Environmental perceptions and health before and after relocation to a green building

Abstract

Green buildings are designed to have low environmental impacts and improved occupant health and well-being. Improvements to the built environment including ventilation, lighting, and materials have resulted in improved indoor environmental quality (IEQ) in green buildings, but the evidence around occupant health is currently centered around environmental perceptions and self-reported health. To investigate the objective impact of green buildings on health, we tracked IEQ, self-reported health, and heart rate in 30 participants from green and conventional buildings for two weeks. 24 participants were then selected to be relocated to the Syracuse Center of Excellence, a LEED platinum building, for six workdays. While they were there, ventilation, CO2, and volatile organic compound (VOC) levels were changed on different days to match the IEQ of conventional, green, and green+ (green with increased ventilation) buildings. Participants reported improved air quality, odors, thermal comfort, ergonomics, noise and lighting and fewer health symptoms in green buildings prior to relocation. After relocation, participants consistently reported fewer symptoms during the green building conditions compared to the conventional one, yet symptom counts were more closely associated with environmental perceptions than with measured IEQ. On average, participants had 4.7 times the odds of reporting a lack of air movement, 1.4 more symptoms (p-value = 0.019) and a 2 bpm higher heart rate (p-value < 0.001) for a 1000 ppm increase in indoor CO2 concentration. These findings suggest that occupant health in green and conventional buildings is driven by both environmental perceptions and physiological pathways.

Sick building syndrome: are we doing enough?

“…One of these measures is the use of green building for enhancing the health status of occupants (MacNaughton et al 2016;Paul and Taylor 2008;Thatcher and Milner 2016). To answer the question whether green building can have a really better impact on occupants, Thatcher and Milner (2016) conducted a longitudinal study to empirically investigate three green buildings through using a pre-test, post-test design, and repeated measures design with a contrast group for two of the buildings.…”

“…The statistical analyses established significant improvements in perceived air quality across all three buildings, significant improvements in self-report productivity in two of the buildings and a significant improvement in physical wellbeing in one building. In another study, MacNaughton et al (2016) investigated the influence of green building on improving the health status through recording and monitoring the IEQ, self-reported health, and heart rates of participants dwelling in two green and conventional buildings. The findings indicated that participants consistently reported fewer symptoms during the green building conditions.…”

Motivators for Green Buildings: A Review

“…Nduka & Ogunsanmi, 2015;Ng, 2013;Shazmin et al, 2016). On the other hand, some studies have attributed the motivators related to the environmental and social aspects, such as; protection of the environment and ecosystem, control of climate change, waste reduction, and improving the quality of life as the most important factors (Abidin & Powmya, 2014;Aste et al, 2016;Bond, 2010;Lee et al, 2013;MacNaughton et al, 2016;Rustom, 2014;Usman & Gidado, 2015;Waidyasekara & Fernando, 2013).…”

Environmental and Energy Aspects of Construction Industry and Green Buildings

“…Construction industry is one of the largest final consumers of environmental resources and one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases and other types of pollution, but before the 21st century, for instance, in China, green building construction has not received much attention [6].…”

“…Health aspects are very important in green buildings. According to the research that examined 30 participants in green buildings and conventional buildings for two weeks [6], participants in green buildings experienced significantly lower CO 2 concentrations, reports of too little air flow were reduced by 91 %, chemical odours by 22 %, tobacco smoke odours by 88 %, other unpleasant odours by 28 %, dryness by 63 %, and the participants in green buildings reported half as many symptoms per day as those in the conventional buildings -eye and skin, cognitive, viral, and sensory symptoms were reduced by 67 %, 70 %, 28 %, 50 % and 65 %, respectively. As a result, green buildings have lower environmental impacts and improve health and well-being of occupants, by such improvements as ventilation, lighting, materials, and improved indoor environmental quality.…”