Indoor air pollutants, ventilation rate determinants and potential control strategies in Chinese dwellings: A literature review

Highlights

• Indoor air pollution data measured in > 7000 residences in China were summarized.

• Particulate matters, VOCs, SVOCs, moisture/mold, inorganic gases and radon were ubiquitous.

• Ventilation prerequisites, determinants and requirements were discussed.

• Natural (window) ventilation + air cleaner and mechanical ventilation + air filtration was compared.

Abstract

After nearly twenty years of rapid modernization and urbanization in China, huge achievements have transformed the daily lives of the Chinese people. However, unprecedented environmental consequences in both indoor and outdoor environments have accompanied this progress and have triggered public awareness and demands for improved living standards, especially in residential environments. Indoor pollution data measured for > 7000 dwellings (approximately 1/3 were newly decorated and were tested for volatile organic compound (VOC) measurements, while the rest were tested for particles, phthalates and other semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), moisture/mold, inorganic gases and radon) in China within the last ten years were reviewed, summarized and compared with indoor concentration recommendations based on sensory or health end-points. Ubiquitous pollutants that exceed the concentration recommendations, including particulate matter, formaldehyde, benzene and other VOCs, moisture/mold, inorganic gases and radon, were found, indicating a common indoor air quality (IAQ) issue in Chinese dwellings. With very little prevention, oral, inhalation and dermal exposure to those pollutants at unhealthy concentration levels is almost inevitable. CO₂, VOCs, humidity and radon can serve as ventilation determinants, each with different ventilation demands and strategies, at typical occupant densities in China; and particle reduction should be a prerequisite for determining ventilation requirements. Two directional ventilation modes would have profound impacts on improving IAQ for Chinese residences are: 1) natural (or window) ventilation with an air cleaner and 2) mechanical ventilation with an air filtration unit, these two modes were reviewed and compared for their applicability and advantages and disadvantages for reducing human exposure to indoor air pollutants. In general, mode 2 can more reliably ensure good IAQ for occupants; while mode 1 is more applicable due to its low cost and low energy consumption. However, besides a roadmap, substantial efforts are still needed to develop affordable, applicable and general ventilation solutions to improve the IAQ of residential buildings in China.

Introduction

Building envelopes intentionally separate occupants from the outside, making indoor pollutants, such as particulate matter, inorganic gases, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), mold, and radioactive compounds (as summarized in Table 1), more easily to accumulate indoors. Some of the pollutants found indoors can produce odor or cause irritation, while many can pose chronic and/or acute health effects on occupants (Logue et al., 2011, Wouter Borsboom et al., 2016) via inhalation, dermal or other pathways (Gong et al., 2016, Ostro et al., 2015, Tischer and Heinrich, 2013, Tse et al., 2011, Tsushima et al., 2016, Weschler, 2009).

Other than the available technologies for source control and air cleaning, ventilation serves as the basic means to partially dilute indoor pollutants, mostly in the gas phase, and to maintain a habitable space for human beings. Ventilation can be inefficient for reducing human exposure to radon (as the radon entry rates can be the leading factor sometimes) (Andersen et al., 1997), or significantly decrease SVOC concentrations both in the gas phase and on indoor surfaces including human skin (Liu et al., 2015). However, ventilation is still a common method with usually manageable costs.

Furthermore, one of the key elements of using ventilation to improve indoor air quality (IAQ) is to determine an adequate ventilation rate in a standardized manner at a broader scale. In a sense, the required adequate ventilation can be interpreted as the recommended (minimum) ventilation rate for various buildings as specified in guidelines, standards, building codes or even legislation, and this ventilation rate is usually provided by mechanical ventilation systems (ASHRAE, 2016a, ASHRAE, 2016b, Brelih and Seppänen, 2011, BSI, 2008). However, it should be clarified that the recommended ventilation rate is an engineering approach based on available knowledges and technologies, and can be considered as prescriptions. Sometimes, people use the term of minimum ventilation rate when refereeing to the mandatory ventilation rates in building design codes, such as GB 50736-2012 in China (MOHURD, 2012). And to determine the recommended (or minimum) ventilation rate in practice is a comprehensive task for the following reasons at least: First, it is easy for engineers and building owners to follow this rate during the design phase to reach a target acceptable IAQ. On the other hand, it is also easy to be overlooked and poorly accomplished during both the design and service phases, compromising occupants' living and working environments. Second, the recommended (or minimum) ventilation rate must balance improving IAQ, which usually requires more ventilation, with the energy consumption, which needs less ventilation (Sundell, 2004). Third, more diversified indoor air pollutant sources require flexible methods for determining the ventilation rate, while the regulations of the minimum ventilation rate in a standardized manner need to avoid complexity.

