Moisture buffering, energy potential, and volatile organic compound emissions of wood exposed to indoor environments

Nore, Kristine; Nyrud, Anders Q.; Kraniotis, Dimitrios; Skulberg, Knut Ragnvald; Englund, Finn; Aurlien, Tormod

doi:10.1080/23744731.2017.1288503

Cited by 24 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Terpenes, the main emission product group from softwoods, provide several protective functions in trees (Granström 2005) and are mainly responsible for the typical smell of wood (Nore et al 2017). The terpene group in conifers consists primarily of mono-, sesqui-and diterpenes (Granström 2010).…”

Section: Reported Health Effects From Emission Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a room with low ventilation and a large surface area of wood exposed to surrounding humidity, the buffering effect forms a considerable factor (Hameury 2005). In similar settings, according to research results, it is possible to reduce the daily humidity fluctuations of indoor air and improve the perceived air quality without increasing the amount of ventilation (Simonson et al 2001(Simonson et al , 2002Kunzel et al 2004;Hameury 2005;Kurnitski et al 2007;Li et al 2012;Nore et al 2017). For example, a hygroscopic structure with wood-based materials has the potential to reduce the maximum RH of indoor air by up to 35%, compared with a non-hygroscopic structure (Simonson et al 2002).…”

Section: Moisture Buffering Properties Of Woodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moisture transfer between indoor air and hygroscopic materials also affects the indoor temperature because of the conversion of latent heat (Hameury 2005;Kraniotis et al 2016;Nore et al 2017). Due to the phase change that humidity undergoes during the process of moisture exchange between hygroscopic material and surrounding air, wood temperature increases when moisture is absorbed and decreases during drying (Simonson et al 2002;Hameury 2005;Kraniotis et al 2016).…”

Section: Latent Heat Exchangementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the phase change that humidity undergoes during the process of moisture exchange between hygroscopic material and surrounding air, wood temperature increases when moisture is absorbed and decreases during drying (Simonson et al 2002;Hameury 2005;Kraniotis et al 2016). This leads to the possibility of reducing energy needed to heat, cool and ventilate buildings, especially in tandem with a well-controlled HVAC system (Osanyintola and Simonson 2006;Nore et al 2017). The numerical model by Osanyintola and Simonson (2006) for a bedroom with wood-based structural components and occupation at night showed that it is possible to reduce energy consumption together with hygroscopic materials and an optimally controlled HVAC system.…”

Section: Latent Heat Exchangementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The influence of wooden interior materials on indoor environment: a review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental issues and health-benefitting design strategies have raised interest in natural and renewable building materials, resulting in an increased focus on the use of wood in built environment. The influence of wooden materials on measured and perceived indoor environment quality (IEQ) has gained attention during the past few decades, with a growing number of studies having explored the issue. This review was conducted to examine and summarise the body of research on the influence of wooden interior materials on IEQ, with an emphasis on the following themes: emissions of chemical compounds, moisture buffering of indoor air, antibacterial effects, acoustics, and psychological and physiological effects. This review found that wooden interior materials exert mainly positive or neutral effects on IEQ, such as moderating humidity fluctuations of indoor air, inducing positive feelings in occupants, and inhibiting certain bacteria. Negative effects on IEQ are limited to volatile organic compounds emitted from wood. The odour thresholds of some aldehydes and terpenes are low enough to affect the perceived IEQ. Additionally, concentrations of formaldehyde and acrolein may under certain conditions cause adverse health effects. Further studies are needed to better understand these phenomena and take advantage of the beneficial effects while hindering the unpleasant ones.

show abstract

Section: Reported Health Effects From Emission Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Moisture Buffering Properties Of Woodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Latent Heat Exchangementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Latent Heat Exchangementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The influence of wooden interior materials on indoor environment: a review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the top of the small part of the chamber, the air moved into the larger part of the chamber with the participants. This set-up was described in more detail by Nore et al (2017). The outdoor air supply rate was maintained at a constant level.…”

Section: Exposure Protocol and Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health and Exposure to VOCs From Pinewood in Indoor Environments

Skulberg

Nyrud

Goffeng

et al. 2019

Front. Built Environ.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a natural, biological material, wood emits various organic chemical substances, mostly volatile organic compounds (VOCs), very volatile organic compounds (VVOCs) and formaldehyde. When such emissions occur in indoor spaces, concentrations of these substances are higher than concentrations outdoors. Consequently, the level of emissions from building materials are of relevance in relation to their possible health effects. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that exposure to VOCs from Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) might increase mucous membrane symptoms and/or general symptoms, compared to exposure to VOCs from Norway spruce (Picea abies). The study was carried out as a double-blinded, crossover, randomized, controlled trial. The health indicators were measured using objective and subjective methods. The VOC exposure was measured with a proton-transfer-reaction time-of-flight mass spectrometer. Thirty healthy individuals participated. The mean concentration of CO 2 inside the chamber in each session varied between 420 ppm and 533 ppm. The temperature and RH varied between 21.5 • C and 23.7 • C and 12.0% and 24.2%. Ozone was supplied via ventilated outdoor air. The median concentration in outdoor air was 23 µg/m 3 (13 ppb). The study was conducted with a statistically significant difference in the exposure to VOCs between the experimental (pine) exposure and the control (spruce) exposure. The mean concentrations of VOCs during the experimental exposure were methanol (31 ppb), acetaldehyde (8 ppb), formic acid (11 ppb), acetone/propanal (14 ppb), acetic acid (14 ppb) and monoterpenes (172 ppb). No difference in health outcome was revealed between the experimental and the control exposure. No inflammatory reactions or sensory irritation were found with exposure to 172 ppb monoterpenes and a low ozone concentration. Low relative humidity may have increased eye blinking in the participants in both exposure situations.

show abstract