File Download
  • No File Attached
 
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
 
Supplementary

Article: Can commonly-used fan-driven air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality? A literature review
  • Basic View
  • Metadata View
  • XML View
TitleCan commonly-used fan-driven air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality? A literature review
 
AuthorsZhang, Y8
Mo, J8
Li, Y4
Sundell, J8 2
Wargocki, P2
Zhang, J5
Little, JC6
Corsi, R1
Deng, Q9
Leung, MHK4
Fang, L2
Chen, W5
Li, J3
Sun, Y7
 
KeywordsAir cleaner
By-product
Clean air delivery rate (CADR)
Electrostatic precipitator
High efficiency particulate air (HEPA)
Indoor air quality (IAQ)
Ion generator
Ozone
Photocatalytic oxidation (PCO)
Plasma
Sorption
Thermal catalytic oxidation (TCO)
Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI)
 
Issue Date2011
 
PublisherPergamon. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv
 
CitationAtmospheric Environment, 2011, v. 45 n. 26, p. 4329-4343 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.041
 
AbstractAir cleaning techniques have been applied worldwide with the goal of improving indoor air quality. The effectiveness of applying these techniques varies widely, and pollutant removal efficiency is usually determined in controlled laboratory environments which may not be realized in practice. Some air cleaners are largely ineffective, and some produce harmful by-products. To summarize what is known regarding the effectiveness of fan-driven air cleaning technologies, a state-of-the-art review of the scientific literature was undertaken by a multidisciplinary panel of experts from Europe, North America, and Asia with expertise in air cleaning, aerosol science, medicine, chemistry and ventilation. The effects on health were not examined. Over 26,000 articles were identified in major literature databases; 400 were selected as being relevant based on their titles and abstracts by the first two authors, who further reduced the number of articles to 160 based on the full texts. These articles were reviewed by the panel using predefined inclusion criteria during their first meeting. Additions were also made by the panel. Of these, 133 articles were finally selected for detailed review. Each article was assessed independently by two members of the panel and then judged by the entire panel during a consensus meeting. During this process 59 articles were deemed conclusive and their results were used for final reporting at their second meeting. The conclusions are that: (1) None of the reviewed technologies was able to effectively remove all indoor pollutants and many were found to generate undesirable by-products during operation. (2) Particle filtration and sorption of gaseous pollutants were among the most effective air cleaning technologies, but there is insufficient information regarding long-term performance and proper maintenance. (3) The existing data make it difficult to extract information such as Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR), which represents a common benchmark for comparing the performance of different air cleaning technologies. (4) To compare and select suitable indoor air cleaning devices, a labeling system accounting for characteristics such as CADR, energy consumption, volume, harmful by-products, and life span is necessary. For that purpose, a standard test room and condition should be built and studied. (5) Although there is evidence that some air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality, further research is needed before any of them can be confidently recommended for use in indoor environments. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.
 
ISSN1352-2310
2013 Impact Factor: 3.062
2013 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.776
 
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.041
 
ISI Accession Number IDWOS:000293680100001
Funding AgencyGrant Number
National Natural Science Foundation of China50725620
51006057
Funding Information:

This literature review was financially supported by a research project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Number: 50725620, 51006057). Thanks to Prof. J. Zhang, Syracuse University, for providing the space and on-site support for the 2nd expert meeting, Dr. Jeffery Siegel for the additional paper-selection, and thanks to Ph. D candidates J. Pei of Syracuse University and Z. Liu of Virginia Tech for their assistance.

