Indoor environmental conditions (thermal, noise, light, and indoor air quality) may affect workers’ comfort, and consequently their health and well-being, as well as their productivity. This study aimed to assess the relations between perceived indoor environment and occupants’ comfort, and to examine the modifying effects of both personal and building characteristics. Within the framework of the European project OFFICAIR, a questionnaire survey was administered to 7441 workers in 167 “modern” office buildings in eight European countries (Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain). Occupants assessed indoor environmental quality (IEQ) using both crude IEQ items (satisfaction with thermal comfort, noise, light, and indoor air quality), and detailed items related to indoor environmental parameters (e.g., too hot/cold temperature, humid/dry air, noise inside/outside, natural/artificial light, odor) of their office environment. Ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relations between perceived IEQ and occupants’ comfort. The highest association with occupants’ overall comfort was found for “noise”, followed by “air quality”, “light” and “thermal” satisfaction. Analysis of detailed parameters revealed that “noise inside the buildings” was highly associated with occupants’ overall comfort. “Layout of the offices” was the next parameter highly associated with overall comfort. The relations between IEQ and comfort differed by personal characteristics (gender, age, and the Effort Reward Imbalance index), and building characteristics (office type and building’s location). Workplace design should take into account both occupant and the building characteristics in order to provide healthier and more comfortable conditions to their occupants.

The European project OFFICAIR aimed to broaden the existing knowledge regarding indoor air quality (IAQ) in modern office buildings, i.e., recently built or refurbished buildings. Thirty-seven office buildings participated in the summer campaign (2012), and thirty-five participated in the winter campaign (2012-2013). Four rooms were investigated per building. The target pollutants were twelve volatile organic compounds, seven aldehydes, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter <2.5μm (PM). Compared to other studies in office buildings, the benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene concentrations were lower in OFFICAIR buildings, while the α-pinene and d-limonene concentrations were higher, and the aldehyde, nitrogen dioxide and PM concentrations were of the same order of magnitude. When comparing summer and winter, significantly higher concentrations were measured in summer for formaldehyde and ozone, and in winter for benzene, α-pinene, d-limonene, and nitrogen dioxide. The terpene and 2-ethylhexanol concentrations showed heterogeneity within buildings regardless of the season. Considering the average of the summer and winter concentrations, the acetaldehyde and hexanal concentrations tended to increase by 4-5% on average with every floor level increase, and the nitrogen dioxide concentration tended to decrease by 3% on average with every floor level increase. A preliminary evaluation of IAQ in terms of potential irritative and respiratory health effects was performed. The 5-day median and maximum indoor air concentrations of formaldehyde and ozone did not exceed their respective WHO air quality guidelines, and those of acrolein, α-pinene, and d-limonene were lower than their estimated thresholds for irritative and respiratory effects. PM indoor concentrations were higher than the 24-h and annual WHO ambient air quality guidelines.

No abstract

Abstract. A comparison exercise on thermal-optical elemental carbon/organic carbon (ECOC) analysers was carried out among 17 European laboratories. Contrary to previous comparison exercises, the 17 participants made use of an identical instrument set-up, after correcting for temperature offsets with the application of a recently developed temperature calibration kit (Sunset Laboratory Inc, OR, US). Temperature offsets reported by participants ranged from −93 to +100 °C per temperature step. Five filter samples and two sucrose solutions were analysed with both the EUSAAR2 and NIOSH870 thermal protocols. z scores were calculated for total carbon (TC); nine outliers and three stragglers were identified. Three outliers and eight stragglers were found for EC. Overall, the participants provided results between the warning levels with the exception of two laboratories that showed poor performance, the causes of which were identified and corrected through the course of the comparison exercise. The TC repeatability and reproducibility (expressed as relative standard deviations) were 11 and 15% for EUSAAR2 and 9.2 and 12% for NIOSH870; the standard deviations for EC were 15 and 20% for EUSAAR2 and 20 and 26% for NIOSH870. TC was in good agreement between the two protocols, TCNIOSH870 = 0.98 × TCEUSAAR2 (R2 = 1.00, robust means). Transmittance (TOT) calculated EC for NIOSH870 was found to be 20% lower than for EUSAAR2, ECNIOSH870 = 0.80 × ECEUSAAR2 (R2 = 0.96, robust means). The thermograms and laser signal values were compared and similar peak patterns were observed per sample and protocol for most participants. Notable deviations from the typical patterns indicated either the absence or inaccurate application of the temperature calibration procedure and/or pre-oxidation during the inert phase of the analysis. Low or zero pyrolytic organic carbon (POC), as reported by a few participants, is suggested as an indicator of an instrument-specific pre-oxidation. A sample-specific pre-oxidation effect was observed for filter G, for all participants and both thermal protocols, indicating the presence of oxygen donors on the suspended particulate matter. POC (TOT) levels were lower for NIOSH870 than for EUSAAR2, which is related to the heating profile differences of the two thermal protocols.