Most ventilation systems in schools and offices are just not up to the job when it comes to helping curb the spread of COVID-19 according to a new study.
The study, published by the International Journal of Thermofluids, looks at how infectious diseases spread in tightly packed buildings using different ventilation systems.
Sick building syndrome, which blames factors such as heating and air conditioning for sickness, days off and poor performance has been a worry since the 80s. Now with COVID-19, a fresh focus on intelligent ventilation systems could be key to public health.
“The most commonly used ventilation systems are inadequate at lowering airborne transmission risks,” said Professor Hussam Jouhara at Brunel University London.
“High occupancy buildings must be better adapted as a matter of urgency to reduce disease transmission resulting from inappropriate or inadequate ventilation,” said Prof Jouhara.
“COVID-19 has exposed areas requiring urgent development to protect our health, wellbeing and the economy by providing safe indoor environments for employees or students,” he said in the study.
While social distancing and wearing a mask can lower COVID-19 transmission, indoor airflows in buildings holding lots of people must work better to remove airborne pathogens, the study finds.
Depending what the weather is like outside, most ventilation systems suck in outdoor air, then heat or cool it before circulating it round the building. The ‘used’ air then either gets pumped back outside, or is recirculated in the system. Most current systems use centralised air distribution and ceiling level air supply or recirculation, which create the best conditions for disease to spread, the study says. And with claims the virus can stay in the air for up to three hours, the more people come and go from the building, the more the virus spreading pathogens people are exposed to.
Swapping these centralised systems for displacement ventilation systems such as natural ventillation, or naturally assisted ventilation (mixing mechanical extract with controlled inlet openings).
Poor maintenance and alterations to cut energy use or noise also mean there’s often a big gap between the level of ventilation laid down by building standards and reality, the team found. In classrooms, ventilation rates often fail to reach required minimum standard, several studies show. The peak CO2 concentration often exceeded the recommended levels.
“Since the vast majority of air conditioners and hybrid ventilation systems in public buildings mix the indoor air like a blender and utilise air recirculation, it raises the question over their safety and indicates the need for further research, so safety can be improved, especially in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said Prof Jouhara.
“If designed and implemented appropriately, natural ventilation measures, or a combination of localised mechanical exhaust and large cross section natural inlets, can provide an adequate displacement ventilation solution, significantly reducing the risk of infection.”
To mark Clean Air Day, Mark Bouldin, healthy buildings expert at Johnson Controls explains why the UK needs a new approach to clean air in buildings.
If you had the choice of breathing clean air for 90% of the time or 10% of the time, which would you choose? Well, currently, the emphasis is firmly on the 10%. From governments, campaigners and businesses, there has been a huge push to clean the air we breathe outside. And there’s no denying the importance of that. However, given the average member of the British public spends 22 hours of their day indoors, it seems negligent not to place the same level of attention on indoor air quality (IAQ).
A new care home development in Kent has invested in BoilerMag technology to protect its heating system and plant room from a build-up problem of ferrous oxide and scale....