Get documents about "AIR PURIFICATION CONSORTIUM
Document Sample
FINAL REPORT NCEMBT-070912
AIR PURIFICATION CONSORTIUM
TECHNOLOGY, RESEARCH, STANDARDS AND POLICY
Richard Sweetser
Exergy Partners Corporation
Davor Novosel
National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
FINAL REPORT NCEMBT-070912
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT
AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES TASK 06-14:
AIR PURIFICATION CONSORTIUM TECHNOLOGY,
RESEARCH, STANDARDS AND POLICY SEMINAR
SEPTEMBER 2007
Prepared By:
Richard Sweetser
Exergy Partners Corporation
Davor Novosel
National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
Prepared For:
U.S. Department of Energy
William Haslebacher
Project Officer / Manager
This report was prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
Under Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-03GO13072
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the
United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any
information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by
the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not
necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES CONTACT
Davor Novosel
Chief Technology Officer
National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies
601 North Fairfax Street, Suite 250
Alexandria VA 22314
703-299-5633
dnovosel@ncembt.org
www.ncembt.org
ii NCEMBT-070912
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................1
1. PROJECT OBJECTIVE............................................................................................................................................3
2. BACKGROUND....................................................................................................................................................4
2.1 NCEMBT’s Change in Course Direction .........................................................................................................4
2.2 Five-Year Goals.............................................................................................................................................4
2.3 Definition of Market Transformation (MT).......................................................................................................6
2.4 Market Transformation Sector Concept .........................................................................................................6
2.5 Air Purification Consortium Model – The First Disruptive Influence .................................................................8
2.5.1 University of Illinois at Chicago Air Filtration Research ............................................................................8
2.5.2 Penn State University Research in Bioaerosols and UVGI ........................................................................8
2.5.3 Syracuse University Residential Air Cleaner Research .............................................................................9
2.6 Knowledge Gap ..........................................................................................................................................10
3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................11
4. RESULTS ..........................................................................................................................................................14
Question One: What is/are the most compelling method(s) to transforming the market to adopt new air cleaning
approaches and technologies? .........................................................................................................................14
Question Two: What should an APC research program look like? ........................................................................15
Question Three: Is a new IAQ standard needed? If so, what should it look like? Or how can we demonstrate the
trade-off between air cleaning and ventilation? .................................................................................................17
Question Three: Is a new IAQ standard needed? If so, what should it look like? Or how can we demonstrate the
trade-off between air cleaning and ventilation? .................................................................................................18
5. REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................................19
APPENDIX A – SEMINAR AGENDA..........................................................................................................................20
APPENDIX B - SEMINAR ATTENDEES......................................................................................................................21
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION........................................................22
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER ...............34
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI ...............................................................................71
APPENDIX F - BREAKOUT GROUPS........................................................................................................................86
NCEMBT-070912 iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. View of the ASHRAE Standard 145P Compliant Test Loop at UIC ................................................................8
Figure 2. View of PSU Bioaerosols Laboratory .........................................................................................................9
Figure 3. View of the Environmental Test Chamber at SU..........................................................................................9
iv NCEMBT-070912
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies (NCEMBT), through its Air
Purification Consortium (APC), held a two-day seminar to discuss research, technology, standards and
policy for indoor air quality (IAQ) to form the foundation of future work necessary to bring about
meaningful change. A strategic blend of academia, industry, manufacturers and government IAQ experts
was represented at the seminar held on May 28 and 29 of 2007.
The fundamental hypothesis being examined was that improving air cleaning is the key to improving IAQ
and reducing energy consumption.
The seminar participants concluded that if good air quality could be properly defined and air cleaning
could achieve good air quality, then energy consumption would indeed be reduced. The fundamental
basis for this conclusion was that ventilation is an energy intensive process and may introduce more
pollutants to the building (particularly in urban centers) versus air cleaning which is less energy intensive.
A secondary goal of the seminar was to determine if the proposed Air Purification Consortium would be
supported by industry. John Vasselli, Chief of Technology for Indoor Air Quality for Carrier
Corporation, confirmed his company’s interest in the APC project by presenting the effort with a $25,000
check. “Carrier stands by the APC/NCEMBT and the important, ground breaking research of its partners.
Carrier recognizes the impending energy and health crisis and our need to change how our buildings
operate. We will support the NCEMBT and its efforts to understand the nexus of a healthy indoor
environment and energy efficiency,” stated Vasselli.
Vasselli also gave the first presentation of the seminar entitled, “Defining a New Standard for IAQ.”
Vasselli explained, “The HVAC industry is a green industry. We are discovering that global warming
and carbon footprints are the most significant societal challenge and the biggest threat to national
security.”
Presentations also were given by Dr. Claudia Miller of the University of Texas Health Center regarding
‘What do we Know about IAQ and Health?’ and Dr. Jim Woods of the Building Diagnostics Research
Institute on ‘Basic Principles for IAQ Criteria and Control.’
Dr. Miller described a new, disturbing phenomenon with workers today, “Toxicant Induced Loss of
Tolerance (TILT) has been observed in more than a dozen countries. People who are suffering from sick
buildings have developed new onset symptoms - headaches, fatigue, digestive problems, new intolerances
for food, alcohol, caffeine. All of this seems to be linked back to sick building syndrome. We need more
research to be done in this area to effectively prevent further sickness,” she stated.
