I require expert knowledge in Real estate practices and law to assist with this assignment. Please see the attached assignment details, as well as assistive documentation. Additional resources may be found at:
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
You read briefly about hazardous materials and gasses, and
practiced with environmental vocabulary concerning
property sales in the Learning Activity. Now you have an
opportunity to do some research and see what technological
advances have helped to either eradicate or mitigate the
damages done by environmental toxins with regards to real
property. Most states have laws pertaining to responsibility
for disclosure of such toxins present in homes.
The following Course Outcome is assessed in this
assignment:
GEL-3.04: Examine the relationship between science and
technology and the impact on the natural world.
Scenario: You are showing clients a house built in 1960 in
your state. They are interested in buying the home, but they
want to completely remodel it and the mechanical systems
including adding a new gas furnace and stove. Research
“Healthy Building Materials” in the Purdue Global Library
located in the Academic Tools area of the course. Select an
article to read and record the title, author, and year.
Checklist:
What air quality and building materials concerns should
they look at regarding the existing home? Analyze possible
radon, lead, gas, and asbestos issues and how these
affect homeowners and the environment.
What scientific discoveries regarding air quality and
building materials have led to new technological solutions
that will deal with your clients’ potential problems?
Based on research on your state’s disclosure statements
required of real estate agents, discuss what disclosures of
hazardous materials the real estate agent or seller is
required to make to the buyer of a home in your state.
Access the Unit 3 Assignment grading rubric.
Respond in a minimum 500–600-word APA formatted and
citation styled paper with additional title and reference
pages to the Unit 3 Assignment Dropbox before the end of
the unit.
Limits on Ownership
Restrictions of Use Separation of Use or Possession Complete Removal Share of Value
Private Deed Restrictions/ HOA or Condo Bylaws Easements & Leases Liens (In default) ________
Government Regulation through Police Power _______ Eminent Domain Taxation
This chapter examines the government limitations on real property ownership
Features of Real Estate that Cause Market Distortions
“Spillover” effects from nearby land uses
Uniqueness of location (absolute monopoly)
Unknown quality or condition of existing structures
Instability of land uses around residential neighborhoods
Resulting Market Failures in Real Estate (1 of 2)
Monopoly
Utilities as “natural” monopolies
“Holdouts” in land assembly efforts (roads, other public uses)
Incomplete information
Construction quality hidden
Buyers unable to judge natural risks
Hurricanes
Earthquakes
Fires
Resulting Market Failures in Real Estate (2 of 2)
Buyers unable to judge adequacy of structure quality
Wind tolerance
Resilience against shocks
Fire safety and resistance
More Market Failures (1 of 2)
Externalities
“Spillover” effects of land use for which initiator is not held accountable
Traffic congestion
Storm runoff
Emissions (smoke, gases, particles, noise, light)
Urban sprawl
Disorderly extension of urban infrastructure
More Market Failures (2 of 2)
Uncertainty of residential values
Effect of non-conventional structures
Effect of nonresidential land uses
Effect of non-conventional population –e.g., students
The “Revolution” in Land Use Controls
Pre-1970: Little interest in land use controls
No land use plans had force of law
Zoning very limited in function
Focused on protection of single-family homes
Did not exist in many areas
Environmental movement of late 1960s
Rachael Carson: Silent Spring
Love Canal
Notion of “spaceship earth”
Some Critical Questions
Will land use planning solve market failures?
At what level should control be imposed?
For subdivisions?
For streets and utilities?
For schools?
For water resources and drainage control?
For transportation systems?
For rivers and wetlands?
For ecological and endangered species?
Is Comprehensive Planning the Answer? What Is Required?
Project future population growth
Determine requirements for water and waste disposal
Project needs for public services (utilities, streets, schools, parks and recreation, safety)
Projected demand for various land uses (public, residential, nonresidential)
Design compatible arrangement of needed land uses (land use map)
Challenges to Comprehensive Planning
Changing notion of “best practice”
Cul-de-sacs or grid streets?
