Evaluating ROI of Efficient Upgrades in Mobile Home Air Conditioning

Indoor temperature under 18 °C (64 °F) has been shown to be associated with increased respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, increased blood levels, and increased hospitalization.^[33]

While sick building syndrome (SBS) encompasses a multitude of non-specific symptoms, building-related illness (BRI) comprises specific, diagnosable symptoms caused by certain agents (chemicals, bacteria, fungi, etc.). These can typically be identified, measured, and quantified.^[34] There are usually four causal agents in BRi: immunologic, infectious, toxic, and irritant.^[34] For instance, Legionnaire's disease, usually caused by Legionella pneumophila, involves a specific organism which could be ascertained through clinical findings as the source of contamination within a building.^[34]

• Reduction of time spent in the building
• If living in the building, moving to a new place
• Fixing any deteriorated paint or concrete deterioration
• Regular inspections to indicate for presence of mold or other toxins
• Adequate maintenance of all building mechanical systems
• Toxin-absorbing plants, such as sansevieria^{[35][36][37][38][39][40][41][excessive citations]}
• Roof shingle non-pressure cleaning for removal of algae, mold, and Gloeocapsa magma
• Using ozone to eliminate the many sources, such as VOCs, molds, mildews, bacteria, viruses, and even odors. However, numerous studies identify high-ozone shock treatment as ineffective despite commercial popularity and popular belief.
• Replacement of water-stained ceiling tiles and carpeting
• Only using paints, adhesives, solvents, and pesticides in well-ventilated areas or only using these pollutant sources during periods of non-occupancy
• Increasing the number of air exchanges; the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers recommend a minimum of 8.4 air exchanges per 24-hour period
• Increased ventilation rates that are above the minimum guidelines^[22]
• Proper and frequent maintenance of HVAC systems
• UV-C light in the HVAC plenum
• Installation of HVAC air cleaning systems or devices to remove VOCs and bioeffluents (people odors)
• Central vacuums that completely remove all particles from the house including the ultrafine particles (UFPs) which are less than 0.1 μm
• Regular vacuuming with a HEPA filter vacuum cleaner to collect and retain 99.97% of particles down to and including 0.3 micrometers
• Placing bedding in sunshine, which is related to a study done in a high-humidity area where damp bedding was common and associated with SBS^[17]
• Lighting in the workplace should be designed to give individuals control, and be natural when possible^[42]
• Relocating office printers outside the air conditioning boundary, perhaps to another building
• Replacing current office printers with lower emission rate printers^[43]
• Identification and removal of products containing harmful ingredients

SBS, as a non-specific blanket term, does not have any specific cause or cure. Any known cure would be associated with the specific eventual disease that was cause by exposure to known contaminants. In all cases, alleviation consists of removing the affected person from the building associated. BRI, on the other hand, utilizes treatment appropriate for the contaminant identified within the building (e.g., antibiotics for Legionnaire's disease).^{[citation needed]}

Improving the indoor air quality (IAQ) of a particular building can attenuate, or even eliminate, the continued exposure to toxins. However, a Cochrane review of 12 mold and dampness remediation studies in private homes, workplaces and schools by two independent authors were deemed to be very low to moderate quality of evidence in reducing adult asthma symptoms and results were inconsistent among children.^[44] For the individual, the recovery may be a process involved with targeting the acute symptoms of a specific illness, as in the case of mold toxins.^[45] Treating various building-related illnesses is vital to the overall understanding of SBS. Careful analysis by certified building professionals and physicians can help to identify the exact cause of the BRI, and help to illustrate a causal path to infection. With this knowledge one can, theoretically, remediate a building of contaminants and rebuild the structure with new materials. Office BRI may more likely than not be explained by three events: "Wide range in the threshold of response in any population (susceptibility), a spectrum of response to any given agent, or variability in exposure within large office buildings."^[46]

Isolating any one of the three aspects of office BRI can be a great challenge, which is why those who find themselves with BRI should take three steps, history, examinations, and interventions. History describes the action of continually monitoring and recording the health of workers experiencing BRI, as well as obtaining records of previous building alterations or related activity. Examinations go hand in hand with monitoring employee health. This step is done by physically examining the entire workspace and evaluating possible threats to health status among employees. Interventions follow accordingly based on the results of the Examination and History report.^[46]

Some studies have found that women have higher reports of SBS symptoms than men.^[17][10] It is not entirely clear, however, if this is due to biological, social, or occupational factors.

