 |
As research continues into the effects of good and bad IAQ, evidence is mounting that businesses can realize substantial benefits from both increased worker performance and decreased absences. One group that is taking charge of managing this research is the Indoor Environment Group of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) via its Indoor Air Quality Scientific Findings Resource Bank (IAQ-SFRB), a joint effort between the LBNL and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
According to the LBNL, research shows increased ventilation rates translate directly to improved worker performance, lower absenteeism, and millions of dollars in savings nationally. While the minimum standard ventilation rate in commercial buildings is “17 cubic feet per minute (cfm) per person for offices, using the standard’s default value for occupant density,” LBNL’s analysis of recent IAQ research shows that increased rates can make a big difference.
The analysis states: “… The projected practical benefits of increasing ventilation rates in U.S. offices to 32 cfm per person, in buildings with lower existing ventilation rates, include 0.6% to 1% increases in work performance and 10% to 19% decreases in sick building syndrome symptoms in 12 to 16 million workers, plus 7 to 10 million days of avoided absence.”
Join the thousands of environmental professionals who have counted on the Environmental Manager’s Compliance Advisor newsletter’s practical advice and best practice case studies for over 30 years.
Learn More
Overall, the LBNL states such ventilation rate changes can result in “associated total annual economic benefit ranges from $9 billion to $14 billion,” while they estimate associated costs of energy and implementation “were very small relative to the estimated benefits.”
Indoor air temperature is another area where improvements can result in cost savings when taken to “improve overall thermal comfort” of workers. Based on one large U.S. office survey study that showed “temperatures exceed 73.4°F during at least a portion of winter work days,” the LBNL estimated benefits from keeping winter temperatures lower than 73.4°F. “The estimated benefits included an average 0.2% increase in work performance in 40 million workers, an average 12% reduction in winter dissatisfaction with thermal comfort in 40 million workers, and prevention of 8 million cases of weekly sick building syndrome symptoms. The total estimated annual economic benefit was $3.4 billion with an annual implementation cost of less than $0.4 billion. Needless to say, lowering temperatures also lowers energy costs as well.”
Your "Peace of Mind" Guide to EPA Regs
Environmental Manager’s Compliance Advisor saves time and worry with concise reports on what the EPA, the DOT, and state regulators are doing and what that means for you.
In addition to IAQ only, LBNL also examines two important IEQ factors: dampness/mold and improved particle filtration. Mold and dampness cause or exacerbate colds, asthma, and respiratory health in general and are a primary cause of absenteeism in afflicted buildings. Although much of the research data available are specific to dampness and mold found in homes, the LBNL concludes that “the estimated benefits of a 30% reduction of dampness and mold in offices include 1.5 million days of avoided absence per year, worth $0.5 billion per year in avoided lost work.”
Anyone in industry is well aware of particulate matter as a major and highly regulated constituent of air pollution, but office buildings are also subject to particulates that are brought indoors via their heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. According to the LBNL, although most commercial HVAC systems have air filters, there remains “a considerable potential to prevent premature deaths and reduce adverse health effects through improved particle filtration in buildings.”
Although there are currently no available published estimates of national benefits, the LBNL reviewed one study that estimated “the per-person benefits” of filtering vs. not filtering the mechanically supplied outdoor air in office buildings. “From a societal perspective, the annual benefits of reduced premature death ranged from $37 to $144 per office worker and the annual benefits of reduced illness ranged from $8 to $30 per worker. The estimated annual per person cost of providing the filtration was $2.6.” To estimate national costs, the LBNL subtracted the per-person costs from the benefits and applied the remainder to the 41 million U.S. office workers and found “the net annual benefits are $1.4 to $5.8 billion for prevention of premature death and $0.2 to $1.1 billion for avoided illness.”