Mixed density and mixed use or containment of nonresidential use?
How much mass transit?
Limited actual experience to rely on (little more than 30 years)
Insufficient theory and information
Inability to foresee the future well
Traditional Planning versus New Urban Planning (1 of 2)
Traditional
Separated uses
Automobile oriented
Priority placed on easy ingress and egress
Uniform density
Cul-de-sac hierarchy in neighborhoods
Traditional Planning versus New Urban Planning (2 of 2)
New Urban
Mixed use
Public transportation
Pedestrian oriented
Sidewalks
Houses close to street
Rear alleys
Grid streets with restricted traffic flows
Traditional Land Use Controls: Building Codes
Older than zoning (circa 1900)
Issues of safety
Fire: Materials, alarms, electrical and gas systems
Sanitation: Plumbing, water, and HVAC requirements
Injury: Design and strength
Continue to evolve
Effect of Hurricane Andrew, 2004-5 hurricanes, Katrina
New technology (e.g., smoke detectors)
Changing perception of needs (e.g., bedroom windows large enough to step through)
Traditional Land Use Controls: Zoning
Features of traditional zoning
Use classifications: Residential, commercial, industrial, automotive
Use districts (zoning map)
Setback requirements (side, front and back)
“Bulk” or density limits (minimum lot size, height limits, maximum floor area ratios)
Special use districts: Service stations, hospitals, churches, private schools, cemeteries
Traditional Land Use Controls: Subdivision Regulations
Features of subdivision regulations
Standards for streets, sewers, and water systems
Adequate water supply for fire safety
Adequate drainage and run-off retention
Open spaces
Lot layout
Easements for utilities
Traffic and pedestrian safety
Traditional Land Use Controls: Planning and Zoning Administration (1 of 2)
Planning and Zoning Commission created in the zoning ordinance
Appointed by elected officials
Ultimately is advisory to elected officials
Oversees implementation of the ordinance
Considers requests for specific changes
Requested changes must:
Traditional Land Use Controls: Planning and Zoning Administration (2 of 2)
Be compatible with a comprehensive plan
Be justified if they require change in the comprehensive plan
Not have undue effect on surrounding land uses or the community
Traditional Land Use Controls: Board of Adjustment
Required in zoning ordinance
Appointed by elected officials
Reviews petitions for variances
Decisions are final rather than advisory to the elected officials
Only appeal is through the courts
Traditional Land Use Controls: Site Plan Review
May be the same as planning and zoning commission
Review subdivisions and most other building site plans
Public review (neighbors and others)
Public offices (public safety – fire, police, emergency vehicles; utility officials; school officials)
Informal procedure allows criteria and rules to change with public pressure
Most “treacherous” step for proposed new development?
Zoning Issues and Concepts (1 of 2)
Legality of zoning established by USSC: Village of Euclid versus Ambler Realty – 1926
Nonconforming use: Use conflicting with zoning map, but existing prior to its enactment
Cannot be substantially changed
Must be continuous
Can be “amortized” away (e.g., billboards)
Zoning Issues and Concepts (2 of 2)
Variance: Exception to requirements granted due to hardship
Common example: wavier of setback requirement
Exclusionary zoning (unreasonable lot size; inadequate provision for low- and moderate-income housing)
Do Land Use Controls Solve the Problem of Market Failure?
Does zoning raise the cost of “threshold” housing unnecessarily?
Does it interfere with economically efficient land use patterns?
Example: Does zoning make neighborhood services excessively remote?
Does low density resulting from zoning contribute to urban sprawl?
Houston: effective land uses without zoning?
Newer Approaches to Land Use Control: Planned Unit Development
Detailed development plan negotiated with authorities
Mixed use
Mixed density
No standard setback requirements
Open community spaces
Community recreation and other facilities
Newer Approaches to Land Use Controls: Performance Standards
Storm runoff limits
Noise and emission limits
Traffic impact limits
Tree removal restrictions
More New Land Use Controls
Impact fees
Favorite of economists (in principle)
Despised by many in the building community
Appear to be used more as revenue source than tool to guide land use
Growth restrictions
Temporary moratoriums
US Supreme Court refuses to review Petaluma, Ca. limit on the number of new housing units.