A 2001 study published in the Journal Indoor Air, gathered 1464 office-working participants to increase the scientific understanding of gender differences under the Sick Building Syndrome phenomenon.^[47] Using questionnaires, ergonomic investigations, building evaluations, as well as physical, biological, and chemical variables, the investigators obtained results that compare with past studies of SBS and gender. The study team found that across most test variables, prevalence rates were different in most areas, but there was also a deep stratification of working conditions between genders as well. For example, men's workplaces tend to be significantly larger and have all-around better job characteristics. Secondly, there was a noticeable difference in reporting rates, specifically that women have higher rates of reporting roughly 20% higher than men. This information was similar to that found in previous studies, thus indicating a potential difference in willingness to report.^[47]

There might be a gender difference in reporting rates of sick building syndrome, because women tend to report more symptoms than men do. Along with this, some studies have found that women have a more responsive immune system and are more prone to mucosal dryness and facial erythema. Also, women are alleged by some to be more exposed to indoor environmental factors because they have a greater tendency to have clerical jobs, wherein they are exposed to unique office equipment and materials (example: blueprint machines, toner-based printers), whereas men often have jobs based outside of offices.^[48]

This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (August 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

In the late 1970s, it was noted that nonspecific symptoms were reported by tenants in newly constructed homes, offices, and nurseries. In media it was called "office illness". The term "sick building syndrome" was coined by the WHO in 1986, when they also estimated that 10–30% of newly built office buildings in the West had indoor air problems. Early Danish and British studies reported symptoms.

Poor indoor environments attracted attention. The Swedish allergy study (SOU 1989:76) designated "sick building" as a cause of the allergy epidemic as was feared. In the 1990s, therefore, extensive research into "sick building" was carried out. Various physical and chemical factors in the buildings were examined on a broad front.

The problem was highlighted increasingly in media and was described as a "ticking time bomb". Many studies were performed in individual buildings.

In the 1990s "sick buildings" were contrasted against "healthy buildings". The chemical contents of building materials were highlighted. Many building material manufacturers were actively working to gain control of the chemical content and to replace criticized additives. The ventilation industry advocated above all more well-functioning ventilation. Others perceived ecological construction, natural materials, and simple techniques as a solution.

At the end of the 1990s came an increased distrust of the concept of "sick building". A dissertation at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm 1999 questioned the methodology of previous research, and a Danish study from 2005 showed these flaws experimentally. It was suggested that sick building syndrome was not really a coherent syndrome and was not a disease to be individually diagnosed, but a collection of as many as a dozen semi-related diseases. In 2006 the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare recommended in the medical journal Läkartidningen that "sick building syndrome" should not be used as a clinical diagnosis. Thereafter, it has become increasingly less common to use terms such as sick buildings and sick building syndrome in research. However, the concept remains alive in popular culture and is used to designate the set of symptoms related to poor home or work environment engineering. Sick building is therefore an expression used especially in the context of workplace health.

Sick building syndrome made a rapid journey from media to courtroom where professional engineers and architects became named defendants and were represented by their respective professional practice insurers. Proceedings invariably relied on expert witnesses, medical and technical experts along with building managers, contractors and manufacturers of finishes and furnishings, testifying as to cause and effect. Most of these actions resulted in sealed settlement agreements, none of these being dramatic. The insurers needed a defense based upon Standards of Professional Practice to meet a court decision that declared that in a modern, essentially sealed building, the HVAC systems must produce breathing air for suitable human consumption. ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers, currently with over 50,000 international members) undertook the task of codifying its indoor air quality (IAQ) standard.

ASHRAE empirical research determined that "acceptability" was a function of outdoor (fresh air) ventilation rate and used carbon dioxide as an accurate measurement of occupant presence and activity. Building odors and contaminants would be suitably controlled by this dilution methodology. ASHRAE codified a level of 1,000 ppm of carbon dioxide and specified the use of widely available sense-and-control equipment to assure compliance. The 1989 issue of ASHRAE 62.1-1989 published the whys and wherefores and overrode the 1981 requirements that were aimed at a ventilation level of 5,000 ppm of carbon dioxide (the OSHA workplace limit), federally set to minimize HVAC system energy consumption. This apparently ended the SBS epidemic.

