Next Article in Journal
A Discriminant Function Approach to Adjust for Processing and Measurement Error When a Biomarker is Assayed in Pooled Samples
Next Article in Special Issue
Indoor Air Contamination from Hazardous Waste Sites: Improving the Evidence Base for Decision-Making
Previous Article in Journal
Caesarean Section—A Density-Equalizing Mapping Study to Depict Its Global Research Architecture
Previous Article in Special Issue
Indoor Environmental Quality in Mechanically Ventilated, Energy-Efficient Buildings vs. Conventional Buildings
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12(11), 14709-14722; doi:10.3390/ijerph121114709

Economic, Environmental and Health Implications of Enhanced Ventilation in Office Buildings

1
Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Landmark 409 West, 401 Park Drive Boston, MA 02115, USA
2
United Technologies Climate, Controls & Security, Syracuse, NY 13221, USA
3
Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, SUNY-Upstate Medical School, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
4
Industrial Assessment Center, Biomedical and Chemical Engineering Department, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Gary Adamkiewicz and M. Patricia Fabian
Received: 30 September 2015 / Revised: 22 October 2015 / Accepted: 30 October 2015 / Published: 18 November 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Indoor Environmental Quality: Exposures and Occupant Health)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [227 KB, uploaded 19 November 2015]   |  

Abstract

Introduction: Current building ventilation standards are based on acceptable minimums. Three decades of research demonstrates the human health benefits of increased ventilation above these minimums. Recent research also shows the benefits on human decision-making performance in office workers, which translates to increased productivity. However, adoption of enhanced ventilation strategies is lagging. We sought to evaluate two of the perceived potential barriers to more widespread adoption—Economic and environmental costs. Methods: We estimated the energy consumption and associated per building occupant costs for office buildings in seven U.S. cities, representing different climate zones for three ventilation scenarios (standard practice (20 cfm/person), 30% enhanced ventilation, and 40 cfm/person) and four different heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system strategies (Variable Air Volume (VAV) with reheat and a Fan Coil Unit (FCU), both with and without an energy recovery ventilator). We also estimated emissions of greenhouse gases associated with this increased energy usage, and, for comparison, converted this to the equivalent number of vehicles using greenhouse gas equivalencies. Lastly, we paired results from our previous research on cognitive function and ventilation with labor statistics to estimate the economic benefit of increased productivity associated with increasing ventilation rates. Results: Doubling the ventilation rate from the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers minimum cost less than $40 per person per year in all climate zones investigated. Using an energy recovery ventilation system significantly reduced energy costs, and in some scenarios led to a net savings. At the highest ventilation rate, adding an ERV essentially neutralized the environmental impact of enhanced ventilation (0.03 additional cars on the road per building across all cities). The same change in ventilation improved the performance of workers by 8%, equivalent to a $6500 increase in employee productivity each year. Reduced absenteeism and improved health are also seen with enhanced ventilation. Conclusions: The health benefits associated with enhanced ventilation rates far exceed the per-person energy costs relative to salary costs. Environmental impacts can be mitigated at regional, building, and individual-level scales through the transition to renewable energy sources, adoption of energy efficient systems and ventilation strategies, and promotion of other sustainable policies. View Full-Text
Keywords: green buildings; energy and environmental costs; health; productivity green buildings; energy and environmental costs; health; productivity
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

MacNaughton, P.; Pegues, J.; Satish, U.; Santanam, S.; Spengler, J.; Allen, J. Economic, Environmental and Health Implications of Enhanced Ventilation in Office Buildings. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12, 14709-14722.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top