Also Boulder, Co., and Boca Raton, Fl.
Another Way? Form Based Zoning
Land uses are determined not by prescription but “organically” based on:
Development density
Street character
Parking arrangements
Walkway character
Structure shapes and sizes
Foliage character
How Form-Based Zoning Works (1 of 2)
Within broad categories, land uses can go anywhere
Households will select a form that suites their location, household and lifestyle preference: rural, suburb, urban core
Non-residential uses will select as their business requires:
How Form Based Zoning Works (2 of 2)
Neighborhood shops versus large urban stores
Small local offices versus financial centers
Example: Denver, Colorado http://formbasedcodes.org/codes/denver-commons/
Sample of Environmental Controls since the Late 1960s
Clean Air Act
Clean Water Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
Endangered Species Act
Increasing limitations on “fracking”
Is there a limit to regulation?
Pennsylvania Coal Company v Mahon (US Supreme Court, 1922):
Courts must balance public safety and welfare against taking of property
At some point eminent domain must be used. (Murr v. Wisconsin now before USSC)
Minority opinion in the case: “We are in danger of forgetting that a strong public desire to improve the public condition is not enough to warrant achieving the desire by a shorter cut than the constitutional way of paying for it.”
Power of Eminent Domain
Eminent domain: Right of government to acquire private land, without the owner’s consent, for public use, with due process and just compensation
Condemnation: Legal procedure for exercising the right of eminent domain
Public use versus public purpose
Just compensation based on highest and best use
Problems of excessive use
Inverse condemnation
Eminent Domain Controversy – I
Concept of “public use” expanded to “public purpose”
US Supreme Court in 1954 allowed condemnation of “blighted areas” for private redevelopment
Michigan Supreme Court in 1981 allowed condemnation to enable GM manufacturing facilities
Wide-spread subsequent condemnation of “blighted areas” for private redevelopment
Driven by local government hunger for an increased property tax base
Eminent Domain Controversy – II
Kelo v. New London Ct., 2005
U.S. Supreme Court allowed use of eminent domain to obtain non-blighted property for private redevelopment
Left it to states to decide whether to intervene
Most states initiated legislation to limit use of eminent domain
Congress enacted law to prevent application of Federal monies for such use
Most states moderated the proposed laws to limit eminent domain
A Larger Perspective on “Kelo” (1 of 2)
New London, Ct., had been long recognized as an abandoned and depressed community.
A community/state plan of redevelopment had evolved, with subsidies from the state.
Achievement of the plan required removal of all of the houses in the Kelo area.
A Larger Perspective on “Kelo” (2 of 2)
“Kelo” can hardly be viewed as an isolated or arbitrary taking.
Greatest significance of the USSC “Kelo” decision?- Shift of authority back to the states.
The Effect of Property Taxes on Real Estate
Can property taxes reduce property values and property wealth?
Can an efficient property tax enhance property values and property wealth by the services it funds?
Property Taxes
A primary source of local government revenue
Reliable and countercyclical
Many taxing authorities
City
Improvement districts
County
Transportation authorities
Schools
Water management districts
Computing Tax Liability
Market value $150,000
Assessed value 135,000 = (0.90 × MV)
Less: exemptions 25,000
Taxable value $110,000
Property Tax Calculation
Taxing Authority Millage Rate Taxes Levied
County 8.58 $ 943.80
City 3.20 352.00
School district 9.86 1,084.60
Water mgt. district 0.05 5.50
Total 21.69 2,385.90
Special Assessments
Special assessments: Taxes for specific public improvements affecting a property
Street, sewer, etc.
