FutureAir

The news site and newsletter wunderkind Quartz recently took a long look at society’s obsession with Air Conditioning, highlighting the technological advances stretching all the way back to 1300 B.C. that paved the way for the halogenated chlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) gulping devices we are familiar with today.

While those HCFCs replaced the ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that were used until 1995, new advances in AC technology seek to eliminate HCFCs as well, replacing them with possible technologies such as magnetic air conditioners, membrane-based air conditioners using water as a refrigerant, and passive cooling systems that manipulate interior climates through the smart design of wind and water.

Nevertheless, the numbers on our use of modern air conditioning are startling: 10% of the world’s electricity is devoted to air conditioning, with 1.6 billion AC units installed globally. Every year 117 million metric tons of carbon dioxide are released by air conditioners in the US alone, while the AC units expected to be installed in India by 2030 will be the equivalent of adding several new midsize countries to the global grid.

And despite this tremendous energy expenditure, many office workers in the US frequently complain that their office’s AC units are too cold. Much of the blame can be traced to architectural choices driven by the availability of air conditioning, which allowed architects to forgo cooling tricks such as high ceilings and breezeways. The result was a situation in which AC was more and more necessary to cool office buildings, with that AC calibration derived from the metabolism of a 40-year-old, 155-pound man.

Thankfully, the field of bioclimatic architecture and the rise of carbon-neutral “fifth-generation” skyscrapers promises some relief by integrating water catchment and natural ventilation technologies, a refreshing nod to old school cooling systems that were far less harmful to the environment than current solutions.

Click here to read the full article.

Since 2010, toxic air in London has been at illegal levels, and for a brief period last year, air pollution in London was even worse than Beijing, according to statistics from the London mayor’s office. This air has a direct effect on the lives of Londoners, with more than 9,000 dying prematurely each year, and the air itself is no doubt the result from vehicles on the road–including those that use diesel.

Despite the statistics, Londoners seem to be unaware of how severe the problem is. But artist Michael Pinsky set off to change that by setting up an exhibit on the grounds of the Somerset House which included five geodesic domes, or pollution pods, each designed to simulate the atmospheric conditions in Beijing; São Paulo; London; New Delhi; and Norway’s Tautra Island by recreating the local air using safe chemicals.

Pinsky’s hope was that by directly experiencing levels of pollution from around the world, people would be galvanized to act.

“In terms of driving behavioral change, the thing that seemed important was to pick something that affects everyday life,” he said. “I picked London because pollution is something I feel every day.”

A tour through these geodesic pollution pods from least to most polluted would leave one walking from Tautra Island, to London, to Beijing, to New Delhi, and then finally to São Paulo, where the air is so noxious it made guests desperate to get out. Those visitors from rural locations suffered the most, suggesting that it may be possible to grow numb to constant high levels of outdoor air pollution. Londoners shared their own experiences with London’s pollution, reporting discolored mucus, difficult exercising outdoors, and purchasing plants to improve indoor air quality.

In addition to hosting the exhibit, Somerset House also raised a new Union Jack flag for Earth Day that changes color in real time as it reacted to London’s air quality, transforming from red, white, and blue to gray and black as it reacts to levels of radiation exposure.

Click here to read the full article.

Sadly, wildfires have become common for residents in states such as California and Oregon, prompting them to consider how best to deal with the smoke and ash that lingers afterwards for weeks or even months. Many residents have taken to air purifiers to help reduce the particulate pollution in their homes, and Tim Heffernan, a science writer and editor at Wirecutter, has offered some advice for those looking to purchase such a device.

At a minimum, Heffernan recommends HEPA certified air purifiers, which are rated to remove 99.97 percent of particles that are exactly 0.3 microns in diameter, though he also tested and found positive results with certified models that remove virtually all particles as small as 0.01 micron, one-thirtieth the HEPA standard.

“Most of us spend a lot of time indoors,” Mr. Heffernan said. “And indoor air is more polluted than outdoor air. It kind of comes down to what we have in our homes: pets, rugs, furniture that traps dust. And many homes are not terribly well ventilated.”

In addition to the HEPA certification–which Heffernan states should be listed as “true HEPA”–individuals seeking an air purifier will want to make sure the device has a tight seal around the filter to get the full effect of the device. Some models may list a CADR (Clean Air Delivery Rate) rating, which will indicate how efficiently the model will work depending on the size of the room it’s placed in. Heffernan suggests a CADR of at least 200, which means the unit effectively delivers the equivalent of 200 cubic feet of pure air per minute.

For a more cost-effective solution, it’s also possible to upgrade an existing HVAC system to improve air quality with filters that trap smaller particles. In these instances, filters with a MERV (Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value) rating between 7 and 13 are likely to be nearly as effective as “true HEPA” filters.

Within the air purifier market, buyers should watch out for dubious additional features, such as models that produce ozone to destroy pathogens (ozone is actually a respiratory system irritant) and ones that claim to reduce VOCS (volatile organic compounds), as very few models truly have such a capability.

Regardless of model, Heffernan recommends checking an air purifier every six months for buildup on the filter. Furthermore, for those in smoke-afflicted areas, Heffernan suggests keeping windows closed when possible, washing sheets and pillowcases, and when able mopping instead of vacuuming to avoid kicking up any dust or smoke that’s settled. Lastly, for those wishing to purchase a face mask, they should seek masks with an N95 or P100 rating, as these are the necessary levels to provide adequate protection from smoke particles.

Click here to read the full article.

Indoor air quality has become a major health issue throughout the world as rising levels of outdoor air pollution continue to make the air inside homes and facilities toxic. This indoor air quality epidemic even extends to malls, underscoring the importance for you to understand your mall’s air quality and how it can affect your overall health and well-being.

“The problem occurs when polluted outside air infiltrates the ventilation system of a mall,” stated Camfil’s Charlie Seyffer, Manager of Marketing & Technical Materials and 37-year ASHRAE member and active committee participant. “These are pollutants such as dust, smoke, and pollen, and they can cause a variety of respiratory problems if that mall is not equipped with commercial air filters that can eliminate these harmful particulates from the air.”

In addition to outdoor pollutants, there are also indoor air pollutants found in malls that can contribute to the problem, such as the chemicals and solvents used by dry cleaners, VOCs–or volatile organic compounds– present in the products sold at hardware and home furnishings stores, and the byproduct emissions caused by frying and broiling at fast food kiosks.

A study performed by Hong Kong researchers of nine malls across Hong Kong found significant concentrations of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, formaldehyde, particulate matter (PM10), as well as various strains of bacteria inside all of the malls examined. The high concentration of PM10 is of special concern, as these pollutants–such as dust, pollen, and mold–can lodge in the lungs and lead to respiratory problems. People with a history of heart disease or lung problems are particularly vulnerable to PM10 as well as PM2.5, a similar pollutant that consists of even smaller particles and which was identified as a pollutant in the study. Both of these pollutants also pose a danger to children and the elderly, because these groups tend to have immune systems that are not fully developed or weak due to aging.

While there’s not much an individual can do to directly counter the pollutants found in malls, they can be more aware of their surroundings and keep an eye out for symptoms that might indicate exposure to high levels of pollutants, such as eye, nose, and throat irritation, tightness of the chest, shortness of breath, and coughing.

Click here to read the full article.