is no silver bullet,” Mittelstaedt said.

Limited Authority

Unlike emissions spewed from smokestacks on industrial facilities, agencies like the EPA don’t have broad regulatory authority to address indoor pollution.

This leaves an issue-by-issue collection of building code thresholds and chemical regulations, such as asbestos mitigation through Toxic Substances Control Act or other programs like the National Radon Action Plan targeting carcinogenic radon.

Congress has occasionally taken up the mantle, including with the Indoor Air Quality Act of 1991, which tasked the EPA with research and programs geared towards mitigating indoor air pollution. That bill died after passing the Senate.

More recently, lawmakers have introduced proposals for indoor air cleanup in places like schools or buildings. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Rep. Carolyn Bourdeaux (D-Ga.) introduced a bill this year (S. 122, H.R. 1398) that would provide incentives for better indoor filtration for businesses.

“We have the science to develop exposure limits, guidelines, or standards,” Mittelstaedt said. “The implementation issue—both as a practitioner, how you would do that, and as a regulator, how you would achieve that—are some major questions in front of us.”

Part of the challenge is that— despite ample research connecting improved health outcomes with indoor air quality—no targeted mechanism exists to measure the harmful effects of daily pollution exposure on things such as day-to-day productivity indoors, Bahnfleth noted.

“You have a real expense that you have to pay, compared with a benefit that you have to believe in,” he said.

Some home builders and construction companies also have pushed back on more complex requirements that add time and costs to construction.

The National Association of Home Builders opposes increased ventilation rates that could add costs and trigger additional requirements, according to Craig Drumheller, the organization’s assistant vice president of construction codes and standards.

“NAHB supports changes to the building code that clearly demonstrate a cost effective benefit, and we do not believe that many of the new ventilation requirements have met that test,” he said in a statement.

Federal Versus Local

The EPA has to “walk a fine line,” Sherman noted, because while indoor air pollution is an issue for the agency, it can’t craft standards.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development, too, is faced with the challenge of balancing indoor air issues while not making affordable housing more expensive for Americans in the face of higher building costs.

Builders also can adopt voluntary EPA thresholds such as Indoor airPLUS, which lays out construction specifications that reduce exposure to indoor emissions from building materials.

“We’re making steps towards getting this right, but there’s a long way to go,” Sherman said.

State and local building codes fill some of the gaps left by the lack of federal authority, but advocates want more than the bare minimum.

States such as California have adopted model standards into their codes for non-residential buildings. Other states leave standards adoption up to local governments, and many states don’t adopt any at all.

Those model codes can include guidelines from the International Energy Conservation Code, or standards of care for indoor ventilation set by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers—known as ASHRAE. Even those could use some re-working, experts said.

“What almost none of them require is that you consider the outdoor air,” said Sherman, who sits on the ASHRAE residential ventilation committee. “That is, if you live in an EPA non-attainment area, you don’t have to do anything differently, and that’s one of the things we’re working on.”

Without a comprehensive regulatory strategy, throwing more federal dollars at localized pollution mitigation strategies like air monitoring also could offer more protections.

This is especially true for low-income communities living in urban heat islands, who can be forced inside homes with poor ventilation on hot days or after extreme weather events.

“The drive to address indoor air should be coupled with attention to the EJ communities, because those are the people who are going to have the least protected indoor environment,” Mittelstaedt said.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

Like many issues concerning health, it’s a social problem too: those with the worst indoor air quality are probably the ones with the least capacity to do something about it. “When we’re thinking about improving our indoor environments, I think it’s really important that we think about how we enable people to get equal access to good air quality,” says Catherine Noakes, professor of environmental engineering for buildings at the University of Leeds. 

If that all sounds bad, it isn’t – scientists know how to fix it. In fact, they’ve known for decades, says Noakes. And the solutions are surprisingly simple. Opening windows, for one, is a simple temporary fix, but it doesn’t solve the problem of outdoor air pollution getting in. More advanced methods include mechanical ventilation and filtration systems, such as HEPA air filters which physically remove particles and pollutants from the air. 