Usually charged on a per front foot basis
Example: Street improvements of $500 per running foot of street
For lot with 100 feet of frontage:
100 × .5 × $500 = $25,000
Special Assessments and Community Development Districts
Many large subdivisions have private community development districts
Create and maintain neighborhood infrastructure
Utilities
Drainage and water retention
Streets, bikeways, walkways
Recreation facilities
Issue tax-exempt bonds and impose property assessments to pay the obligations
Have the same lien priority as property taxes
An Example CDD Community in Florida: The Villages
Retirement community in north-central FL
10 CDDs provide every community service except criminal law enforcement
Population of over 100,000
http://www.thevillages.com/AboutUs/aboutus.htm
Issues with Property Tax
Regressive?
May be regressive viewed alone
Not necessarily regressive if resulting public services also are considered
Uneven across geographic areas and property types
Distorted by differential protection laws
California – Proposition 13
Florida – “Save our Homes” Amendment
Poorly administered
Summing up (1 of 2)
Land use must be regulated due to market failures
The concept of spaceship earth has brought a revolution in land use controls
Traditional controls: building codes, zoning, subdivision regulations
“Post-revolution” controls: impact fees, performance standards, PUDs, environmental laws
Summing up (2 of 2)
When regulation goes too far: eminent domain
The problem of expanding use
Property taxes as a double-edged sword.
Efficient and reliable tax.
Can be inequitable and distort land use
a
or,
.020
0
500,000,00
000
2,500,000,
25,000,000
65,000,000
or
exemptions
property
of
value
Total
value
assessed
Total
source
other
from
Income
Authority
Taxing
of
budget
Total
rate
Tax
=
–
–
=
–
–
=
–
–
=
T
X
T
O
B
T
R
V
V
I
E
R
A healthy building is based on the successful
fulfillment of many requirements. For each
building, sound design and construction are
necessary for its technical functioning and
mechanical stability and for the basic safety of
its occupants. However, this is not sufficient to
ensure indoor environmental quality (IEQ) for
its occupants. There are a number of other fac-
tors that affect the occupants’ well-being either
directly or indirectly. Among such factors are
heating, ventilation and air conditioning, and
activities of the occupants, including the use of
office equipment or household activities such
as cooking, cleaning, or applying pesticides.
The risk assessment of indoor contaminants
and the effectiveness of interventions are chal-
lenges faced globally because of vast differences
in the types of residences and their climates as
well as the many types of household products,
furniture, appliances, and so on, that are avail-
able to consumers today. Examples of these
diverse challenges have been demonstrated in
the book The Material World that provides
detailed, thought-provoking visual and written
portraits of “statistically average” families and
their households in 30 nations around the
world (Menzel 1994).
Indoor air pollution is not a new problem,
although only recently has it become a matter
of public concern. As early as the 18th century,
hygienists had identified the consequences of
inadequate ventilation in the indoor environ-
ment. Systematic research activities emerged
soon after World War II, in some respects
reversed by energy conservation measures intro-
duced in housings after the oil crisis in the early
1970s. Since then, the complexity and the
health relevance of the indoor environmental
problem have become increasingly apparent
(European Commission 2005a, 2005b).
Failures to control indoor air risks have
huge economic consequences in the form of
health care costs, lost working days, and per-
sonal costs to individuals (Mendell et al. 2002).
Consequently, investments in developments
that pursue enhanced human health and well-
being through healthier indoor environments
should not be seen as business nuisances but
should be weighed against the benefits gained.
Because factors contributing to building health
are complex, with connections to many essential
fields, we do not attempt to cover all aspects but
present three essential ideas: sustainable develop-
ment of buildings and communities, the effect
of occupants on the indoor environment, and
recent developments in creating healthier prod-
ucts and building materials with a focus on
moisture and mold control. These three areas
are important because they address the most
current issues in building design: sustainability
(in terms both of natural resources and of the
lifetime of the building); individual behaviors
and how they affect their indoor environments;
and the newest trends in building materials that
can promote healthier indoor environments.