Over time, building materials changed with respect to emissions potential. Smoking vanished and dramatic improvements in ambient air quality, coupled with code compliant ventilation and maintenance, per ASHRAE standards have all contributed to the acceptability of the indoor air environment.^[49][50]

• Aerotoxic syndrome
• Air purifier
• Asthmagen
• Cleanroom
• Electromagnetic hypersensitivity
• Havana syndrome
• Healthy building
• Indoor air quality
• Lead paint
• Multiple chemical sensitivity
• NASA Clean Air Study
• Nosocomial infection
• Particulates
• Power tools
• Renovation
• Somatization disorder
• Fan death

• Martín-Gil J., Yanguas M. C., San José J. F., Rey-Martínez and Martín-Gil F. J. "Outcomes of research into a sick hospital". Hospital Management International, 1997, pp. 80–82. Sterling Publications Limited.
• Åke Thörn, The Emergence and preservation of sick building syndrome, KI 1999.
• Charlotte Brauer, The sick building syndrome revisited, Copenhagen 2005.
• Michelle Murphy, Sick Building Syndrome and the Problem of Uncertainty, 2006.
• Johan Carlson, "Gemensam förklaringsmodell för sjukdomar kopplade till inomhusmiljön finns inte" [Unified explanation for diseases related to indoor environment not found]. Läkartidningen 2006/12.
• Bulletin of the Transilvania University of BraÅŸov, Series I: Engineering Sciences • Vol. 5 (54) No. 1 2012 "Impact of Indoor Environment Quality on Sick Building Syndrome in Indian Leed Certified Buildings". by Jagannathan Mohan

• Best Practices for Indoor Air Quality when Remodeling Your Home, US EPA
• Renovation and Repair, Part of Indoor Air Quality Design Tools for Schools, US EPA
• Addressing Indoor Environmental Concerns During Remodeling, US EPA
• Dust FAQs, UK HSE Archived 2023-03-20 at the Wayback Machine
• CCOHS: Welding - Fumes And Gases | Health Effect of Welding Fumes

 

Mechanical ventilation of buildings and structures can be achieved by the use of the following techniques:

• Whole-house ventilation
• Mixing ventilation
• Displacement ventilation
• Dedicated subaerial air supply

Demand-controlled ventilation (DCV, also known as Demand Control Ventilation) makes it possible to maintain air quality while conserving energy.^[27][28] ASHRAE has determined that "It is consistent with the ventilation rate procedure that demand control be permitted for use to reduce the total outdoor air supply during periods of less occupancy."^[29] In a DCV system, CO₂ sensors control the amount of ventilation.^[30][31] During peak occupancy, CO₂ levels rise, and the system adjusts to deliver the same amount of outdoor air as would be used by the ventilation-rate procedure.^[32] However, when spaces are less occupied, CO₂ levels reduce, and the system reduces ventilation to conserves energy. DCV is a well-established practice,^[33] and is required in high occupancy spaces by building energy standards such as ASHRAE 90.1.^[34]

This section needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (September 2024)

Personalized ventilation is an air distribution strategy that allows individuals to control the amount of ventilation received. The approach delivers fresh air more directly to the breathing zone and aims to improve the air quality of inhaled air. Personalized ventilation provides much higher ventilation effectiveness than conventional mixing ventilation systems by displacing pollution from the breathing zone with far less air volume. Beyond improved air quality benefits, the strategy can also improve occupants' thermal comfort, perceived air quality, and overall satisfaction with the indoor environment. Individuals' preferences for temperature and air movement are not equal, and so traditional approaches to homogeneous environmental control have failed to achieve high occupant satisfaction. Techniques such as personalized ventilation facilitate control of a more diverse thermal environment that can improve thermal satisfaction for most occupants.