While it’s pretty difficult to directly measure ventilation rates in a building, getting a carbon dioxide monitor is a great first step. Carbon dioxide concentration levels can act as a proxy for ventilation rates; if levels are high, then it’s likely that other pollutants are high too. In the UK, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) sets the limit of carbon dioxide concentration in a workplace at 5,000 parts per million, or ppm, over an eight-hour period. And the HSE also has a guide to properly ventilating your office. But just because that’s the limit doesn’t strictly mean that it’s optimal or healthy – Allen’s research saw negative effects on productivity at levels below 1,000ppm. 

But cleaning up our indoor air will still take time and concerted effort. “We need to recognise this is the start of probably quite a long journey,” Noakes says. We know the science, and the guidelines in place are stringent enough, but “the biggest problem is compliance,” says Noakes. And we need to figure out how many buildings aren’t compliant with the standards. Under the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, employers are legally required to assess the risks to the health and safety of their employees and to put arrangements in place to control those risks. But the HSE rarely does checkups or prosecutes building owners and operators, says Timothy Sharpe, head of architecture at the University of Strathclyde. “The pandemic has made us realise that we don’t really know very much about quite a lot of our buildings,” he says. “We actually have very little data on how buildings are actually performing, what their ventilation levels are like.”

But the momentum from the pandemic means this could be the time to crack down on poor indoor air quality. Allen says this is the perfect moment to focus on the other benefits that come from cleaner indoor air beyond mitigating the spread of the virus. “When Covid eventually loses centre stage in our lives, we shouldn’t go back to forgetting about our buildings,” he says.  

More great stories from WIRED

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

 

Disabling demand-controlled ventilation

To save energy, some systems monitor building occupancy based on carbon dioxide levels, which rise when we exhale. When fewer people are in the building, the system reduces the rate of outdoor air. “It’s a way to stop ventilating the space to save money,” said Richard Corsi, incoming dean of the College of Engineering at University of California, Davis. “But after people leave an area, we need to continue to ventilate so we can purge the space of any aerosol particles left in the air.”

Increasing outdoor air

Air quality experts recommend adjusting outdoor air dampers, which are movable plates that can bring in more outside air. This isn’t advised in communities with poor outdoor air quality, such as areas with active wildfires.

Don’t be intimidated when asking about ventilation systems. A company that has done the work will have answers at the ready, and the right answers will be obvious. Recently I suggested that my friend ask his gym what it had done to improve ventilation. He is vaccinated and only goes to the gym when it’s not busy, but the reply was encouraging

“We have increased the heating ventilation air conditioning (HVAC) filters to hospital-grade MERV 13,” they wrote. “And opened outdoor HVAC dampers to achieve a higher level of air exchange in the center.”

Can the windows be opened?

Some older buildings and classrooms may not have modern ventilation systems, but simply opening windows can improve air quality. A recent study of infected college students in an isolation dormitory at the University of Oregon found that opening a window could reduce the amount of coronavirus in a room by half.

While opening a window can help, the effect is greater if you can cross ventilate by opening windows on different sides of the room. Open windows aren’t practical during cold weather or in areas with poor outdoor air quality. Adding box fans to windows and turning on exhaust fans in kitchen and bathroom areas can also improve ventilation in homes and in buildings without modern systems.

What is the air change rate?

The air changes per hour, or ACH, number is the industry standard to indicate how often the air in a room is replaced by outdoor air. (Cleaning the air with filters can create the equivalent of air change.) While some experts suggest four to six air changes per hour (that’s fresh or clean air every 10 to 15 minutes), many buildings fall short of that standard. It’s recommended that schools have an ACH of at least 3, but many classrooms are closer to 1.5, experts say. Airplanes and newer hospitals may have anywhere from 10 to 20 air changes per hour. Air change rates or their equivalent can be improved by upgrading the overall ventilation system or filters, increasing the amount of outdoor air (by opening windows or ventilation dampers), adding exhaust fans or by adding portable air filters. If your workplace is decided whether or not to buy an air purifier, this article may help.

Originally Appeared Here

As a new semester begins in Forsyth County a local group is trying to make sure that teachers and students are safe. Saturday afternoon, a group called Community for Safe Schools assembled and donated 70 air purifiers to Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools. “Air filtration – removing virus and other pollutants to improve indoor air quality, is an essential COVID-19 mitigation strategy,” said the group via a statement on their webpage. So many teachers requested the air purifiers that the group is now planning to raise $6,800 in order to buy an additional 100 of them to be given out across the district. If you would like to give a donation towards their efforts, you can do so here.