Environmental Sustainability
Contributes to Health,
Productivity, and Quality of Life
Sustainable design is a collective process
whereby the built environment achieves eco-
logic balance in new and retrofit construction
toward the long-term viability and humaniza-
tion of architecture. In an environmental con-
text, this process merges the natural, minimum
resource-conditioning solutions of the past
(daylight, solar heat, natural ventilation) with
the innovative technologies of the present into
an integrated “intelligent” system that supports
individual control to achieve environmental
quality with resource consciousness. Sustainable
design rediscovers the social, environmental,
and technical values of pedestrian, mixed-use
communities, fully using existing infrastruc-
tures, including “main streets” and small-town
planning principles and recapturing indoor–
outdoor relationships. It attempts to avoid the
thinning out of land use and the dislocated
placement of buildings and functions caused by
single-use zoning. Sustainable design introduces
benign, nonpolluting materials having lower
operating energy requirements and higher
durability and recyclability. Finally, sustainable
design offers architecture of long-term value
through modifiable building systems through
life-cycle instead of least-cost investments and
through timeless delight and craftsmanship
(Loftness et al. 2005).
The importance of proving that sustain-
able design and engineering improves health,
productivity, and quality of life has never
been more important. To this end, the
Center for Building Performance at Carnegie
Mellon University in collaboration with the
Advanced Building Systems Integration
Consortium (ABSIC) from 2000 to the pre-
sent have been developing a building invest-
ment decision support tool—BIDS (Carnegie
Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA). This cost–benefit
tool presents the life-cycle data of over
Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 965
Research | Mini-Monograph
This article is part of the mini-monograph “Developing
Policies to Improve Indoor Environmental Quality.”
Address correspondence to A. Nevalainen, Neulanie-
mentie 4, FI-70700 Kuopio, Finland. Telephone: 35
The authors declare they have no competing
financial interests.
Received 9 January 2006; accepted 25 January 2007.
Elements That Contribute to Healthy Building Design
Vivian Loftness,1 Bert Hakkinen,2 Olaf Adan,3 and Aino Nevalainen
4
1Carnegie Mellon University, School of Architecture, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; 2Gradient Corporation, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
USA; 3TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, Delft, the Netherlands; 4National Public Health Institute, Department of Environmental
Health, Kuopio, Finland
BACKGROUND: The elements that contribute to a healthy building are multifactorial and can be
discussed from different perspectives.
OBJECTIVES: We present three viewpoints of designing a healthy building: the importance of sus-
tainable development, the role of occupants for ensuring indoor air quality, and ongoing develop-
ments related to indoor finishes with low chemical emissions and good fungal resistance.
DISCUSSION: Sustainable design rediscovers the social, environmental, and technical values of
pedestrian and mixed-use communities, using existing infrastructures including “main streets” and
small-town planning principles and recapturing indoor–outdoor relationships. This type of design
introduces nonpolluting materials and assemblies with lower energy requirements and higher dura-
bility and recyclability. Building occupants play a major role in maintaining healthy indoor envi-
ronments, especially in residences. Contributors to indoor air quality include cleaning habits and
other behaviors; consumer products, furnishings, and appliances purchases, as well as where and
how the occupants use them. Certification of consumer products and building materials as low-
emitting products is a primary control measure for achieving good indoor air quality. Key products
in this respect are office furniture, flooring, paints and coatings, adhesives and sealants, wall cover-
ings, wood products, textiles, insulation, and cleaning products. Finishing materials play a major
role in the quality of indoor air as related to moisture retention and mold growth.
CONCLUSIONS: Sustainable design emphasizes the needs of infrastructure, lower energy consump-
tion, durability, and recyclability. To ensure good indoor air quality, the product development for
household use should aim to reduce material susceptibility to contaminants such as mold and
should adopt consumer-oriented product labeling.
