Do you think before you breathe? Survey finds broad misperceptions about impact of cleaner indoor air

December 7, 2015, Drexel University
A survey of more than 100 building designers, engineers, managers, owners and tenants revealed that the majority are confused about the costs and benefits of maintaining good indoor air quality.

Do you know how easy it is to improve the quality of the air you breathe every day? Or how much indoor air quality affects your health and productivity? If you're not sure, you're not alone. According to a recent survey by a group of Drexel University environmental and architectural engineering researchers, there is quite a bit of confusion about the costs and benefits of indoor air quality improvement—even among building owners, designers, managers and tenants.

The study, which was originally published in the journal Indoor Air with new findings recently presented at the annual meeting of The Society for Risk Analysis, Michael Waring, PhD, and Patrick Gurian, PhD, faculty members in Drexel's College of Engineering, indicates that there are some serious misperceptions about how much it would cost to improve and how much it actually helps.

"We spend 90 percent of the day inside buildings, but we may think of as a matter of comfort or aesthetics, rather than something that has demonstrated impacts on our health and productivity." Gurian said.

The survey participants were a group of 112 informed building stakeholders, including building owners, building managers, designers, consultants and tenants. The survey presented two basic ideas for improving air quality: increasing ventilation and using better air filters at the same time. Both of these are relatively minimal changes in the world of indoor environment management, and both can usually be done without any changes to existing building mechanical systems. And research has shown that making these improvements is a good way to avoid sick building syndrome and sick-day absenteeism.

"There's little disagreement that increasing ventilation and upgrading filtration of will improve air quality for building occupants," Waring said.

Despite this research establishing the benefits of these improvements, among each category of participants, the majority of those surveyed were unsure whether the suggested changes would have much of an effect on productivity, absenteeism and health. And the majority of the building tenants surveyed thought it was unlikely that the owner of their building would ever install such upgrades.

The survey also revealed an eye-opening misperception in the overall cost of making these indoor air quality improvements.

"What we found startling was the overestimation of what these improvements would cost as a percentage of the overall energy bill. On average, the participants thought it would cost about 10 times more than it actually would," Waring said.

Simple measures, like opening windows to improve air flow and changing air handling filters more frequently, are known to have a big impact on indoor air quality.
"This is a real missed opportunity," Gurian said. "Because it doesn't take much time or effort to make these changes and improve indoor air quality—but the benefits in terms of health and productivity of the building occupants are most likely significant."

"Even among this group of people, who all have some background knowledge about buildings and their operation, there seemed to be a demonstrable misunderstanding of how little these improvements cost and how much they can benefit the health and productivity of building occupants," Waring said.

Increasing ventilation, according to Waring, can be as easy as opening a window or, opening an outdoor air damper for a mechanically ventilated building.

"There is strong evidence for a link between and occupant welfare and productivity," Gurian said. "It is well-known in the indoor air field that higher instances of airborne disease infection in commercial buildings are associated directly with low ventilation rates. Increasing ventilation rates above minimum standards has been shown to reduce symptoms of 'sick building syndrome' and absenteeism in offices."

Coupled with the increase in ventilation rate, the survey asked participants to also consider the benefits and costs of upgrading a building's air filter. The filter limits exposure to particulate matter that can be brought indoors with higher ventilation rates.

"The technical literature has well established that increased exposure to outdoor particle matter is correlated with increased cardiovascular and respiratory diseases," Waring said. "If you're increasing ventilation rate and potentially bringing more particles of outdoor origin inside, it only makes sense to improve the air filtration as well."

Many building engineers and architects do learn about indoor air quality principles and work to incorporate them into new buildings. But as Gurian and Waring point out, these improvements could also be implemented in existing buildings as retrofits, which makes them able to be realized on a large scale.

Informal interviews with managers indicate that maintaining functioning heating and cooling systems often consumes much of their time and efforts while considering how to improve the air quality systems is barely an afterthought.

"Increasing ventilation rate could be as easy as opening a damper or a vent," Waring said. "And to make sure the air coming in is clean, you upgrade the filter. It's as simple as that. This is an easy, impactful fix—we're just trying to inform the decision-makers of that fact."

But the education and incentives to shift perception of indoor air quality might be lagging. The researchers suggest that tying more air quality goals to the sustainability metrics used to rate buildings could be a step toward broader adoption of these methods.

They also suggest that some improvements and monitoring might be appropriate for individual residences.

"I can easily see indoor air quality technology and monitoring being incorporated in more residential climate control systems in the future," Waring said. "For many subsets of the population indoor air quality is a real concern. For people with allergies, asthma or other sensitivities, it could start with improving the IAQ of their homes or apartments. But eventually more people will start thinking about the quality of air in their workplaces—as much as they think about the temperature and access to natural light. And that is when perception is going to start changing."

Explore further: Improving indoor air quality in EU schools

Related Stories

Improving indoor air quality in EU schools

January 28, 2015
SINPHONIE, an EU-funded research project on indoor air quality in EU schools, and its impact on children's health, has recently published its conclusions. Based on the evidence gathered, the Joint Research Centre and the ...

Green office environments linked with higher cognitive function scores

October 26, 2015
People who work in well-ventilated offices with below-average levels of indoor pollutants and carbon dioxide (CO2) have significantly higher cognitive functioning scores—in crucial areas such as responding to a crisis or ...

How a green building influences the health of its occupants

July 9, 2015
Green buildings are indeed healthy buildings. So says Dr. Joseph Allen and fellow researchers of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in the US. They conducted the first comprehensive review of studies that focused ...

Living 'green' walls may have adverse health effects on office workers living in hot, polluted climates

October 2, 2015
New research by University of York academics reveals that living 'green' walls may have adverse health effects on office workers living in hot, polluted climates.

Recommended for you

How AI could help veterinarians code their notes

November 19, 2018
A team led by scientists at the School of Medicine has developed an algorithm that can read the typed-out notes from veterinarians and predict specific diseases that the animal may have.

Bullying and violence at work increases the risk of cardiovascular disease

November 19, 2018
People who are bullied at work or experience violence at work are at higher risk of heart and brain blood vessel problems, including heart attacks and stroke, according to the largest prospective study to investigate the ...

A low-gluten, high-fiber diet may be healthier than gluten-free

November 16, 2018
When healthy people eat a low-gluten and fibre-rich diet compared with a high-gluten diet, they experience less intestinal discomfort including less bloating. Researchers at University of Copenhagen show that this is due ...

Youth dating violence shaped by parents' conflict-handling views, study finds

November 16, 2018
Parents who talk to their children about nonviolent ways of resolving conflict may reduce children's likelihood of physically or psychologically abusing their dating partners later—even when parents give contradictory messages ...

Why we shouldn't like coffee, but we do

November 15, 2018
Why do we like the bitter taste of coffee? Bitterness evolved as a natural warning system to protect the body from harmful substances. By evolutionary logic, we should want to spit it out.

Dietary fat is good? Dietary fat is bad? Coming to consensus

November 15, 2018
Which is better, a low-fat/high-carbohydrate diet or a high-fat/low-carbohydrate diet—or is it the type of fat that matters? In a new paper featured on the cover of Science magazine's special issue on nutrition, researchers ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.