 
ReferencesReferences in Scopus
 
DC FieldValue
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Y
 
dc.contributor.authorMo, J
 
dc.contributor.authorLi, Y
 
dc.contributor.authorSundell, J
 
dc.contributor.authorWargocki, P
 
dc.contributor.authorZhang, J
 
dc.contributor.authorLittle, JC
 
dc.contributor.authorCorsi, R
 
dc.contributor.authorDeng, Q
 
dc.contributor.authorLeung, MHK
 
dc.contributor.authorFang, L
 
dc.contributor.authorChen, W
 
dc.contributor.authorLi, J
 
dc.contributor.authorSun, Y
 
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-23T05:48:48Z
 
dc.date.available2011-09-23T05:48:48Z
 
dc.date.issued2011
 
dc.description.abstractAir cleaning techniques have been applied worldwide with the goal of improving indoor air quality. The effectiveness of applying these techniques varies widely, and pollutant removal efficiency is usually determined in controlled laboratory environments which may not be realized in practice. Some air cleaners are largely ineffective, and some produce harmful by-products. To summarize what is known regarding the effectiveness of fan-driven air cleaning technologies, a state-of-the-art review of the scientific literature was undertaken by a multidisciplinary panel of experts from Europe, North America, and Asia with expertise in air cleaning, aerosol science, medicine, chemistry and ventilation. The effects on health were not examined. Over 26,000 articles were identified in major literature databases; 400 were selected as being relevant based on their titles and abstracts by the first two authors, who further reduced the number of articles to 160 based on the full texts. These articles were reviewed by the panel using predefined inclusion criteria during their first meeting. Additions were also made by the panel. Of these, 133 articles were finally selected for detailed review. Each article was assessed independently by two members of the panel and then judged by the entire panel during a consensus meeting. During this process 59 articles were deemed conclusive and their results were used for final reporting at their second meeting. The conclusions are that: (1) None of the reviewed technologies was able to effectively remove all indoor pollutants and many were found to generate undesirable by-products during operation. (2) Particle filtration and sorption of gaseous pollutants were among the most effective air cleaning technologies, but there is insufficient information regarding long-term performance and proper maintenance. (3) The existing data make it difficult to extract information such as Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR), which represents a common benchmark for comparing the performance of different air cleaning technologies. (4) To compare and select suitable indoor air cleaning devices, a labeling system accounting for characteristics such as CADR, energy consumption, volume, harmful by-products, and life span is necessary. For that purpose, a standard test room and condition should be built and studied. (5) Although there is evidence that some air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality, further research is needed before any of them can be confidently recommended for use in indoor environments. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.
 
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext
 
dc.identifier.citationAtmospheric Environment, 2011, v. 45 n. 26, p. 4329-4343 [How to Cite?]
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.041
 
dc.identifier.citeulike9376722
 
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.041
 
dc.identifier.epage4343
 
dc.identifier.hkuros192421
 
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000293680100001
Funding AgencyGrant Number
National Natural Science Foundation of China50725620
51006057
Funding Information:

This literature review was financially supported by a research project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project Number: 50725620, 51006057). Thanks to Prof. J. Zhang, Syracuse University, for providing the space and on-site support for the 2nd expert meeting, Dr. Jeffery Siegel for the additional paper-selection, and thanks to Ph. D candidates J. Pei of Syracuse University and Z. Liu of Virginia Tech for their assistance.

 
dc.identifier.issn1352-2310
2013 Impact Factor: 3.062
2013 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.776
 
dc.identifier.issue26
 
dc.identifier.openurl
 
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-79959869554
 
dc.identifier.spage4329
 
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/139359
 
dc.identifier.volume45
 
dc.languageeng
 
dc.publisherPergamon. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv
 
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom
 
dc.relation.ispartofAtmospheric Environment
 
dc.relation.referencesReferences in Scopus
 
dc.subjectAir cleaner
 
dc.subjectBy-product
 
dc.subjectClean air delivery rate (CADR)
 
dc.subjectElectrostatic precipitator
 
dc.subjectHigh efficiency particulate air (HEPA)
 
dc.subjectIndoor air quality (IAQ)
 
dc.subjectIon generator
 
dc.subjectOzone
 
dc.subjectPhotocatalytic oxidation (PCO)
 
dc.subjectPlasma
 
dc.subjectSorption
 
dc.subjectThermal catalytic oxidation (TCO)
 
dc.subjectUltraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI)
 
dc.titleCan commonly-used fan-driven air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality? A literature review
 