Local exhaust ventilation addresses the issue of avoiding the contamination of indoor air by specific high-emission sources by capturing airborne contaminants before they are spread into the environment. This can include water vapor control, lavatory effluent control, solvent vapors from industrial processes, and dust from wood- and metal-working machinery. Air can be exhausted through pressurized hoods or the use of fans and pressurizing a specific area.^[35]
A local exhaust system is composed of five basic parts:

1. A hood that captures the contaminant at its source
2. Ducts for transporting the air
3. An air-cleaning device that removes/minimizes the contaminant
4. A fan that moves the air through the system
5. An exhaust stack through which the contaminated air is discharged^[35]

In the UK, the use of LEV systems has regulations set out by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which are referred to as the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (CoSHH). Under CoSHH, legislation is set to protect users of LEV systems by ensuring that all equipment is tested at least every fourteen months to ensure the LEV systems are performing adequately. All parts of the system must be visually inspected and thoroughly tested and where any parts are found to be defective, the inspector must issue a red label to identify the defective part and the issue.

The owner of the LEV system must then have the defective parts repaired or replaced before the system can be used.

Smart ventilation is a process of continually adjusting the ventilation system in time, and optionally by location, to provide the desired IAQ benefits while minimizing energy consumption, utility bills, and other non-IAQ costs (such as thermal discomfort or noise). A smart ventilation system adjusts ventilation rates in time or by location in a building to be responsive to one or more of the following: occupancy, outdoor thermal and air quality conditions, electricity grid needs, direct sensing of contaminants, operation of other air moving and air cleaning systems. In addition, smart ventilation systems can provide information to building owners, occupants, and managers on operational energy consumption and indoor air quality as well as a signal when systems need maintenance or repair. Being responsive to occupancy means that a smart ventilation system can adjust ventilation depending on demand such as reducing ventilation if the building is unoccupied. Smart ventilation can time-shift ventilation to periods when a) indoor-outdoor temperature differences are smaller (and away from peak outdoor temperatures and humidity), b) when indoor-outdoor temperatures are appropriate for ventilative cooling, or c) when outdoor air quality is acceptable. Being responsive to electricity grid needs means providing flexibility to electricity demand (including direct signals from utilities) and integration with electric grid control strategies. Smart ventilation systems can have sensors to detect airflow, systems pressures, or fan energy use in such a way that systems failures can be detected and repaired, as well as when system components need maintenance, such as filter replacement.^[36]

Combustion (in a fireplace, gas heater, candle, oil lamp, etc.) consumes oxygen while producing carbon dioxide and other unhealthy gases and smoke, requiring ventilation air. An open chimney promotes infiltration (i.e. natural ventilation) because of the negative pressure change induced by the buoyant, warmer air leaving through the chimney. The warm air is typically replaced by heavier, cold air.

Ventilation in a structure is also needed for removing water vapor produced by respiration, burning, and cooking, and for removing odors. If water vapor is permitted to accumulate, it may damage the structure, insulation, or finishes. ^{[citation needed]} When operating, an air conditioner usually removes excess moisture from the air. A dehumidifier may also be appropriate for removing airborne moisture.

Ventilation guidelines are based on the minimum ventilation rate required to maintain acceptable levels of effluents. Carbon dioxide is used as a reference point, as it is the gas of highest emission at a relatively constant value of 0.005 L/s. The mass balance equation is:

Q = G/(C_i − C_a)

• Q = ventilation rate (L/s)
• G = CO₂ generation rate
• C_i = acceptable indoor CO₂ concentration
• C_a = ambient CO₂ concentration^[37]

ASHRAE standard 62 states that air removed from an area with environmental tobacco smoke shall not be recirculated into ETS-free air. A space with ETS requires more ventilation to achieve similar perceived air quality to that of a non-smoking environment.

The amount of ventilation in an ETS area is equal to the amount of an ETS-free area plus the amount V, where:

V = DSD × VA × A/60E

• V = recommended extra flow rate in CFM (L/s)
• DSD = design smoking density (estimated number of cigarettes smoked per hour per unit area)
• VA = volume of ventilation air per cigarette for the room being designed (ft³/cig)
• E = contaminant removal effectiveness^[38]

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (August 2020)

Primitive ventilation systems were found at the Pločnik archeological site (belonging to the Vinča culture) in Serbia and were built into early copper smelting furnaces. The furnace, built on the outside of the workshop, featured earthen pipe-like air vents with hundreds of tiny holes in them and a prototype chimney to ensure air goes into the furnace to feed the fire and smoke comes out safely.^[39]

Passive ventilation and passive cooling systems were widely written about around the Mediterranean by Classical times. Both sources of heat and sources of cooling (such as fountains and subterranean heat reservoirs) were used to drive air circulation, and buildings were designed to encourage or exclude drafts, according to climate and function. Public bathhouses were often particularly sophisticated in their heating and cooling. Icehouses are some millennia old, and were part of a well-developed ice industry by classical times.

