Air Date: 2-10-2017|Episode 447
This week on IAQ Radio we will continue our discussion of a topic that we have been focused on for several years now. Why aren’t more researchers and practitioners working together to give better guidance to those working in the field?
This week on IAQ Radio we will continue our discussion of a topic that we have been focused on for several years now. Why aren’t more researchers and practitioners working together to give better guidance to those working in the field? Every year at the Healthy Building Summit the IAQ Radio team and IAQ Training Institute, LLC sponsor research that is designed to answer important questions about assessment and remediation of indoor environments. There are a few researchers trying to help but there is not enough cooperation. Individuals and some companies are also doing important research but its often times designed to show their product works and not to benefit the industry. Today we will discuss, what type of engineering controls work best for particle reduction during indoor environmental remediation? How do these engineering controls affect other IAQ parameters? How quickly do engineering controls reduce particulate? Do particle counts, spore traps and other optical particle recognition methods match up? What is the best way to determine when a project is complete?
“Research to Practice”
On today’s episode of IAQradio, Radio Joe and I tackled the question why aren’t researchers and practitioners working together to give better guidance to those working on the field?
Nuggets mined from today’s episode:
Defining scientific research. Noun. The systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions. Noun synonyms: Investigation, experimentation, testing, analysis, fact-finding, fieldwork, examination or scrutiny.
Verb. Investigate systematically.Verb synonyms: investigate, study, inquire into, look into, probe, explore, analyze, examine, scrutinize, or review
Why do we do what we do? The first two things that come to my mind are:
1) because it’s what we’ve always done or
2) because it’s the newest way.
It’s often the vacuum tool, not the vacuum that has the greatest amount of influence on cleaning.
Designing a study to determine if it works is science.
Designing a study to determine what works is science.
Calling the only circumstances and parameters in which a product works a study isn’t science it’s marketing.
Should we continue to reward bad science and those acting for self-interest? Or, should the people responsible for the misinformation be held accountable?
The smartest person in the room may not be a PhD, practitioners know stuff! Are those folks we consider authorities really authorities on everything we do? What does being good at identifying microbes under a microscope have to do with good cleaning?
It’s a generational thing. My observation is that millennial’s think everything new is superior. Generational forgetfulness, good fundamentals are being forgotten and lost.
English isn’t the first language of many of our workers. Too much time and emphasis in training is spent on complex jargon, we need to keep it simple.
An echo chamber is a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission inside an “enclosed” space, often drowning out outside views. One purveyor of information will make a claim, which many like-minded people then repeat, overhear, and repeat again (often in an exaggerated or otherwise distorted form) until most people assume that some extreme variation of the story is true.
Poor Guidance- I am concerned that errors and misinformation within industry guidance documents get “parroted” and trained to our employees.
“People will eventually realize that the correct approach is to use the lowest technology that will do the mission, not the highest.” Burt Rutan
Healthy Building Summit Research:
What types of engineering controls work best for particle reduction during indoor environmental remediation? Negative pressure or Neg. pressure with scrubbing does best at keeping contaminants from migrating to other areas of the building.
How do these engineering controls affect other IAQ parameters? A lot depends on the surrounding environment and the type of engineering control.
How quickly do engineering controls reduce airborne particulate? Within two hours the studied engineering controls leveled off with respect to removal of particles.
What are the implications of this research for remediators and consultants? Starting out under negative pressure keeps contaminants from spreading. Once remediation gets toward completion switching over to scrubbing (with the scrubber moved 45 degrees every few hours) was more effective at controlling particulate than neg air or neg air and scrubbing. Positive air has potential but there are numerous variables when using it and more study is needed.
JOIN us this November 2-4 for Healthy Building Summit III at Seven Springs Resort in PA. We will be building on our research and of course have tremendous speakers invited. Mark Hernandez, PhD will be one of our Keynote speakers this year. LEARN MORE
While practitioners may be intimidated, disconnected or don’t know how to get involved; the majority of researchers we know and interact with respect and value the opinions of practitioners working in the field.
Z-Man signing off
Name the term for a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation