Effectiveness of simple ventilation strategies and partitioning in mitigating the effects of passive smoking

Abstract

Pubs, bars and restaurants are places where smoking policy is still left to the discretion of the manager and where smoking is often permitted. However, there is demand to take measures to eliminate or reduce the effects of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) to non-smoking occupants. This paper reports the results of a field study in which ETS markers and air flow patterns were monitored in a number of occupied spaces. The measurements included CO concentrations as a marker of ETS, CO 2 concentrations as a general indoor air quality (IAQ) indicator and air flow measurements to estimate ventilation and infiltration rates. The findings indicate that shared-space smoking needs action beyond that of simple ventilation, segregation of occupants or simple partitioning to minimise the potentially harmful effects of ETS to both staff and customers.

Fine particulate matter measurements in Swiss restaurants, cafés and bars: What is the effect of spatial separation between smoking and non-smoking areas?

“…This is probably due to dilution of the smoke into the non‐smoking area. Ventilation systems have been previously reported to have no significant effect on air pollution levels (Carrington et al., 2003; Johnsson et al., 2006; Kolokotroni et al., 1999), also in line with the results of our study. The most effective way for PM 2.5 reduction is banning smoking from hospitality venues as has been shown in several studies (Mulcahy et al., 2005; Ott et al., 1996; Repace, 2004; Waring and Siegel, 2007).…”

An evaluation of the indoor air quality in bars before and after a smoking ban in Austin, Texas

“…In their study of 60 pubs in the UK, Carrington et al (2003) noted that for pubs with non-smoking areas the median concentration of fine particulate matter is reduced only by 34% of that in the smoking areas. Another study evaluated the effectiveness of ventilation and partitioning to mitigate the effects of passive smoking, and measured CO concentrations as a marker of ETS, CO 2 as a general indoor air quality indicator, and air flow measurements to estimate ventilation and infiltration rates (Kolokotroni et al, 1999). The study determined that ventilation strategies alone, although reducing concentrations of indicators of ETS somewhat, are generally not sufficient to reduce migration of indicators of ETS into a non-smoking space.…”