Dr. James Woods made a case that improved methods of air cleaning and distribution can enhance
environmental quality and reduce energy consumption and that a good, definitive air quality standard is
“essential to move forward in IAQ. An improved evaluation criteria and diagnostic methods are needed
to assure acceptability in the marketplace,” Woods explained. “We need to start with the basics, and
that’s to define IAQ and work from there.”
The most important part of the seminar was the expert panel reviews. Members worked collaboratively
on the questions of: What is the most compelling approach to transforming the IAQ market? What should
an APC research program look like? And is a new IAQ standard needed? The following question
summaries provide an exciting and productive APC action agenda for the next few years.
NCEMBT-070912 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Seminar Conclusions on Question One: What is/are the most compelling approach(s) to
transforming the market to adopt new air cleaning approaches and technologies?
Drawing from the results of the expert panels, a powerful message arose that there are four essential
elements to transform the IAQ market:
1. Do the research that develops the benchmarks to determine good air quality.
2. Do the research that proves air cleaning can deliver good air quality.
3. Demonstrate the impact of air cleaning to building owners with measurement and verification
4. Educate: owners, policy makers, key building occupants (i.e. teachers, employee unions,
etc.)
Seminar Conclusions on Question One: What should an APC research program look like?
Drawing from the results of the expert panels it became clear that there are three essential research
priorities:
1. Target market sector and building types and determine contaminants of concern
2. Review and distill existing research that can be targeted to selected markets, identify gaps and
determine research road map that is multidisciplinary
3. Standards development is the end point
Seminar Conclusions on Question Three: Is a new IAQ standard needed? If so, what should it look
like? Or how can we demonstrate the trade-off between air cleaning and ventilation?
Expert panels fundamentally agreed that there is a need for a good IAQ Guideline and that it
needs to be built upon and compliment the ASHRAE Standard 62. Group 2 captured the general
opinion of the seminar within its stated objective: “Using the 25 years of development of
ASHRAE Standard 62, we suggest using the standard as a foundation for the IAQ Guideline. Our
objective would be to develop a Guideline that applies the IAQ method more easily. The IAQ
Guideline should initially target indoor spaces having high density, diversity, excessive exhaust,
transitory occupancy and locations in high vulnerability areas. Buildings of these types include
schools, convention centers, hotels and casinos. This IAQ Guideline should be promoted by
industry through involvement in the APC.
The National Center for Energy Management and Building Technologies created the concept of
the Air Purification Consortium (APC) as a means of stimulating the advancement of energy
conservation within an integrated building system concomitantly with the need to improve indoor
air quality from a comfort, performance, health and safety perspective.
This seminar confirmed the need to develop the APC as a working entity consisting of experts in
HVAC, IAQ, medical, building trades, manufacturing, academia, allied associations and policy
makers.
The seminar created the outline of a roadmap which will need completing and has provided
encouragement to move rapidly foreword.
2 NCEMBT-070912
1. PROJECT OBJECTIVE
1. PROJECT OBJECTIVE
The goal of this task was to bring together manufacturers, universities, the engineering community,
medical and public health experts, federal and state policy makers, non-government organizations,
contractors and the skilled trades and actively seek support from these stakeholders to achieve critical
mass and leverage efforts in the important field of air cleaning / air purification.
Advanced technologies for purifying air by controlling particulate, gaseous, and microbiological
pollutants are an efficient means of contributing to the overall goal of acceptable Indoor Air Quality
(IAQ). Despite widespread concerns about IAQ in sensitive applications such as schools, hospitals and
homes, as well as conventional applications such as large commercial buildings affected by the "sick
building syndrome," the infrastructure to support the air purification industry is limited.
The NCEMBT believes that new filtration, UVGI, and other air purification technologies can improve
IAQ while increasing building energy efficiency. This is why the NCEMBT supports the Air Purification
Consortium and is seeking strong industry participation. The seminar was designed as a kick-off point for
the APC and its ultimate goal is to make this a self-sustaining industry effort.
NCEMBT-070912 3
2. BACKGROUND
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 NCEMBT’S CHANGE IN COURSE DIRECTION
In 2006, the NCEMBT initiated a course correction through its strategic planning process
Its new plan focuses on transforming building design and the built environment
Its new plan focuses on measurable efficiency improvement within five years
Its new plan focuses on measurable IEQ assessment and improvement within five years
Its new plan focuses on real change in the market within five years
Its new plan focuses on broadening the research and MT base to include states, foundations and
industry
The strategic plan also delineated two very important strategic issues
The work of the NCEMBT (applied research and market transformation) is unique and important
It is essential for the NCEMBT to significantly broaden its funding base beyond the federal
government to include states, foundations and industry to assure its sustainability and impact
2.2 FIVE-YEAR GOALS
Five-year strategic goals are demonstrable, measurable, definable and achievable:
Achieve 70 percent Building Energy Efficiency (BEE)1. BEE is based on the First Law of
Thermodynamics (on a primary energy basis) and is expressed as a ratio:
ER
BEE = (1)
EC
Where:
ER = Energy Required.