KEY WORDS: consumer products, dampness, emissions, fungal resistance, healthy buildings, indoor
air, sustainable development, ventilation. Environ Health Perspect 115:965–970 (2007).
doi:10.1289/ehp.8988 available via http://dx.doi.org/ [Online 25 January 2007]
200 case studies—laboratory, field, and simu-
lation studies that reveal the substantial envi-
ronmental benefits of a range of advanced and
innovative building systems. The health bene-
fits of high-performance buildings designed to
deliver high-quality air, thermal control, light,
ergonomics, privacy, and interaction as well as
access to the natural environment were ana-
lyzed (Center for Building Performance and
Diagnostics/Advanced Building Systems
Integration Consortium 2005). The following
components were included:
• healthy, sustainable air;
• healthy, sustainable thermal control;
• healthy, sustainable light;
• workplace ergonomics and environmental
quality;
• access to the natural environment; and
• land use and transportation.
Healthy, sustainable air. This component
depends on commitments to improve the qual-
ity and quantity of outside air, maximize nat-
ural ventilation with mixed-mode heating,
ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) sys-
tems, and separate ventilation air from thermal
conditioning, provide task air and individual
control, and improve pollution source control
and filtration. International case studies have
demonstrated that high-performance ventila-
tion strategies reduce respiratory illness 9–20%
and increase individual productivity between
0.48 and 11%, with a small energy cost for
increasing outside air rates with heat recovery,
or 25–50% energy savings for natural ventila-
tion and mixed-mode conditioning (e.g., Fisk
and Rosenfeld 1997; Kroeling et al. 1988).
Healthy, sustainable thermal control. This
second component depends on commitments
to separate ventilation air from thermal condi-
tioning, design for dynamic thermal zone size,
provide individual thermal controls (e.g.,
underfloor air), design for building load balanc-
ing and radiant comfort, and engineer proto-
typed, robust systems. International case studies
demonstrate that providing individual tempera-
ture control for each worker increases individ-
ual productivity by 0.2–3% and reduces sick
building syndrome (SBS) symptoms and absen-
teeism, while saving 25% of conditioning
energy (e.g., Wyon 1996).
Healthy, sustainable light. The third com-
ponent can be achieved by maximizing the use
of daylight without glare, selecting the highest
quality lighting fixtures, separating task and
ambient light, and designing plug-and-play
lighting with dynamic lighting zones. Case stud-
ies demonstrate that improved lighting design
increases individual productivity between 0.7
and 23%, reduces headaches and SBS symp-
toms by 10–25%, while reducing annual energy
loads by 27–88% (Heschong et al. 2002).
Workplace ergonomics and environmental
quality. Improving this fourth component has,
as its goals, the well-being and efficiency of indi-
vidual workers with energy-efficient technolo-
gies; optimal lighting, temperature, and
placement of furniture; and healthy interior
materials. Sustainable design depends on the use
of materials that support healthy environments
while reducing transportation energies that carry
secondary health concerns. Material selection is
critical to thermal performance, air quality and
outgassing, toxicity in fires, cancer-causing
fibers, and mold, all which affect respiratory and
digestive systems, eyes, and skin (Dainoff 1990).
Access to the natural environment. The fifth
component is achieved by providing individual
access to nature by maximizing the use of day-
light without glare, maximizing the use of nat-
ural ventilation with mixed-mode HVAC, and
designing for passive solar heating and cooling.
Access to the natural environment may increase
individual productivity between 0.4 and 18%
and reduce absenteeism, SBS, and recovery
time while saving even 40% of lighting energy
(Center for Building Performance and
Diagnostics/Advanced Building Systems
Integration Consortium 2005).
Land use and transportation. This last
component can be improved by commitments
to designing mixed-use communities, allowing
for multigenerational mobility with mixed-
mode transportation, and preserving and cele-
brating natural landscapes. For land use,
walkable neighborhoods may contribute to
prevention of obesity (Srinivasan et al. 2003).