The scientific minimum ventilation rate, on the other hand, is another topic of debates. In modern society, exposure to indoor compounds is almost inevitable regardless of where people live (Weschler, 2009). The ultimate question on indoor pollutants should be whether people are exposed to pollutant levels that are above health-based criteria. And the corresponding minimum ventilation rate should be adequate enough to minimize the health effects that indoor air pollutants can pose on occupants. In general, as summarized by (Carrer et al., 2015), available epidemiological data show that higher ventilation rates will reduce health outcomes and that there are minimum rates of ventilation above which some acute health outcomes can be avoided (the data on chronic health effects are still rare). But, no clear causality has been established and no universally applicable ventilation-health relationship can be established. The primary reason is that ventilation is indirectly related to health because it only modifies exposures to indoor and outdoor sources that affect health (Carrer et al., 2015).

Therefore, ventilation rate should be strongly based on the strength of the pollutant sources that are present indoors. And therefore, indoor air pollutants that have unhealthy concentrations can be considered as ventilation determinants. In a broader sense, ventilation determinants include temperature, humidity, emissions from occupants (bioeffluents), and emissions from indoor materials, furniture and work processes (Persily et al., 2005, Zuraimi and Tham, 2008). This paper only considers the indoor pollutants that can be used to determine the ventilation rates to be ventilation determinants.

Throughout the approximately 200-year history of the minimum ventilation rate, many indoor air pollutants, e.g., formaldehyde, VOCs, total volatile organic compounds (TVOC), SVOCs, and particles, have been discussed and proposed as potential determinants for the ventilation rate (Jokl, 2000, Liu et al., 2015, Noh and Hwang, 2010, Sherman and Hodgson, 2004, Ye et al., 2014c). At present, the regulated ventilation rate is primarily based on IAQ surrogates that represent the bioeffluent mostly emitted from humans, such as CO₂ and odor. Due to the groundwork laid by Pettenkofer (1858) and Yaglou et al. (1936), the link between the minimum ventilation rate and CO₂ (or odor) has been extensively studied. The idea of determining the minimum ventilation rate based on sensory end-point (odor and irritation) has been further developed in the concept of perceived IAQ (Fanger, 1988). Ultimately, the ventilation rate should be more dependent on the health end-point of indoor pollutant exposure, such as short- and long-term health consequences, instead of on occupants' perception of IAQ alone (Sundell et al., 2011). It was not until recently that moderate concentrations of bioeffluents with CO₂, not pure CO₂, were proven to be a causative agent and to have deleterious effects on acute health symptoms and cognitive performance of occupants during typical indoor exposures (Zhang et al., 2016a). This result suggests that to dilute the concentrations of indoor bioeffluents is not only an effort for sensory-related purposes, but also a measure to avoid potential health effects. This is an epitome to the limited but growing scientific bases to determine ventilation rate. As (Persily, 2015) summarized, there are many challenges and efforts in developing ventilation rate standards, and to date, the purpose of recommending adequate ventilation rate shifts from covering sensory issues alone to providing a more health-oriented approach for indoor environment in buildings.