This is the energy required at the building boundary to control the four basic
exposure parameters (thermal, lighting, acoustic and chemical (IEQ)) within
“acceptable” values for all occupied spaces as defined by codes, standards, and
functional requirements of the facility
1
Presently, BEE for Commercial Buildings is estimated at 50%
4 NCEMBT-070912
2. BACKGROUND
EC = Energy Consumed
This is the necessary energy to provide the ER, including all associated parasitic
losses or Energy Waste (EW) within the building boundary; therefore
EC = ER + EW (2)
Equation (1) can be expressed as
ER
BEE = (3)
ER + EW
Evidence has long indicated that some buildings, which have large envelope or internal loads but simple
control systems, perform with a high BEE but large ER; and others, which have low envelope and internal
loads and complex control systems, perform with a low BEE and a small ER. Moreover, evidence
indicates that the components of EW may be of the same magnitude as ER, resulting in BEE values in the
50% range.
20% reduction in Energy Required (ER) compared to the current baseline in buildings through
measures that reduce envelope and internal loads.
20% reduction in Energy Waste (EW) compared to the current baseline in buildings caused by
deficiencies in design concepts and details, and by deficiencies in construction.
20% reduction in Energy Waste (EW) compared to the current baseline in buildings caused by
deficiencies in operations and maintenance procedures during the life of the building.
20% improvement in occupant response or performance resulting from enhanced control of
thermal, lighting, acoustic and/or IAQ technologies that are capable of reducing Energy Required
or Energy Waste by 20% compared to the current baseline.
By objective measures, successful market transformation through adoption of the technologies,
standards and/or processes developed by the NCEMBT and its partners.
An overall “accuracy” of 80% to diagnose and evaluate the performance of the buildings used in
this five-year plan.
NCEMBT-070912 5
2. BACKGROUND
2.3 DEFINITION OF MARKET TRANSFORMATION (MT)
The conventional definition of “market transformation” stems from the notion that the volumes of
purchases of a specific product or service can be “transformed” into purchases of a higher quality product
or service. Abundant literature on “market transformation” in North American energy efficiency exists,
and here the term means “a strategic effort of government, utility and other organizations to intervene in
the market, causing beneficial, lasting changes in the structure or function of the market, leading to
increases in the adoption of energy efficient products, services and / or practices.”
The NCEMBT market transformation efforts are looking to the past for guidance in making real change in
tomorrow’s buildings.
“The difficulty lies, not in the new ideas, but in escaping from the old ones”
John Maynard Keynes
“The vested interests that dominate the built environment will fight change until disruptive
influences or technologies make changing the path of least resistance”
John Wimer, NCEMBT
Billions of dollars and millions of “man”-hours of market transformation effort have been spent to change
commercial building design, construction and operation. How have we done it? As an industry, energy
efficiency performance has largely remained static and IEQ remains problematic in large sections of the
building stock. It is not surprising that government and/or utility based programs trying to impact certain
discrete behaviors are largely based on new construction and aim to insert the perceived latest, most
efficient technology into the market. This approach usually tries to focus on a discrete component instead
on the building as a whole or a complete MTS.
The complexities of the built environment require concentrating on MT at the beginning of research, not
the conclusion. Understanding these past efforts provides a great opportunity for the NCEMBT. We
have the credibility through our research. We have a solid strategic plan and the passion about what we
do to deliver successful market transformation. The NCEMBT is in the right place at the right time.
Therefore we have concluded:
The nexus of energy efficiency and IEQ can develop disruptive technologies or processes within
the next five years
Our universe of research can and must develop these disruptive technologies or processes
The complexities of the buildings market (concept, financing, design, execution and operation)
require concentration on market transformation at the beginning of research not at the conclusion
2.4 MARKET TRANSFORMATION SECTOR CONCEPT
The nexus of NCEMBT research and market place has been previously described a market transformation
sector. It important to understand what is meant by this term. In broad terms, an MTS can be a
technology, group of technologies, systems process, vertical market, application, climate zone, etc. that
can be improved and can have a measurable financial impact in the market place. This idea should
become clearer reviewing the Air Purification Consortium.
6 NCEMBT-070912
2. BACKGROUND
The NCEMBT has developed a simplified process flow scheme to assess MTS viability which is depicted
below:
Examine NCEMBT
Research Portfolio for
Market Transforming(MT)
Research
Cluster Research Projects
Where Appropriate
Test Research
Rethink
NO for Ability to Affect LIMITED
Approach
Real MT
REAL POTENTIAL
Develop:
Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunity& Threats
IMPOSSIBLE Calibration Check TOO DIFFICULT
POSSIBLE
Develop Strategy to create
,
Market Pull for Product
Process or Approach
Execute
NCEMBT-070912 7
2. BACKGROUND
2.5 AIR PURIFICATION CONSORTIUM MODEL – THE FIRST DISRUPTIVE INFLUENCE
The NCEMBT began assessing its research portfolio for disruptive approaches to the market and found
that among the discrete tasks three emerged as having great potential to change the way we design
buildings to achieve good air quality and also collectively have the potential to improve building level
energy efficiency. We also saw that separately, these research projects were incremental in nature and not
likely to have great impact.
The research we are focusing on in the development of this MTS model is:
at University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) on particulate filtration and sorbent-based gaseous
removal
at Penn State University (PSU) on bioaerosols and ultra-violet germicidal irradiation (UVGI)
at Syracuse University (SU) on residential air cleaning processes including photo-catalytic
oxidation
2.5.1 University of Illinois at Chicago Air Filtration Research
UIC is targeting airborne particulates and gases/vapors using its ASHRAE MOT Standard 52.2 test loop
for performance evaluation of in-duct, particulate removal media and is working on the development of
the pending ASHRAE MOT Standard 145.2P for tests of in-duct, gas phase removal media.”
