Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Air Pollution in Our Homes

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 137 posts

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#71

Post by graeme »

clairity wrote: post #68
graeme wrote: post #31

I got a laseregg 2, and highly recommend it or a similar monitor. It's been very eye opening to see how various scenarios affect air pollution: * frying indoors generally swiftly puts things in the unsafe range. Especially if it led to browning. * a neighbour's bbq would do the same if the window was open * idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range * surprisingly, the toaster would raise levels if it…

i bought a wave-plus[0] on a whim, and it's also been eye-opening. it doesn't measure particulate matter directly, but has a VOC meter (and radon, which is their strength) that similarly spikes for all sorts of things, including closing the windows at night. it's battery-operated and connects to a phone app via bluetooth (which then can sync to their cloud dashboard if you choose). i may buy a foobot[1] one day, as i…

Re foobot, did you see this? https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/928661125327069184

Airthings looks interesting. I'm curious to know of any reviews of their accuracy.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#72

Post by stinos »

code_duck wrote: post #65

I have serious food allergies and celiac disease in addition to allergies/sensitivities to ingredients of cleaning products. I have problems entering are staying in a lot of environments, pretty much anywhere that I don’t have control over the air or access to fresh air. The results on the toaster are not surprising. I’ve worried about toast smoke in coffee shops before because small amounts of gluten or allergens ca…

It’s amazing how casual people are about this

Only if you think of it that way really, considering a) the majority of people don't have problems and b) long-term effects of those products are sometimes not known at all, let alone known by the general public. Don't forget things like allergy information for food etc are fairly recent developments even in the western world. And studies showing/hinting at links between cleaning produtcs and premature deaths etc are also fairly recent I think, so unfortunately the general population isn't really aware of the dangers.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#73

Post by graeme »

ip26 wrote: post #64
salex89 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently borrowed a similar device, and this one also measures formaldehyde. To be honest I'm quite anguished by it, because I can't find any indoors object with formaldehyde concentration less than 0.1ppm, which is the "safe" (by some legal standards) margin. Only outside or in a room with a wide open window it comes down under. It's even borderline higher in buildings not recently renovated. I've tried researc…

Common sources of formaldehyde would be things like furniture, and another less obvious one would be air infiltration through your walls (picking the formaldehyde up from the engineered lumber) due to a depressurized home envelope (e.g. stack effect). When the house is depressurized enough to really draw in through the walls you should notice a puff of air when you crack a door.

What causes depressurized houses?

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#74

Post by ip26 »

graeme wrote: post #73
ip26 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common sources of formaldehyde would be things like furniture, and another less obvious one would be air infiltration through your walls (picking the formaldehyde up from the engineered lumber) due to a depressurized home envelope (e.g. stack effect). When the house is depressurized enough to really draw in through the walls you should notice a puff of air when you crack a door.

What causes depressurized houses?

Most often the stack effect (warmth in the house causes air to rise & leak out the attic which sucks in replacement air down low- like a chimney), but also potentially overpowered range hoods, bath fans, clothes dryers, open flue gas appliances, wood fireplaces, etc.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#76

Post by telotortium »

> CTRL+F "smoke"

> CTRL+F "smoking"

> 0 results

The dominant source of air pollution for almost all of human history has been smoke of one sort or another (see: historical dramas that show indoor light/heating with candles and fireplaces, https://samharris.org/the-fireplace-delusion/), to the extent that I personally doubt banning secondhand smoke indoors would have made much difference to non-smokers' health before open wood fires and coal fires were phased out.