After many years of studying and debating, in 2012, China launched its revised national design standard for heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) for civil buildings that is still in effect (MOHURD, 2012). Although during the revising process, it still took sensory-based ventilation rates as references to a great extent, this standard has been playing an important role in standardizing the ventilation design for buildings in China. In this standard, the minimum ventilation rates (as in an engineering aspect) that cover > 30 types of spaces with various functions fall into four categories: public buildings (not high occupant density buildings), residential buildings, hospitals and high occupant density buildings. Compared to the previous standard published in 2003 (MOHURD and AQSIQ, 2003), almost all of the defined spaces were brought together for the first time. Another landmark change involved categorizing buildings using occupant density based on the assumption that human bioeffluents can be the dominant pollutants in high occupant density buildings. The minimum ventilation rate per person (m³ h^− 1 ∙ person^− 1) was simplified and given based on the occupant density (person m^− 1) for high occupant density buildings, e.g., classrooms, supermarkets, cinemas, libraries and stadiums. On the other hand, the minimum ventilation rate was given as the minimum air change rate (ACH, h^− 1) based on the average area per person (m² ∙ person^− 1) value for dwellings that have a mechanical ventilation system to supply outdoor air to the indoors, as shown in Table 2. (Dwellings that do not have a mechanical ventilation system to supply outdoor air do not have a regulation for the minimum ventilation rate.) For many years, residences were considered to be low occupant density spaces; building pollutants, e.g., VOC emissions from building materials and consumer products, are sometimes the majority of the indoor pollutants in low occupant density spaces (Ye et al., 2014b). However, current ventilation rates for residences are still mainly based on human bioeffluents and may not suitably account for potential pollutants other than bioeffluents, e.g., particles, VOCs and SVOCs, in the residential environment.

For comparison, the typical methods used to determine the ventilation rate in the EU and USA are included in Table 2 (ASHRAE, 2016a, ASHRAE, 2016b, BSI, 2007, Cao et al., 2012). Although many European countries also have various regulations or guidelines on ventilation rate (Brelih and Seppänen, 2011), only EN 15251 is shown as an example to represent the European efforts and typical methods. As opposed to using the air change rate for the whole room to regulate the residential ventilation rate in China, the ventilation rate per person is more frequently used in both the EU and USA. However, using default values of n, A or N_br, the typical air change rate (~ 0.5 h^− 1 to ~ 0.7 h^− 1) would be similar to the values in China. Although it is difficult to tell which method is more advanced in general, it can be noted intuitively that both the EU and USA methods are more occupant-oriented (e.g., determining the ventilation rate based on expectations or partly on occupant number), while the Chinese method is less complicated (in terms of calculation), but is more building-oriented (based on the area per person). Furthermore, both EN 15251 and ASHRAE 62.2 have emphasized not only the need to apply mechanical ventilation in residences but also the need to adjust the exhaust air from the kitchen, bathrooms and toilets; outdoor air should primarily be supplied to living rooms and bedrooms. The current Chinese ventilation rate standard is still general and has little impact on dwellings that do not install a mechanical ventilation system to supply outdoor air.

This discussion on ventilation rate standard leads to two more topics. First, ventilation can be poor in reality, no matter how much the ventilation rate is recommended or even regulated. Home ventilation is mainly occupant controlled. Even with proper design, it is very difficult to make it mandatory for everybody to use home ventilation when necessary. (Dimitroulopoulou, 2012) reviewed ventilation data in European dwellings, and the results show that although occupants generally think that ventilation is important, their understanding of the ventilation systems is low, often resulting to under-ventilated homes (lower than 0.5 h^− 1, which is currently a standard in many European countries).

Second, the applied ventilation method should be able to efficiently remove or dilute the concentrations of indoor pollutants. However, most of the residential buildings in China still depend on “window ventilation” or infiltration to passively introduce outdoor air to indoors. Although mechanical ventilation often comes with an air filtration unit that provides a reliable way to supply the minimum required airflow with good air quality to indoor spaces, this ventilation method has not been popularized among Chinese dwellings due to economic and many other factors. In reality, instead of depending on the mechanical ventilation, opening windows often becomes a life-long habit among Chinese people (Peng et al., 2012). This occupant-controlled window ventilation is often mistaken as natural ventilation, while natural ventilation should be designed specially to use natural forces for building ventilation. With suitable climate and proper design, natural ventilation can be an energy-efficient way to improve IAQ. However, at least three downsides can still be expected.