Figure 1. View of the ASHRAE Standard 145P Compliant Test Loop at UIC
2.5.2 Penn State University Research in Bioaerosols and UVGI
PSU research currently focuses on viable and non-viable bioaerosols. Experimental efforts include
measurement of UV lamp characteristics under variable operating conditions, development of protocols
for accurately determining viable contaminant deactivation, and testing of in-duct UVGI components.
8 NCEMBT-070912
2. BACKGROUND
Experimental results are being used to develop testing and design guidance and to support device and
system modeling. PSU is actively involved in the early stages of development of the proposed ASHRAE
Method of Test (MOT) Standard 185P for UV lamps.
Figure 2. View of PSU Bioaerosols Laboratory
2.5.3 Syracuse University Residential Air Cleaner Research
SU has evaluated ten different residential air cleaners using their full-scale environmental chambers, and
is developing model-based testing, evaluation, and design optimization methods for a variety of gas phase
air cleaners: sorbent-based, UV-PCO and ionization ones. SU has been actively involved in the
development of ASHRAE Standard 145.1P for sorbent media evaluation.
Figure 3. View of the Environmental Test Chamber at SU
NCEMBT-070912 9
2. BACKGROUND
2.6 KNOWLEDGE GAP
Separately, the discrete research by PSU, UIC and SU is interesting, but not likely to transform the
HVAC or building industry. The NCEMBT believes that new filtration, UVGI, and other air purification
technologies can improve IAQ while increasing building energy efficiency. The Air Purification
Consortium brings together manufacturers, universities, the engineering community, federal and state
policy makers, NGOs, contractors and the skilled trades to research, develop, test, educate and apply
advanced air purification technologies and system approaches.
The goal is to transform the HVAC and building industry. To be successful with the hypothesis that
indoor air can be purified using less energy than conventional approaches
We must prove that air purification is possible
We must prove that air can be purified using less energy
The biggest gap is that we have no definition of good IAQ. Therefore, we must define good IAQ and
develop a standard. This is by no means an easy task, but is necessary to develop realistic temperature,
humidity and surrogates for volatile organics, bioaerosols, etc. that yield good air quality for health, safety
and comfort. Accomplishing this significant goal will inevitable lead to the ability to achieve these levels
through a combination of air purification approaches. This standard will lead to innumerable research
tasks and inevitably to a means to deliver good quality air to a space without depending on diluting space
air with outside air which is often impure, too hot, too cold, too humid or too dry.
We cannot underestimate the task of developing a good indoor air quality standard. This standard must
provide the design community with a sound basis for defining what is good a for both health and comfort,
be concise in the data points collected, clear in its use, defensible from existing research and protective of
the issuing entity. This is no simple task but necessary to establish a goal for purifying the air.
ASHRAE’s position remains, as always, to avoid the health and safety issue as a basis for their dilution
standard 62 (Persily 2007). If we deal with technology, ASHRAE is comfortable. The NCEMBT has a
vision to break through the Standards barrier.
10 NCEMBT-070912
Error! Reference source not found.
3. METHODOLOGY
This interactive seminar was designed to develop common understanding of air cleaning versus
contaminant dilution through ventilation air with respect to indoor air quality (IAQ) and energy
consumption. Further, the seminar was designed to test the principle hypothesis, “Is improving air
cleaning the key to improving IAQ and reducing energy consumption?”
If the consensus of the seminar was that air cleaning was indeed a path to improved IAQ and reduced
energy consumption, then four questions need to be answered:
1. How do we transform the market?
2. What research is necessary for success?
3. Do we need a new IAQ standard?
4. Who will do all of this?
The following discourse and related appendices will provide a detailed account of the seminar and what
transpired.
The seminar began with three presentations to provide context for the discussion. The first presentation
was given by John J. Vasselli, Chief of Technology for Indoor Air Quality of Carrier Corporation.
John encouraged the group to consider the convergence of energy conservation and indoor air quality by
bringing new technology innovations into the HVAC industry and introducing new IAQ products into the
marketplace. He challenged the group by stating “This will require three important elements: research &
development, increased education and awareness and new IAQ metrics, policies and standards. The
NCEMBT can play an important role in all three areas.”
Advanced panel filtration technology
high efficiency
low pressure drop
long lasting
low cost
Effective removal of harmful gases, including aldehydes, VOC’s, ozone, et. al.
active decomposition via Ultra-violet Photocatalytic Oxidation (UV-PCO), electrostatics, etc.
next-generation absorbent / desorbant air filtration technologies
Destruction of airborne biological contaminants via UV, electrostatics, metal & chemical
biocides, and, in the right applications and times, ozone.
Next-generation energy recovery systems
Sensible and latent exchange media performance with efficacies over 70%
New systems concepts for integration and airflow
Intelligent building sensing and controls
Real-time, unattended, integrated airborne contaminant sensors
Indoor and Outdoor monitoring for ventilation control
Predictive and self-training energy management systems
NCEMBT-070912 11
3. METHODOLOGY
Policy, Standards Development, Regulatory Advisory
Raise public awareness and IAQ industry involvement in key niche markets, expanding
“outward” and “upward” into government organizations.
Promote and lead key elements of IAQ metrics definitions for biologicals and most harmful and
prevalent IAQ gases.
Foster and facilitate industry/academia collaboration
The second presentation was given by Dr. Claudia S. Miller, MD, MS, Deputy Chair, Community
Medicine & Environmental Health of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. Dr.
