How do we know an advanced technology, like ionization, is actually reducing airborne pathogens?
Some people point to fantastic lab results. All good, but how do you know it’s working in your school. How do we make the invisible visible specifically with regards to airborne pathogens.
Well, you’ve seen me write about it many times already, but I’d like to take a slightly different approach here.
Bringing in a 3rd party engineer to test the air before and after an advanced technology is installed is critically important to get a transparent understanding on whether your investment is working or not.
Before we get into onsite test results let’s make sure we understand the science. When we are talking about ion levels, we are talking about oxygen molecules that have been charged. The Earth’s atmosphere has natural electrostatic charges that occur (ie. Lightning strike) that create oxygen ions that, when charged, act as magnets to airborne particles, viruses, bacteria, mold, and VOCs including formaldehyde. It’s the Earth’s way of scrubbing the outdoor air clean. The oxygen ions, or ions, inactivate viruses they cling onto, kill bacteria and mold, and breakdown VOCs/formaldehyde. This is a fact. It is not some Harry Potter magic.
When you are hiking, or fishing or hunting and you feel the fresh air around you – you are most likely in an area with a very high concentration of ions. How high? Ions are measured in per cubic centimeters. When you are up in your tree stand or showing your daughter how to fly fish, your ion levels could be anywhere from 3,000 to 5,000+ ions per cubic centimeter!
This being true, we need to understand that ion levels are an important barometer when we are looking to judge how good or poorly our IAQ is. Ion levels indoors drop dramatically especially with young students in K12 schools. Some schools have ion levels below 500 ions per cubic centimeter.
CO2 is an excellent data point when it comes to IAQ but let’s understand something very important: Just because the CO2 levels in your school are low doesn’t necessarily mean you have great IAQ. It is in fact ONE data point. For example, a classroom could have a high level of VOCs, bacteria or mold, and low CO2. Bravo on making sure there is a good amount of oxygen in the room, but let’s not ignore the fact that other data points are equally as important.
The challenge with creating ions indoors comes with the fact that most ion generating technology doesn’t meet the right standards. Two major standards in particular: UL2998 and 12.07eV. UL2998 is a UL rating that represents an electronic air cleaning technology that is considered ozone free. 12.07eV is the amount of voltage, measured in electron volts (eV), that is needed to turn an oxygen molecule into an oxygen ion. If the ionization technology doesn’t meet these two standards, other negative byproducts could be produced.
That stated, an ionization technology’s purpose is to generate enough ions in the space people are occupying, like a classroom. It adds a level of proactive health and safety, when it comes to IAQ, that can not be replaced by any other technology.
Now that we understand that ions should be present indoors and they represent another important data point, what should the ion levels be and why?
AtmosAir’s patented tube ionization technology was tested in a lab and proven to reduce the coronavirus by 99.92% in 30 minutes at 1,500 ions per cubic centimeter. Incidentally, they chose 1,500 ions because they felt it was an achievable average in real world conditions as opposed to some competitors that used 27,000 ions per cubic centimeter in their lab test- very unrealistic to think you can reach that level in the center of a room.
When we did our project for the City School District of New Rochelle (CSDNR) NY in late 2021, Guth DeConzo Engineering independently tested 97 spaces throughout the ten-building school district. The data they tested for before and after the equipment installed was operating was ion levels, particle counts from .3 microns to 10, VOCs levels, Formaldehyde levels, and Ozone.
Full transparency here: There was no testing done for microbials or for airborne pathogens. BUT… what we have is deductive reasoning.
Unfortunately, or fortunately, we cannot infuse an airborne virus or bacteria into a classroom to test out performance onsite, but we can test for other things.
The illustration below was compiled by data recorded by Guth DeConzo Engineering. The 97 spaces they tested included classrooms, cafeterias, gyms, hallways, and offices. What the illustration validates is the performance of AtmosAir’s DBD ionization technology. You can see the increase in ions, and the subsequent decrease of both VOCs and Formaldehyde levels which were already very low. The higher ion level also affect small particle counts showing a decrease of the most important particles from .3um to 2.0um. (“Best and suspenders” AtmosAir is UL2298 ozone free and you can see that being validated as well with ozone levels not affected.)
Strictly from deductive reasoning, do we make a major point: If we have validated AtmosAir’s performance using a wide spectrum of data, one could safely assume that airborne pathogens were being reduced as well.
Important note: The testing illustrated above was done AFTER the school district already updated the filters in the air handling units to Merv15. This is real-world evidence that proper ventilation and upgraded filters should not be the final solution, but should be considered two parts of a broader strategy that should include the right ionization technology.
To add to this, as the illustration indicates, Guth DeConzo Engineering found the average ion level jumped from 1,390 to 2,678 per cubic centimeter- measured in the center of the space at desk level height.
Recall, from above, AtmosAir’s lab test at 1,500 ions per cubic centimeter reduced the coronavirus by 99.92% after 30 minutes. Being that the ion levels, according to Guth DeConzo, averaged 2,678 per cubic centimeter – this real-world validation leaves us with one last remaining fact:
In contrast to the lab test that was completed after 30 minutes, AtmosAir’s technology operates 24 hours per day continuously throughout the City School District of New Rochelle producing more ions per cubic centimeter than it did in the lab test. Being that the lab testing showed a reduction of the coronavirus by 99.92% after “30 minutes”, please feel free to use the power of deductive reasoning to come to your own conclusion of how effective AtmosAir’s technology is on the coronavirus as well as any other airborne pathogens in real-world situations.
The next step for your school: Getting approval for projects in K12 public schools can be overwhelming. Your first step is to set up a Smart Air Defense Test Pilot. The test pilot will allow you to bring stakeholders in and validate via 3rd party engineer test data why this technology should be in your school. You choose three rooms (classrooms, offices etc). We install unit(s) and an engineer validates performance and safety with a report that provides the transparency and the support needed to move forward.