The development of forced ventilation was spurred by the common belief in the late 18th and early 19th century in the miasma theory of disease, where stagnant 'airs' were thought to spread illness. An early method of ventilation was the use of a ventilating fire near an air vent which would forcibly cause the air in the building to circulate. English engineer John Theophilus Desaguliers provided an early example of this when he installed ventilating fires in the air tubes on the roof of the House of Commons. Starting with the Covent Garden Theatre, gas burning chandeliers on the ceiling were often specially designed to perform a ventilating role.

A more sophisticated system involving the use of mechanical equipment to circulate the air was developed in the mid-19th century. A basic system of bellows was put in place to ventilate Newgate Prison and outlying buildings, by the engineer Stephen Hales in the mid-1700s. The problem with these early devices was that they required constant human labor to operate. David Boswell Reid was called to testify before a Parliamentary committee on proposed architectural designs for the new House of Commons, after the old one burned down in a fire in 1834.^[40] In January 1840 Reid was appointed by the committee for the House of Lords dealing with the construction of the replacement for the Houses of Parliament. The post was in the capacity of ventilation engineer, in effect; and with its creation there began a long series of quarrels between Reid and Charles Barry, the architect.^[42]

Reid advocated the installation of a very advanced ventilation system in the new House. His design had air being drawn into an underground chamber, where it would undergo either heating or cooling. It would then ascend into the chamber through thousands of small holes drilled into the floor, and would be extracted through the ceiling by a special ventilation fire within a great stack.^[43]

Reid's reputation was made by his work in Westminster. He was commissioned for an air quality survey in 1837 by the Leeds and Selby Railway in their tunnel.^[44] The steam vessels built for the Niger expedition of 1841 were fitted with ventilation systems based on Reid's Westminster model.^[45] Air was dried, filtered and passed over charcoal.^[46][47] Reid's ventilation method was also applied more fully to St. George's Hall, Liverpool, where the architect, Harvey Lonsdale Elmes, requested that Reid should be involved in ventilation design.^[48] Reid considered this the only building in which his system was completely carried out.^[49]

With the advent of practical steam power, ceiling fans could finally be used for ventilation. Reid installed four steam-powered fans in the ceiling of St George's Hospital in Liverpool, so that the pressure produced by the fans would force the incoming air upward and through vents in the ceiling. Reid's pioneering work provides the basis for ventilation systems to this day.^[43] He was remembered as "Dr. Reid the ventilator" in the twenty-first century in discussions of energy efficiency, by Lord Wade of Chorlton.^[50]

Ventilating a space with fresh air aims to avoid "bad air". The study of what constitutes bad air dates back to the 1600s when the scientist Mayow studied asphyxia of animals in confined bottles.^[51] The poisonous component of air was later identified as carbon dioxide (CO₂), by Lavoisier in the very late 1700s, starting a debate as to the nature of "bad air" which humans perceive to be stuffy or unpleasant. Early hypotheses included excess concentrations of CO₂ and oxygen depletion. However, by the late 1800s, scientists thought biological contamination, not oxygen or CO₂, was the primary component of unacceptable indoor air. However, it was noted as early as 1872 that CO₂ concentration closely correlates to perceived air quality.

The first estimate of minimum ventilation rates was developed by Tredgold in 1836.^[52] This was followed by subsequent studies on the topic by Billings ^[53] in 1886 and Flugge in 1905. The recommendations of Billings and Flugge were incorporated into numerous building codes from 1900–the 1920s and published as an industry standard by ASHVE (the predecessor to ASHRAE) in 1914.^[51]

The study continued into the varied effects of thermal comfort, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and biological contaminants. The research was conducted with human subjects in controlled test chambers. Two studies, published between 1909 and 1911, showed that carbon dioxide was not the offending component. Subjects remained satisfied in chambers with high levels of CO₂, so long as the chamber remained cool.^[51] (Subsequently, it has been determined that CO₂ is, in fact, harmful at concentrations over 50,000ppm^[54])