Miller delved into an explanation of an apparent rise in individual susceptibility to chemical exposures.
Her presentation stated that “The data of individual differences in susceptibility to xenobiotics (drugs,
chemicals) will drive ventilation design in the future as medical understanding of the importance of
indoor air quality, health care costs, and litigation increase. Tiny differences in “xenobiotic-
metabolizing” enzymes that are coded by our genes (polymorphisms) determine how we each respond to
different drugs, as well as low level chemical exposures. Increasingly, personalized or “genetic”
ventilation, as opposed to generic (one size fits all) ventilation, will be in demand.”
Dr. Miller further concluded based on her research that very low level indoor air contaminants can initiate
Toxicant Induced Loss Tolerance “TILT” and/or trigger symptoms, depending upon an individual’s
genetic make-up and prior history of exposure. The pathogenesis of TILT remains a mystery; we are at
the “germ theory” stage in terms of our scientific understanding of this phenomenon. Proposed
underlying mechanisms for TILT include: olfactory-limbic sensitization, neural inflammation, and
cholinergic super sensitivity.
Increasing ventilation rates for genetic predispositions would raise enormous design and energy issues.
This alone may drive practitioners toward whole building good air quality with in-situ personal air
cleaning for susceptible individuals should these results prove universally true.
The third presentation was given by Dr. James E. Woods, Ph.D., P.E, Executive Director of the Building
Diagnostics Research Institute, Inc. Dr. Woods posed the following hypothesis “Is Improving Air
Cleaning the KEY to Improving IAQ and Reducing Energy Consumption?” and then set about
determining its defensibility.
Dr. Woods reminded the group that current IAQ standards focus on comfort and the minimum IAQ
comfort standard existing in the U.S. is the current version of the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62 (ASHRAE
2004). IAQ also has far reaching health implications yet no IAQ health standard exists for general
practitioners. IAQ is one of several components that must be simultaneously controlled to achieve
“acceptable” indoor environments.
Basic methods of air cleaning are now available and improved methods of air cleaning and distribution
can enhance environmental quality and reduce energy consumption. However, improved evaluation
criteria and diagnostic methods are needed to assure acceptability. Dr. Woods asserted that a good air
quality STANDARD is essential to move IAQ forward.
Finally, Dr. Woods reviewed ASHRAE’s latest public statement about its air quality standards which
appeared in the March 2007 ASHRAE Journal (Persily 2007). The Journal article stated, “While
ASHRAE does not make findings as to the health and safety impacts of environmental exposures,
ASHRAE activities and publications, where appropriate, shall consider and reference findings issued by
cognizant organizations with the appropriate scope and expertise.”
Armed with the background information provided by Mr. Vasselli, Dr. Miller and Dr. Woods, the
assembled IAQ specialists were divided into five expert panels to assess three critical questions to
determine the best pathway forward in improving IAQ while reducing energy consumption. The basic
12 NCEMBT-070912
Error! Reference source not found.
methodology was to pose a question, allow the panels to discuss and assess their approach and then report
back to all participants.
NCEMBT-070912 13
4. RESULTS
4. RESULTS
QUESTION ONE: WHAT IS/ARE THE MOST COMPELLING METHOD(S) TO TRANSFORMING THE
MARKET TO ADOPT NEW AIR CLEANING APPROACHES AND TECHNOLOGIES?
Group 1
Clearly demonstrate the causal aspect of environmental exposures – scientific proof
The need for new air cleaning equipment is not intuitive – need to build a case for it.
Need good education, good communication of needs for this – need to get this message out.
Formula – whole building application 80%, 20% for individuals who are feeling sick.
Understand that you can improve conditions without wasting energy.
Group 2
Demonstrate the impact of air cleaning to building owners with measurement and verification
without a focus on the human health connection.
Training and outreach to next generation practicing analysis and evaluation on the
implementation of air cleaning.
Begin to establish strategic multiple disciplinary affiliations with clearly articulated scope –
occupational, health, medical, building groups – raising awareness.
Long term strategy – need long term data, typically low concentration data, to connect IAQ and
health to further engage strategic affiliations.
Group 3
Different markets – what market are you talking about? Which should you approach first?
Hospital, schools, etc. Each market has different IAQ problem.
In each market, you need some sort of IAQ barometer. What measures are you using? Need
data, need research. There is a public awareness of IAQ but it is a general awareness. Not
quantified. Semi quantitative awareness is needed. Get there for IAQ but you need data.
Need design criteria – what to remove, how much to remove?
Combat idea that outdoor air – fresh air. Increase public awareness of bad outdoor air.
A general awareness of IAQ but without data. How do you convince public to buy improved
products?
Products that add to IAQ – scented candles, quantitative data on their effect on IAQ. Are they
really improving the air or not?
Group 4
Niche approach to generate science for air cleaning application by market sector and building end
use
Once science is generated, carry out education on air cleaning benefits by market sector and
building end use
Support research to generate the science through crosscutting, multidisciplinary funding
14 NCEMBT-070912
4. RESULTS
need federal interdisciplinary funding for combined engineering and health sciences
intervention studies to document benefits possibly targeting susceptible populations
Foster higher education curriculum that has multidisciplinary training for next generation
professionals in the building and public health community
Group 5
Measurable/verifiable performance in actual applications (quantitative vs. qualitative)
Standards from evaluating/rating air cleaner components/systems (generic or specific)
Legislation/rules/regulations pertaining to achieving/defining acceptable IAQ/IEQ. If we have
benchmarks, we can have a standard.