I suppose it's a notable achievement of our society that both industrial pollution and domestic smoke has been reduced so much that VOCs from other sources indoors are our greatest worry.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#77

Post by clairity »

graeme wrote: post #71
clairity wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i bought a wave-plus[0] on a whim, and it's also been eye-opening. it doesn't measure particulate matter directly, but has a VOC meter (and radon, which is their strength) that similarly spikes for all sorts of things, including closing the windows at night. it's battery-operated and connects to a phone app via bluetooth (which then can sync to their cloud dashboard if you choose). i may buy a foobot[1] one day, as i…

Re foobot, did you see this? https://mobile.twitter.com/dhh/status/928661125327069184 Airthings looks interesting. I'm curious to know of any reviews of their accuracy.

thanks! i had not seen that particular tweet, though i'd heard dhh was into this stuff generally.

i'm a little less concerned about accurate co2 levels, since mitigation is straightforward (open a window). even imperfect co2 readings are good enough to signal when to open a window (around 800-1000 ppm, or ~2x ambient co2 levels).

voc's and particulate matter are more my nemesis, as my lungs are more sensitive to that stuff. beyond knowing generally how bad the air is, i'd like to be able to figure out what is causing the bad air and how to mitigate it. information there seems lacking right now.

i'd trust the radon sensor in the airthings more than the voc/co2 sensor, since radon is what they're known for. the voc/co2 sensor is probably the cheaper type used in most consumer air quality monitors, so it's good directionally but is not strictly accurate/precise.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#78

Post by nextos »

rayiner wrote: post #70
nextos wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is spot on. The only solution is to build houses with better materials that release less VOCs and/or use an air filter with a good activated carbon stage. Carpets have become very popular. But cheap ones release tons of VOCs due to fire retardants and anti-stain treatments. I've switched to a house built in the Scandinavian style, with oiled wooden floors and simple soap-treated furniture. Not only beautiful, bu…

What is the health impact, in quantifiable terms of those "nasty VOCs?"

It's hard to say, there's evidence some are carcinogenic. E.g. formaldehyde.

Studies are lacking, so I prefer to err on the safe side. Especially since buying natural furniture that releases less VOCs is not limiting. In fact, it will last longer as materials are of higher quality.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#79

Post by jly »

salex89 wrote: post #59
graeme wrote: post #31

I got a laseregg 2, and highly recommend it or a similar monitor. It's been very eye opening to see how various scenarios affect air pollution: * frying indoors generally swiftly puts things in the unsafe range. Especially if it led to browning. * a neighbour's bbq would do the same if the window was open * idling truck on the street for construction? Unsafe range * surprisingly, the toaster would raise levels if it…

I've recently borrowed a similar device, and this one also measures formaldehyde. To be honest I'm quite anguished by it, because I can't find any indoors object with formaldehyde concentration less than 0.1ppm, which is the "safe" (by some legal standards) margin. Only outside or in a room with a wide open window it comes down under. It's even borderline higher in buildings not recently renovated. I've tried researc…

0.1 ppm is quite a high indoor concentration of formaldehyde. Most homes will not air exposure levels this high.

Just for reference, NIOSH recommends 0.016 ppm as the max exposure limit for a workday. CARB recommends a max safe level of 0.05 ppm. WHO recommends max level of 0.08 ppm for 30 minutes, etc.

0.3 ppm is extremely high for chronic exposure.

Re: Air Pollution in Our Homes

#80

Post by jly »

graeme wrote: post #62
salex89 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently borrowed a similar device, and this one also measures formaldehyde. To be honest I'm quite anguished by it, because I can't find any indoors object with formaldehyde concentration less than 0.1ppm, which is the "safe" (by some legal standards) margin. Only outside or in a room with a wide open window it comes down under. It's even borderline higher in buildings not recently renovated. I've tried researc…

What device measures formaldehyde? I've ordered an awair, I think it does vocs but not sure it does them in any specificity. And I think the only real solution is venting. Open a window. Other than identifying the source and removing it of course. But in many places I think it's wall materials, furniture, etc Dhh had a talk on indoor air quality you may find useful.

I am not aware of a consumer sensor that measures this accurately enough, but I'm also curious what is available.

I tested my home using a badge from this company: https://acsbadge.com/ They are not cheap ($60 for one test), but it's accurate to 2 ppb and will give you an idea what your chronic home exposure is and if changes are needed.

Post reply on HN