While
the building practices that are being used in the contemporary
environment are continuously improving, thanks is large part to a the
“Green” movement and a socially-charged desire to improve
sustainability, there exist a substantial part of our existing
infrastructure that has yet to be addressed and improved as in
pertains to non-toxic buildings and living conditions.
Many
non-industrial buildings have yet to be evaluated to establish
overall toxicity levels, VOC emissions and the associated adverse
health effects. The article: Building
Pathology, Investigation of Sick Buildings – VOC Emissions, that
was published in Indoor and Built Environments (2010) by Chuck Wah
Francis Yu and Jeong Tai Kim, outlines an important investigation
methodology that is being used in the UK that analyzes the level of
toxicity, as it pertains to VOC emissions, for new building,
completed dwellings and refurbished buildings. This methodology
exposes a litany of VOCs that are related each phase of building that
pose health threats to the occupants of these dwellings. Yu et al.
Describes an analysis protocol that involves the investigation of
four major factors that contribute to the toxic living environment.
This multi-disciplinary, comprehensive analysis seeks to use a
scientific approach to determining the cause and effect of building
and refurbishment “failures”, as they describe, that lead to
adverse or potentially adverse health effects.
This
first of these factors is described as the “historic building
pathology”. For each pre-existing structure, or new buildings,
building management is surveyed on building concerns such as
materials used in the build or refurbishments, ventilation or
lighting. The second factor is an investigation of the deterioration
of existing building materials that could emit VOCs such as molding
plywood and degrading carpet backing. The third part of the protocol
is an analysis of the emission of indoor air pollutants or microbial
matters that may result from solvents, pesticides and the like.
Finally, a comprehensive questionnaire analyzing human factors such
as activities and perceptions.
The
article later describes an exhaustive list of steps and factors to
address for each key phase of the analysis protocol. Obviously, the
size and age of the existing building, the number and nature of each
refurbishment and the type of building that is being analyzed
(apartments, business office, school, hospital) each play a
significant role in the time-expenditure required to analyze the
building and to provide more toxic-free building alternatives to
limit or eliminate VOCs. The important take-away message is that
this type of analysis on “sick buildings” can be applied to any
size or class of building. This method is applicable, to a diminished
level of detail, to the every-day family who would like to analyze
their current dwelling or are considering refurbishing their home.
The table provided below, as published in Building
Pathology, Investigation of Sick Buildings – VOC Emissions,
is a useful source that may inform individuals about possible sources
of VOC exposure when building or refurbishing their homes.
Citation:
Table 2 was taken directly from: Yu,C. Kim, J. Building
Pathology, Investigation of Sick Buildings – VOC Emissions. Indoor
and Build Environment. February 2010, vol. 19, no. 1, 30-39
While
the everyday home owner may not have an intimate knowledge of the
adverse health effects of the VOC's listed above, this table may
provide some knowledge as to how particular VOC emission present in
the home, what their aromas may be an where they originate from. In a perfect world, this protocol, or one similar and equally comprehensive, can be used to examine existing structures of all types and generate assessments of the overall toxicity so that viable, less-toxic alternatives can be used to create a healthier living and working conditions.
Indoor
and Build Environment. February 2010, vol. 19, no. 1, 30-39
No comments:
Post a Comment