• Natural ventilation is not always predictable or sufficient. Building location, group layout, orientation, internal space arrangement and openings need to be carefully designed to maximize natural ventilation. For example, in the past, natural ventilation was used along with sun shading and thermal insulation to make traditional Chinese dwellings passively climate responsive in the rural areas with hot summers and cold winters (Gou et al., 2015); however, thermal sensation during winter was not satisfactory. Currently, approximately 250 million households (accounting for 55% of the population) live in cities. Compared to 2001, the total number of residents living in rural areas in 2014 dropped from 796 million to 619 million, while residents living in urban areas increased from 481 million to 749 million (NSB, 2015). Consequently, natural ventilation potential in multi-story or high-rise apartment buildings has become an emerging topic in China (Zhou et al., 2014). In terms of sufficient quantity, China is currently the largest producer of wood-based panels, coatings and furniture in the world (Liu et al., 2012); therefore, massive new building furnishing materials and consumer products have emerged in people's daily life. Exposure to ubiquitous VOCs and SVOCs is already causing public concerns; asthma, rhinitis and eczema (allergic or non-allergic) have been increasing among children during the last several decades, indicating that insufficient ventilation rates in homes and schools can be a problem (Zhang et al., 2013b).

• Outdoor air quality is of wide concerns for many parts of the country (Hua et al., 2015, Li and Zhang, 2014, Wang et al., 2014a). The haze event on January 30, 2013, affected 1.43 million square kilometers, covering approximately 15% of China's land territory (MEP, 2013). Natural ventilation is theoretically unhealthy to use in areas with severe outdoor pollution unless the air has been properly treated. Currently, air cleaners are an affordable household solution that are usually used for only some spaces and some of the time. Although air cleaners can be reasonably effective even under haze conditions with window ventilation (Ma et al., 2016), none of the current technologies for air cleaners are able to effectively remove all indoor pollutants, including particles and VOCs, and many could generate undesirable by-products during operation (Zhang et al., 2011a). Therefore, whether air cleaners can be useful in dwellings may not have a straight answer.

• The natural ventilation approach for home ventilation makes the minimum ventilation rate regulated by national standard (MOHURD, 2012) less effective and guaranteed. In a way, the minimum ventilation rate should mainly be achieved by mechanical ventilation. Some of the newly built residential buildings are equipped with mechanical ventilation to supply filtered outdoor air into the indoor environment. However, the majority of residences are existing dwellings that mostly depend on window or natural ventilation, making effective and affordable indoor air cleaning devices a necessity.

Rapid modernization and urbanization has led China to experience a dramatic change in both indoor and outdoor environments during the past two decades. The challenges that urge us to improve IAQ for 1.4 billion residents have never been more urgent and complicated. Although the current ventilation standard in China (MOHURD, 2012) has refined the ventilation requirements for various buildings and has already led to industrial development of related technologies and products, the contents are still partially derived from international experience. Because the adequate ventilation rate is closely related to strength of the pollutant sources and efficacy of the ventilation design and system, both aspects need to be thoroughly investigated in the context of Chinese dwellings.

This review first focuses on current major indoor pollutants, i.e., bioeffluents, particles, VOCs, SVOCs, mold/moisture and radon, based on both sensory (mainly for bioeffluents) and health end-points, in residential buildings in China, by reviewing the available scientific literature and summarizing the indoor concentration data. Applicable ventilation determinants that have adverse acute and chronic effects on health are discussed, followed by a discussion and comparison of the methods used to determine ventilation requirements. In addition, two ventilation modes raised in recent years that specifically intended for ventilation in Chinese residential buildings, i.e., natural ventilation (mainly window ventilation) with an air cleaner (mode 1) and mechanical ventilation with an air filtration unit (mode 2), are compared in terms of their applicability and adaptability in China. Mode 1 is assumed to be able to meet the ventilation rate requirements, although the current GB 50736-2012 standard only applies to dwellings that have installed mechanical ventilation systems. Both modes have the potential to achieve good IAQ. However, the difference is that mode 1 does not actively target the minimum ventilation rate, while mode 2 intentionally meets this requirement.

The competition and comparison of the two modes are currently popular topics for national discussions and debates as part of the 13th Five-Year Plan cycle (2016 to 2020) as they are possible solutions for improving IAQ in the dwellings. It needs to be pointed out that there are many ways that can be used to achieve good IAQ in dwellings. In addition, many modifications can be done based on each one of the modes. However, these two modes represent two directions for home ventilation development and open a dialog for more discussions and debates on whether we should popularize mechanical ventilation or promote air cleaners to improve residential IAQ, while overcoming outdoor air pollution on a large scale with limited room for increasing total energy usage in the residential sector. Since no conclusive studies have been proposed to prioritize these two technological pathways, and no final results may end this debate at least for the next few years, a comprehensive review is needed to analyze the potentials of the two primary options.