Energy use reduction/energy conservation. Benefits to whom? Owners? Occupant? It’s about
marketing.
Focusing on the market most vulnerable/most visible/most benefited.
Drawing from the results of the expert panels a powerful message arises that there are four essential
elements to transform the IAQ market:
1. Do the research that develops the benchmarks to determine good air quality.
2. Do the research that proves air cleaning can deliver good air quality.
3. Demonstrate the impact of air cleaning to building owners with measurement and verification
4. Educate: owners, policy makers, key building occupants (i.e. teachers, employees unions, etc.)
QUESTION TWO: WHAT SHOULD AN APC RESEARCH PROGRAM LOOK LIKE?
Group 1
Gaps are between basic and applied research. Need to be simultaneous. Goal is to define a path.
Causal on the human effects of particulate influences.
NIEHS basic research
EPA/HUD/ASHRAE – applied research
Energy implications for the NCEMBT strategic goal of achieving 20% energy reduction:
Eighty percent of filtration remediation is done on a facility-wide basis where technology exists
today. Additional 20% is fine, more zonal, small particulate filtration, i.e., pursue specific needs
without affecting every piece of the building at a very wide cost.
Group 2
Near term
Review and distill existing research that can be targeted to different markets – don’t want to
duplicate.
Select contaminants and determine what is known about them – frequency, level, etc.
From the information developed in above, determine gaps and determine research road map
that is multidisciplinary.
NCEMBT-070912 15
4. RESULTS
Develop a calculator that determines the benefit/trade off of filtration vs. energy savings
utilizing experimented data being developed. This should be implemented in some accepted
system configuration.
Long term
Understand sources and categorize them and list what we know about them.
Understand and determine new methods for ultrafine particulate removal.
Group 3
Unlimited funding – diversified funding sources.
Should be diversified funding source to get buy in.
Short term
Education of tech community and public awareness and long term focus – some research to
grab public interest – adding things to air, fragrance, study these. Needs to be investigated
immediately and educate the public as to results.
Long term
What are the contaminants in terms of allergies and what are their levels? What technologies
can we use to fix these? How can we get these studies through? Multidisciplinary issue on an
epidemiological basis. It’s a community effort. We need to generate hard data.
Market transformation will drive desire to buy new products which improves products and
efficacy.
Group 4
Premise – research to support IAQ procedure implementation.
Niche science approach – target market sector and building types and determine contaminants of
concern.
Metrics – IAQ index based on normative, non-IAQ problem buildings to establish measure of
acceptable IAQ.
Interaction effects – interactive effects of multiple contaminants.
Intervention studies – particular high profile contaminants or sensitive populations.
Technology performance – lab and field measurement and verification.
Preferred “materials list” for building construction/furnishings.
Best practices for good IAQ from design to operation.
Group 5
Two issues – what should overall program do? What is the program that APC should do?
Going from end point backwards, descriptive approach works the best in buildings.
Standards development is the end point – research should support that.
Demonstrating technology in the field – should just be measuring contaminants on human health
and productivity
Definition of design criteria – if we don’t have design criteria we get kind of lost.
16 NCEMBT-070912
4. RESULTS
Development of rating methods for devices and systems – important to have long term
performance measures
Drawing from the results of the expert panels it becomes clear that there are three essential research
priorities:
1. Target market sector and building types and determine contaminants of concern
2. Review and distill existing research that can be targeted to selected markets, identify gaps and
determine research road map that is multidisciplinary
3. Standards development is the end point
QUESTION THREE: IS A NEW IAQ STANDARD NEEDED? IF SO, WHAT SHOULD IT LOOK LIKE? OR
HOW CAN WE DEMONSTRATE THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN AIR CLEANING AND VENTILATION?
Group 1
YES – IAQ takes precedence over energy savings.
Use Finnish IAQ standard as basis for the standard
80% (whole building) prescribes targets
20% - performance targeted to address the needs of susceptible sub-population
Performance guidance for energy management to ensure environmental quality
Contaminant control
Filtration
Ventilation
Group 2
YES
Objective: Using the 25 years of development of ASHRAE Standard 62, we suggest using the
standard as a foundation for the IAQ Guideline. Our objective would be to develop a guideline
that applies the IAQ method more easily. The guideline should initially target indoor spaces
having high density, diversity, excessive exhaust, transitory occupancy and locations in high
vulnerability areas. Buildings of these types include schools, convention centers, hotels and
casinos. This IAQ guideline should be promoted by industry through involvement in the APC.
Group 3
YES, but how?
Must be relative to sector – residential or commercial.
No residential standard currently for IAQ.
Not enough data to write a standard.
Closer look at systems in regard to IAQ – we need data.
Add humidity control in buildings.
Hot and humid environments should have infiltration requirement.
NCEMBT-070912 17
4. RESULTS
IAQ guideline needed for a first-class healthy building that has different levels for difference
health status target populations
Must have specific target contaminants – what to dilute and remove? Demonstrate air cleaning
and ventilation trade off.
Any IAQ guideline needs to be based on BEST PRACTICES.
Group 4
No, BUT the current standard would have to evolve significantly. Following up on Group 4’s
APC research program premise of IAQ procedure implementation support:
Establish control levels via this supporting science approach.