ASHVE began a robust research effort in 1919. By 1935, ASHVE-funded research conducted by Lemberg, Brandt, and Morse – again using human subjects in test chambers – suggested the primary component of "bad air" was an odor, perceived by the human olfactory nerves.^[55] Human response to odor was found to be logarithmic to contaminant concentrations, and related to temperature. At lower, more comfortable temperatures, lower ventilation rates were satisfactory. A 1936 human test chamber study by Yaglou, Riley, and Coggins culminated much of this effort, considering odor, room volume, occupant age, cooling equipment effects, and recirculated air implications, which guided ventilation rates.^[56] The Yaglou research has been validated, and adopted into industry standards, beginning with the ASA code in 1946. From this research base, ASHRAE (having replaced ASHVE) developed space-by-space recommendations, and published them as ASHRAE Standard 62-1975: Ventilation for acceptable indoor air quality.

As more architecture incorporated mechanical ventilation, the cost of outdoor air ventilation came under some scrutiny. In 1973, in response to the 1973 oil crisis and conservation concerns, ASHRAE Standards 62-73 and 62–81) reduced required ventilation from 10 CFM (4.76 L/s) per person to 5 CFM (2.37 L/s) per person. In cold, warm, humid, or dusty climates, it is preferable to minimize ventilation with outdoor air to conserve energy, cost, or filtration. This critique (e.g. Tiller^[57]) led ASHRAE to reduce outdoor ventilation rates in 1981, particularly in non-smoking areas. However subsequent research by Fanger,^[58] W. Cain, and Janssen validated the Yaglou model. The reduced ventilation rates were found to be a contributing factor to sick building syndrome.^[59]

The 1989 ASHRAE standard (Standard 62–89) states that appropriate ventilation guidelines are 20 CFM (9.2 L/s) per person in an office building, and 15 CFM (7.1 L/s) per person for schools, while 2004 Standard 62.1-2004 has lower recommendations again (see tables below). ANSI/ASHRAE (Standard 62–89) speculated that "comfort (odor) criteria are likely to be satisfied if the ventilation rate is set so that 1,000 ppm CO₂ is not exceeded"^[60] while OSHA has set a limit of 5000 ppm over 8 hours.^[61]

Historical ventilation rates

Author or source	Year	Ventilation rate (IP)	Ventilation rate (SI)	Basis or rationale
Tredgold	1836	4 CFM per person	2 L/s per person	Basic metabolic needs, breathing rate, and candle burning
Billings	1895	30 CFM per person	15 L/s per person	Indoor air hygiene, preventing spread of disease
Flugge	1905	30 CFM per person	15 L/s per person	Excessive temperature or unpleasant odor
ASHVE	1914	30 CFM per person	15 L/s per person	Based on Billings, Flugge and contemporaries
Early US Codes	1925	30 CFM per person	15 L/s per person	Same as above
Yaglou	1936	15 CFM per person	7.5 L/s per person	Odor control, outdoor air as a fraction of total air
ASA	1946	15 CFM per person	7.5 L/s per person	Based on Yahlou and contemporaries
ASHRAE	1975	15 CFM per person	7.5 L/s per person	Same as above
ASHRAE	1981	10 CFM per person	5 L/s per person	For non-smoking areas, reduced.
ASHRAE	1989	15 CFM per person	7.5 L/s per person	Based on Fanger, W. Cain, and Janssen

ASHRAE continues to publish space-by-space ventilation rate recommendations, which are decided by a consensus committee of industry experts. The modern descendants of ASHRAE standard 62-1975 are ASHRAE Standard 62.1, for non-residential spaces, and ASHRAE 62.2 for residences.

In 2004, the calculation method was revised to include both an occupant-based contamination component and an area–based contamination component.^[62] These two components are additive, to arrive at an overall ventilation rate. The change was made to recognize that densely populated areas were sometimes overventilated (leading to higher energy and cost) using a per-person methodology.