dc.typeArticle
 
<?xml encoding="utf-8" version="1.0"?>
<item><contributor.author>Zhang, Y</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Mo, J</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Li, Y</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Sundell, J</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Wargocki, P</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Zhang, J</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Little, JC</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Corsi, R</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Deng, Q</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Leung, MHK</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Fang, L</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Chen, W</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Li, J</contributor.author>
<contributor.author>Sun, Y</contributor.author>
<date.accessioned>2011-09-23T05:48:48Z</date.accessioned>
<date.available>2011-09-23T05:48:48Z</date.available>
<date.issued>2011</date.issued>
<identifier.citation>Atmospheric Environment, 2011, v. 45 n. 26, p. 4329-4343</identifier.citation>
<identifier.issn>1352-2310</identifier.issn>
<identifier.uri>http://hdl.handle.net/10722/139359</identifier.uri>
<description.abstract>Air cleaning techniques have been applied worldwide with the goal of improving indoor air quality. The effectiveness of applying these techniques varies widely, and pollutant removal efficiency is usually determined in controlled laboratory environments which may not be realized in practice. Some air cleaners are largely ineffective, and some produce harmful by-products. To summarize what is known regarding the effectiveness of fan-driven air cleaning technologies, a state-of-the-art review of the scientific literature was undertaken by a multidisciplinary panel of experts from Europe, North America, and Asia with expertise in air cleaning, aerosol science, medicine, chemistry and ventilation. The effects on health were not examined. Over 26,000 articles were identified in major literature databases; 400 were selected as being relevant based on their titles and abstracts by the first two authors, who further reduced the number of articles to 160 based on the full texts. These articles were reviewed by the panel using predefined inclusion criteria during their first meeting. Additions were also made by the panel. Of these, 133 articles were finally selected for detailed review. Each article was assessed independently by two members of the panel and then judged by the entire panel during a consensus meeting. During this process 59 articles were deemed conclusive and their results were used for final reporting at their second meeting. The conclusions are that: (1) None of the reviewed technologies was able to effectively remove all indoor pollutants and many were found to generate undesirable by-products during operation. (2) Particle filtration and sorption of gaseous pollutants were among the most effective air cleaning technologies, but there is insufficient information regarding long-term performance and proper maintenance. (3) The existing data make it difficult to extract information such as Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR), which represents a common benchmark for comparing the performance of different air cleaning technologies. (4) To compare and select suitable indoor air cleaning devices, a labeling system accounting for characteristics such as CADR, energy consumption, volume, harmful by-products, and life span is necessary. For that purpose, a standard test room and condition should be built and studied. (5) Although there is evidence that some air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality, further research is needed before any of them can be confidently recommended for use in indoor environments. &#169; 2011 Elsevier Ltd.</description.abstract>
<language>eng</language>
<publisher>Pergamon. The Journal&apos;s web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/atmosenv</publisher>
<relation.ispartof>Atmospheric Environment</relation.ispartof>
<subject>Air cleaner</subject>
<subject>By-product</subject>
<subject>Clean air delivery rate (CADR)</subject>
<subject>Electrostatic precipitator</subject>
<subject>High efficiency particulate air (HEPA)</subject>
<subject>Indoor air quality (IAQ)</subject>
<subject>Ion generator</subject>
<subject>Ozone</subject>
<subject>Photocatalytic oxidation (PCO)</subject>
<subject>Plasma</subject>
<subject>Sorption</subject>
<subject>Thermal catalytic oxidation (TCO)</subject>
<subject>Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI)</subject>
<title>Can commonly-used fan-driven air cleaning technologies improve indoor air quality? A literature review</title>
<type>Article</type>
<identifier.openurl>http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&amp;issn=1352-2310&amp;volume=45&amp;issue=26&amp;spage=4329&amp;epage=4343&amp;date=2011&amp;atitle=Can+commonly-used+fan-driven+air+cleaning+technologies+improve+indoor+air+quality?+A+literature+review</identifier.openurl>
<description.nature>Link_to_subscribed_fulltext</description.nature>
<identifier.doi>10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.05.041</identifier.doi>
<identifier.scopus>eid_2-s2.0-79959869554</identifier.scopus>
<identifier.hkuros>192421</identifier.hkuros>
<relation.references>http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-79959869554&amp;selection=ref&amp;src=s&amp;origin=recordpage</relation.references>
<identifier.volume>45</identifier.volume>
<identifier.issue>26</identifier.issue>
<identifier.spage>4329</identifier.spage>
<identifier.epage>4343</identifier.epage>
<identifier.isi>WOS:000293680100001</identifier.isi>
<publisher.place>United Kingdom</publisher.place>
<identifier.citeulike>9376722</identifier.citeulike>
</item>
Author Affiliations
  1. University of Texas at Austin
  2. Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
  3. Shanghai Research Institute of Building Science
  4. The University of Hong Kong
  5. Syracuse University
  6. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
  7. University of Texas at Tyler
  8. Tsinghua University
  9. Central South University China