The past, present, and future of indoor air chemistry

Abstract

“In developed countries, we spend 80%-90% of our time indoors” is the opening sentence for most grant applications and publications in our field. But has this well-worn truism lost its impact? We know that the majority of our exposure to air pollution occurs indoors, so why has indoor air quality not received the attention it deserves and how do we as a community better communicate this message? Recently, there has been increasing interest from experts from a wide range of backgrounds, including outdoor air quality scientists. They have enhanced our community, sparking a rapid evolution in the measurement technology used indoors, and the number, diversity, and novelty of findings. The INDoor AIR POLLution NETwork (INDAIRPOLLNET) was recently supported by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST), following submission of a proposal that began with the sentence highlighted above. It consists of ~200 participants from 38 countries, comprising both scientists and practitioners in chemistry, biology, aerosol characterization, toxicology, exposure, emissions and chemical risk assessments, material design, building physics, civil engineering, and standardization. Over a four-year period, INDAIRPOLLNET will address the current state of indoor air pollution, with emphasis on indoor air chemistry (IAC), including the associated research needs, challenges, and ways to address them. A liaison with the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) will facilitate the transfer of this scientific knowledge to practice. Increasing climate change awareness is driving rigorous energy efficiency measures with buildings becoming more airtight, though adverse health effects can be associated with lower ventilation rates.1 Air pollutant concentrations are often higher indoors than outdoors, particularly following activities such as cleaning, cooking, and smoking.2 More than two million healthy life years are lost across Europe because of indoor air pollution, including indoor exposure to outdoor pollutants, indoor combustion sources, moisture, and emissions from building materials and consumer products.3 There are vast differences in building types and uses, occupant behavior, geographic locations, ventilation systems, and indoor and outdoor sources. Chemical processes indoors and their relation to those occurring outdoors must be well-understood, in order to extrapolate results to a wider range of buildings and locations than in the relatively few, in which measurements have been made. In its first year, INDAIRPOLLNET used seven subgroups to mine recent literature to summarize what existing measurement and model studies reveal about IAC. The research priorities from the subgroups are now presented. The field of indoor air chemistry is moving forward rapidly, accelerated to a great extent by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation's Chemistry of Indoor Environment program (whose Web site's homepage vividly flashes the “90%-sentence”). From the laboratory to the field, from test houses to climate chambers, and from extraordinary campaigns such as HOMEChem20 to modeling efforts such as the international MOCCIE consortium, invaluable data about indoor air chemistry and physics are being swiftly generated. Indoor air chemistry occupies an increasing share in the programs of the Indoor Air conference series and at meetings such as the recent joint conference of The International Societies of Exposure Science (ISES) and Indoor Air Quality and Climate (ISIAQ) in Kaunas, Lithuania. But as it often is the case in science, new answers generate new questions and we seem to have lots of them. Such new questions are to be welcomed. As Albert Einstein noted, “To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science.” As we continue to address the unknowns of indoor air chemistry and allow our scientific curiosity to generate further insights, we should remember that we ultimately strive not only for understanding, but especially for healthier indoor environments. We thank those participants of INDAIRPOLLNET's Working Group 1, who actively contributed to the work, which resulted in this editorial. These participants are Elena Gomez Alvarez, Noel J. Aquilina, Steigvile Bycenkiene, Nuno Canha, Regina Duarte, Emer Duffy, Sebastien Dusanter, Renata Kovacevic, Mila Ródenas García, Pawel Misztal, Aleksandar Petrovski, Ana Maria Scutaru, Milena Jovasevic-Stojanovic, Kristina Plauškaitė-Šukienė, Teresa Vera, and Lenka Wimmerová. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST).

Topics & Concepts