Sick Building Syndrome

Surveys carried out in Australia have shown SBS to be more prevalent in air-conditioned building than non air-conditioned. SBS is often given as a reason for having air handling systems cleaned.

The Environmental Protection Agency in the US (EPA) firmly believe that it is a major problem costing billions of dollars annually in lost office production.

The US national Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has conducted studies of over 350 buildings in which indoor air quality problems were reported.

In 28% of the buildings studied by NIOSH, a specific indoor contaminant was indentified. Of these, building contaminants such as fiberglass (fibrous glass in US) or volatile organic compounds accounted for 4% and microbial aerosols accounted for 5%. For these buildings, cleanliness of the air handling system is very important.

In 11%, a specific outdoor contaminant was identified as a cause of complaints (for example, motor vehicle exhaust entering a fresh air intake). Here the removal or prevention of the contaminant is of primary importance with a clean up of the air handling system needed to remove the accumulation of the contaminant. More of the contaminant generally settles in the air handling system than is circulated.

Comparable results have been obtained in Australia when similar studies have been carried out.

Sick Building Syndrome is much more common than most think. Often office workers complain about a lack of sense of well being in the building. Sick Building Syndrome causes symptoms in people such as eye, nose and throat infections, headaches, fatigue, dry skin and a host of similar annoying problems. The world health organisation (WHO) have published some alarming statistics such as the following.

For an office of 1000 m2 this is a typical example:

• Office Area: 1000 m2
• Average Staffing: 15 m2 / employee
• Total Staff: 67
• Assume average salary and benefit cost to employer of $30,000 per annum
• Total salary: $2,000,000
• Absenteeism cost per 1%: $20,000 per annum
• Lost productivity cost per 5%: $100,000 per annum

According to EPA estimates, absenteeism can be reduced by several percent by simply having clean air, whilst productivity improvements can be as high as 25%. The costs of not having clean air therefore can be enormous.

Well Being

Cleaning the air-conditioning system will almost always have a positive effect on the occupants of the building. Not only can it really improve their health, guard against long-term effects of exposure to dangerous or even deadly material, but it also will make them feel better.