FORSYTH COUNTY, N.C. —

As a new semester begins in Forsyth County a local group is trying to make sure that teachers and students are safe.

Saturday afternoon, a group called Community for Safe Schools assembled and donated 70 air purifiers to Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools.

“Air filtration – removing virus and other pollutants to improve indoor air quality, is an essential COVID-19 mitigation strategy,” said the group via a statement on their webpage.

So many teachers requested the air purifiers that the group is now planning to raise $6,800 in order to buy an additional 100 of them to be given out across the district.

If you would like to give a donation towards their efforts, you can do so here.

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

If you are buying a home, any IAQ issues, especially radon, will probably be noted during the presale certified home inspection. Beyond that, Parsons doesn’t advise patients to have their home air quality tested without cause. “In my clinical experience, most triggers are detected by reviewing a patient’s medical history,” he says. “Poor air quality is real, but most issues are obvious: pets, a wood-burning stove, mold on a wall, things you can see. If you buy or remodel and find a major mold issue, then obviously you need to take care of it, but a spot of mold in your bathtub or on the carpet is easy to self-manage.”

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here

October 26, 2021

SEATTLE (October 26, 2021) – Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the winners of the Cleaner Indoor Air During Wildfires Challenge. Challenge winners receive prizes of up to $10,000 for their proposed innovative technologies that could be used in homes to clean indoor air during wildfire smoke events. Three of the five winning projects selected nationwide are here in the Pacific Northwest, where longer and more intense wildfire seasons frequently cause unhealthy and even hazardous air quality in many communities. 

“The increasing intensity of wildfires is a major public health challenge,” said Dr. Wayne Cascio, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science in EPA’s Office of Research and Development. “The innovative ideas proposed by the challenge winners can further our efforts to protect public health and keep indoor air as clean as possible during wildfires and other high air pollution events.”

Wildfires release many pollutants that worsen air quality in areas downwind. Particle pollution, specifically fine particulate matter (PM2.5 or particles smaller than 2.5 micrometers), is a significant component of wildfire smoke and a known health risk for people exposed to high amounts or prolonged concentrations. Wildfire smoke exposure is particularly hazardous for people with pre-existing health conditions, such as asthma or cardiovascular disease. Smoke can spread many miles during wildfires, impacting communities near and far. Recommended responses to reduce smoke exposures during wildfires include staying indoors with doors and windows closed, when possible.

Current indoor air cleaning technologies have multiple limitations that prevent their widespread use, including the cost of purchase, operation, and maintenance, as well as dependence on electrical power, which can be disrupted by wildfires or rolling blackouts. The challenge winners developed detailed written proposals for affordable approaches to keep indoor air as clean as possible during periods when outdoor PM2.5 concentrations are elevated, such as during wildfire smoke events. Winners from this first phase of the challenge will be invited to submit prototypes of their technologies for evaluation in the next challenge phase.

Challenge Winners in EPA’s Region 10:

• Low-Cost Household Air Purifier Requiring No Consumables – An air purifier that uses a method called cyclonic separation to remove smoke particles from the air, and this process would be enhanced by adding a fine mist of water to the air stream. Proposed by Charles Matlack and Liam Bradshaw, of Seattle, Wash.
• The Cocoon: An Accessible Low-Cost Air Cleaner for Safer Spaces During Wildfires – An air cleaner that uses a large, tube-shaped, washable fabric filter combined with a box fan to create a low-cost device. Proposed by Elliot Gall, Brett Stinson, Matthew Moore, and Warren Gunn, Portland State University, Mechanical and Materials Engineering, of Portland, Ore.
• Resonant Ultrasonic Scrubber for Indoor Air Filtration – An air cleaner that uses the motion created by sound waves (ultrasonic agitation) to aerosolize water and mix with smoky air to capture particles in the air. Proposed by Eric Nutsch, BOTE Innovations LLC, of Burley, Idaho.

Read the full descriptions of winning and honorable mention proposals on the challenge website: https://www.epa.gov/air-research/winners-cleaner-indoor-air-during-wildfires-challenge.
Learn more about EPA’s wildfire research: https://www.epa.gov/air-research/wildland-fire-research-protect-health-and-environment
 

[ad_2]

Originally Appeared Here