With ventilation rate procedure normative, non-complaint building and its contaminant
levels.
With IAQ procedure.
using control levels per normative , non-complaint building above
MAV “equivalent” dilution result per Standard 62
Add source control requirements
Expand user manual to address above control levels and source control requirements
Group 5
Is there an old IAQ standard? No, so there is nothing to replace. A Standard should be based on
complete knowledge.
Comprehensive in terms of types of contaminants.
Address interactions between contaminants considered.
Coordinated with energy and comfort standards – consistent with one another.
Verifiable and enforceable
QUESTION THREE: IS A NEW IAQ STANDARD NEEDED? IF SO, WHAT SHOULD IT LOOK LIKE? OR
HOW CAN WE DEMONSTRATE THE TRADE-OFF BETWEEN AIR CLEANING AND VENTILATION?
Expert panels fundamentally agree that there is a need for a good IAQ Guideline and that is needs to be
built upon and complement ASHRAE Standard 62. Group 2 captured the general opinion of the seminar
within its stated objective: “Using the 25 years of development of ASHRAE Standard 62, we suggest
using the standard as a foundation for the IAQ Guideline. Our objective would be to develop a Guideline
that applies the IAQ method more easily. The IAQ Guideline should initially target indoor spaces having
high density, diversity, excessive exhaust, transitory occupancy and locations in high vulnerability areas.
Buildings of these types include schools, convention centers, hotels and casinos. This IAQ Guideline
should be promoted by industry through involvement in the APC.
18 NCEMBT-070912
5. REFERENCES
5. REFERENCES
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta, Georgia:
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
Persily, A., Stanke, D., Holness, G.V.R., Hermans, R. 2007. “Standard 62.1 - Problems, Perceptions &
Panaceas.” ASHRAE J. 49 (3): 34-40.
NCEMBT-070912 19
APPENDIX A – SEMINAR AGENDA
APPENDIX A – SEMINAR AGENDA
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
7:00 p.m. Welcome and Introductions John Wimer
7:15 p.m. Defining a New Standard for IAQ John J. Vasselli
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
7:45 a.m. Welcome and Setting the Stage John Wimer
8:00 a.m. What Do We Know About IAQ And Health? Claudia Miller
8:45 a.m. Reactions, Comments, Clarifications, … Group
9:00 a.m. Basic Principles for IAQ Criteria and Control James Woods
9:45 a.m. Reactions, Comments, Clarifications, … Group
10:00 a.m. COFFEE BREAK
10:30 a.m. What is the most compelling approach to transforming the Group
market?
12:00 p.m. LUNCH
1:00 p.m. What should an APC research program look like? Group
2:30 a.m. COFFEE BREAK
3:00 p.m. Is a new IAQ standard needed? If so, what should it look Group
like? Or how can we demonstrate the trade-off between air
cleaning and ventilation?
4:30 p.m. Summary and Next Steps George Ferguson
5:00 p.m. Adjourn and Thank You John Wimer
20 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX B - SEMINAR ATTENDEES
APPENDIX B - SEMINAR ATTENDEES
Organization Contact e-mail
3M Charles Beach chbeach@mmm.com
Alberti Group, LLC Ujjval Vyas uvyas@albertigroup.net
Building Diagnostics Research Institute James E. Woods JEWoods3@aol.com
Building Wellness Consultancy, Inc. H.E. (Barney) Burroughs heburroughs@mindspring.com
Carmen Group Christina Erling erlingc@carmengroup.com
Carrier Corporation John J. Vasselli John.Vasselli@carrier.utc.com
U.S. Department of Energy Terry Logee terry.logee@ee.doe.gov
Duke University Medical Center Wayne R. Thomann thoma010@mc.duke.edu
EXERGY Partners Richard Sweetser rsweetser@exergypartners.com
Filtration Group, Inc. Phil Winters pwinters@filtrationgroup.com
General Services Administration Vijay Gupta vijay.gupta@gsa.gov
Kimberly Clark Corporation David Matela dmatela@kcc.com
NCEMBT Davor Novosel dnovosel@ncembt.org
NCEMBT John Wimer jwimer@ncembt.org
NCEMBT Anthony Picarazzi tpicarazzi@ncembt.org
Pennsylvania State University William P. Bahnfleth wbahnfleth@psu.edu
Pennsylvania State University James Freihaut jfreihaut@engr.psu.edu
Phillips Rich Hubach replaced Jim Boch
Purafil, Inc. Jim Mash jim_mash@purafil.com
Purafil, Inc. Chris Muller chris_muller@purafil.com
Richard A. Charles, P.E. Richard (Dick) Charles rac781@aol.com
Ruotolo Associates George Ferguson gferguson@ruotoloassoc.com
SMWIA Local 88 John P. Christiansen jc@smw88.com
Syracuse University/Carrier Wenhao Chen wchen13@syr.edu
Trane Roy R. Crawford roy.crawford@trane.com
UIC Douglas Kosar dkosar@uic.edu
UIC William Worek wworek@uic.edu
UIC James Wiet jjwiet@uic.edu
University of Texas Claudia S. Miller MillerCS@uthscsa.edu
UNLV Linda Stetzenbach linda.stetzenbach@unlv.edu
UTRC Gregory M. Dobbs dobbsgm@utrc.utc.com
UV Resources Forrest B. Fencl forrest.fencl@verizon.net
NCEMBT-070912 21
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER
CORPORATION
Slide 1.