Occupant Based Ventilation Rates,^[62] ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004

IP Units	SI Units	Category	Examples
0 cfm/person	0 L/s/person	Spaces where ventilation requirements are primarily associated with building elements, not occupants.	Storage Rooms, Warehouses
5 cfm/person	2.5 L/s/person	Spaces occupied by adults, engaged in low levels of activity	Office space
7.5 cfm/person	3.5 L/s/person	Spaces where occupants are engaged in higher levels of activity, but not strenuous, or activities generating more contaminants	Retail spaces, lobbies
10 cfm/person	5 L/s/person	Spaces where occupants are engaged in more strenuous activity, but not exercise, or activities generating more contaminants	Classrooms, school settings
20 cfm/person	10 L/s/person	Spaces where occupants are engaged in exercise, or activities generating many contaminants	dance floors, exercise rooms

Area-based ventilation rates,^[62] ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004

IP Units	SI Units	Category	Examples
0.06 cfm/ft2	0.30 L/s/m2	Spaces where space contamination is normal, or similar to an office environment	Conference rooms, lobbies
0.12 cfm/ft2	0.60 L/s/m2	Spaces where space contamination is significantly higher than an office environment	Classrooms, museums
0.18 cfm/ft2	0.90 L/s/m2	Spaces where space contamination is even higher than the previous category	Laboratories, art classrooms
0.30 cfm/ft2	1.5 L/s/m2	Specific spaces in sports or entertainment where contaminants are released	Sports, entertainment
0.48 cfm/ft2	2.4 L/s/m2	Reserved for indoor swimming areas, where chemical concentrations are high	Indoor swimming areas

The addition of occupant- and area-based ventilation rates found in the tables above often results in significantly reduced rates compared to the former standard. This is compensated in other sections of the standard which require that this minimum amount of air is delivered to the breathing zone of the individual occupant at all times. The total outdoor air intake of the ventilation system (in multiple-zone variable air volume (VAV) systems) might therefore be similar to the airflow required by the 1989 standard.
From 1999 to 2010, there was considerable development of the application protocol for ventilation rates. These advancements address occupant- and process-based ventilation rates, room ventilation effectiveness, and system ventilation effectiveness^[63]

• In hot, humid climates, unconditioned ventilation air can daily deliver approximately 260 milliliters of water for each cubic meters per hour (m³/h) of outdoor air (or one pound of water each day for each cubic feet per minute of outdoor air per day), annual average.^{[citation needed]} This is a great deal of moisture and can create serious indoor moisture and mold problems. For example, given a 150 m² building with an airflow of 180 m³/h this could result in about 47 liters of water accumulated per day.
• Ventilation efficiency is determined by design and layout, and is dependent upon the placement and proximity of diffusers and return air outlets. If they are located closely together, supply air may mix with stale air, decreasing the efficiency of the HVAC system, and creating air quality problems.
• System imbalances occur when components of the HVAC system are improperly adjusted or installed and can create pressure differences (too much-circulating air creating a draft or too little circulating air creating stagnancy).
• Cross-contamination occurs when pressure differences arise, forcing potentially contaminated air from one zone to an uncontaminated zone. This often involves undesired odors or VOCs.
• Re-entry of exhaust air occurs when exhaust outlets and fresh air intakes are either too close, prevailing winds change exhaust patterns or infiltration between intake and exhaust air flows.
• Entrainment of contaminated outdoor air through intake flows will result in indoor air contamination. There are a variety of contaminated air sources, ranging from industrial effluent to VOCs put off by nearby construction work.^[64] A recent study revealed that in urban European buildings equipped with ventilation systems lacking outdoor air filtration, the exposure to outdoor-originating pollutants indoors resulted in more Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) than exposure to indoor-emitted pollutants.^[65]

• Publications from the Air Infiltration & Ventilation Centre (AIVC)

• Publications from the International Energy Agency (IEA) Energy in Buildings and Communities Programme (EBC) ventilation-related research projects-annexes:
  • EBC Annex 9 Minimum Ventilation Rates
  • EBC Annex 18 Demand Controlled Ventilation Systems
  • EBC Annex 26 Energy Efficient Ventilation of Large Enclosures
  • EBC Annex 27 Evaluation and Demonstration of Domestic Ventilation Systems
  • EBC Annex 35 Control Strategies for Hybrid Ventilation in New and Retrofitted Office Buildings (HYBVENT)
  • EBC Annex 62 Ventilative Cooling

• Indoor Air Journal
• Indoor Air Conference Proceedings

• ASHRAE Standard 62.1 – Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality
• ASHRAE Standard 62.2 – Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in Residential Buildings