Slide 2.
22 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 3.
Slide 4.
Slide 5.
NCEMBT-070912 23
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 6.
Slide 7.
Slide 8.
24 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 9.
Slide 10.
Slide 11.
NCEMBT-070912 25
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 12.
Slide 13.
Slide 14.
26 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 15.
Slide 16.
Slide 17.
NCEMBT-070912 27
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 18.
Slide 19.
Slide 20.
28 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 21.
Slide 22.
Slide 23.
NCEMBT-070912 29
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 24.
Slide 25.
Slide 26.
30 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 27.
Slide 28.
Slide 29.
NCEMBT-070912 31
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 30.
Slide 31.
Slide 32.
32 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX C - PRESENTATION BY JOHN VASSELLI OF CARRIER CORPORATION
Slide 33.
Slide 34.
Slide 35.
NCEMBT-070912 33
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 1
Slide 2
34 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5
NCEMBT-070912 35
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
36 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 9
Slide 10
Slide 11
NCEMBT-070912 37
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 12
Slide 13
Slide 14
38 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 15
Slide 16
Slide 17
NCEMBT-070912 39
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 18
Slide 19
Slide 20
40 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 21
Slide 22
Slide 23
NCEMBT-070912 41
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 24
Slide 25
Slide 26
42 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 27
Slide 28
Slide 29
NCEMBT-070912 43
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 30
Slide 31
Slide 32
44 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 33
Slide 34
Slide 35
NCEMBT-070912 45
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 36
Slide 37
Slide 38
46 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 39
Slide 40
Slide 41
NCEMBT-070912 47
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 42
Slide 43
Slide 44
48 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 45
Slide 46
Slide 47
NCEMBT-070912 49
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 48
Slide 49
Slide 50
50 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 51
Slide 52
Slide 53
NCEMBT-070912 51
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 54
Slide 55
Slide 56
52 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 57
Slide 58
Slide 59
NCEMBT-070912 53
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 60
Slide 61
Slide 62
54 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 63
Slide 64
Slide 65
NCEMBT-070912 55
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 66
Slide 67
Slide 68
56 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 69
Slide 70
Slide 71
NCEMBT-070912 57
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 72
Slide 73
Slide 74
58 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 75
Slide 76
Slide 77
NCEMBT-070912 59
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 78
Slide 79
Slide 80
60 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 81
Slide 82
Slide 83
NCEMBT-070912 61
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 84
Slide 85
Slide 86
62 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 87
Slide 88
Slide 89
NCEMBT-070912 63
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 90
Slide 91
Slide 92
64 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 93
Slide 94
Slide 95
NCEMBT-070912 65
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 96
Slide 97
Slide 98
66 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 99
Slide 100
Slide 101
NCEMBT-070912 67
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 102
Slide 103
Slide 104
68 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 105
Slide 106
Slide 107
NCEMBT-070912 69
APPENDIX D - PRESENTATION BY DR. CLAUDIA MILLER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
Slide 108
Slide 109
70 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 1
Slide 2
NCEMBT-070912 71
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5
72 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
NCEMBT-070912 73
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 9
Slide 10
Slide 11
74 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 12
Slide 13
Slide 14
NCEMBT-070912 75
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 15
Slide 16
Slide 17
76 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 18
Slide 19
Slide 20
NCEMBT-070912 77
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 21
Slide 22
Slide 23
78 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 24
Slide 25
Slide 26
NCEMBT-070912 79
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 27
Slide 28
Slide 29
80 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 30
Slide 31
Slide 32
NCEMBT-070912 81
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 33
Slide 34
Slide 35
82 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 36
Slide 37
Slide 38
NCEMBT-070912 83
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 39
Slide 40
Slide 41
84 NCEMBT-070912
APPENDIX E - PRESENTATION BY DR. JAMES WOODS OF BDRI
Slide 42
Slide 43
NCEMBT-070912 85
APPENDIX F - BREAKOUT GROUPS
APPENDIX F - BREAKOUT GROUPS
Group 1
Leader: Wayne Thomann...................................Duke Medical
Jim Woods ..........................................BDRI
Chuck Beach .......................................3M
Jim Wiet ..............................................UIC
David Watela .......................................Kimberly Clark
Group 2
Leader: Bill Worek ...........................................UIC
John Vasselli .......................................Carrier
H.E. Barney Burroughs .........................Building Wellness
James Mash ........................................Purafil
Vjjval Vyas ...........................................Alberti Group
Group 3
Leader: Jim Friehaut ........................................PSU
Linda Stetzenbach ...............................UNLV
Phil Winters .........................................Filtration Group
Dick Charles ........................................Consultant Design
Roy Cramford ......................................Trane
Group 4
Leader: Doug Kosar .........................................IUC
Claudia Miller .....................................University of Texas Medical Center
Terry Logee ..........................................U.S. Department of Energy
Forrest Fencl
Greg Dobbs .........................................UTHC
Group 5
Leader: Bill Bahnfleth ......................................PSU
Vijay Gupta .........................................GSA
Chris Muller ........................................Purafil
Rich Hubach ........................................Phillips
Wenhoe Chen ......................................UNLV
86 NCEMBT-070912
NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENERGY MANAGEMENT AND BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES
601 NORTH FAIRFAX STREET, SUITE 250
ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314
WWW.NCEMBT.ORG