Cool roofs and cool community developments
with increases in landscaped surfaces and tree
canopies demonstrated reductions in annual
cooling loads by 10%, peak cooling by 5%, as
well as benefits for carbon sequestration, storm
runoff management, and a 6–8% reduction in
smog that could potentially reduce respiratory
illnesses (Rosenfeld and Romm 1997).
Quantifying the Value of the
Built Environment to Health
It is imperative to incorporate the full life-cycle
costs of a poor-quality built environment, from
materials to systems to land use and transporta-
tion. Based on health insurance costs reported
in five references by independent nonprofit
organizations, human resource research firms,
and the U.S. government, the average employer
cost for health insurance was approximately
US$5,000 per employee per year in 2003
(Figure 1). Some health conditions and illnesses
have been linked to the quality of the indoor
environment, including colds, headaches, respi-
ratory illnesses, musculoskeletal disorders, back
pain, and symptoms of SBS. These are pre-
sented in Figure 1 with references.
Suboptimal indoor environments can lead
to a variety of adverse health effects that result
directly in increased physician visits and medical
treatment. This leads to increases in health
insurance costs, both for institutions and for
individuals. Improvements in indoor environ-
ments, such as increased ventilation rates, better
ergonomics and lighting, and improved heating
and cooling methods, would reduce many of the
adverse symptoms and illnesses described above.
Human health in the built environment is
one of the most critically needed research efforts,
requiring both extensive experimental and field
research. Controlled laboratory experiments
Loftness et al.
966 VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 • Environmental Health Perspectives
$
P
er
p
er
so
n
pe
r
ye
ar
4
5,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
Chumu
($200)
FMr
($412)
Energys,t
($450)
Rent/mortgageq,r
($3,200)
Technology
($10,000)
Benefitsa,b
($18,500)
Salarya,b
($45,000)
Potential benefits of quality buildings
$5,300 Turnoveri,j
$226 Interior systems
$70 Utility central systems
$62 Roads and grounds
$36 External building
$73 Process and
environmental systems
12.5%
Productivityh
Figure 1. Improving the quality of the built environment will reduce the life cycle costs of business.
Monetary amounts are in U.S. dollars per year. MSD, musculoskeletal disorders. Forrrester Group is part
of Forrester Research (Cambridge, MA).
Data from aU.S. Department of Labor (DOL) (2004a); bU.S. DOL (2004b); cU.S. DOL (2002); dKaiser Family Foundation and Health
Research and Educational Trust (2003); eTowers Perrin HR Services (2003); fU.S. Chamber of Commerce (2003); gDeloitte &
Touche (2003); hLeaman (2001); iU.S. DOL (2003b); jFitz-Enz (2000); kU.S. DOL (2003a); lBirnbaum et al. (2003); mU.S. EPA (1998);
nGuo et al. (1999); oFendrick et al. (2003); pSilverstein et al. (2000); qGeneral Services Administration (2003); rInternational
Facility Management Association (IFMA) (2002); sU.S. DOE (1998); tU.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (2004); uIFMA (2001).
need to be carried out simultaneously with
experiments in actual buildings to map chains of
consequence and to identify possible building-
related causes for the rise in respiratory prob-
lems, fatigue, stress, depression and other
health-related declines in the quality of life. Yet
there is remarkably little federal investment in
defining and valuing healthy buildings and
communities (Figure 2).
The opportunity to substantially improve
the health of building and community resi-
dents through investments in higher quality
materials, systems, and land-use planning is
significant. The catalyst for these investments
must be research and subsequent policy based
on the combined expertise of the health
research community and the sustainable
design and engineering disciplines that we
hold responsible for our built environment.
Human Influence on Healthy
Indoor Air
Humans have a major role in maintaining the
quality of the indoor environments in which
they live. Lifestyles that affect IEQ include the
following:
• Personal cleaning habits. Examples include
frequency of vacuuming and washing of bed
linen and towels.
• Other personal behavior such as whether
kitchen or bathroom fans are commonly used
and whether windows are opened to increase
air circulation if certain consumer products
are used.
• The types of consumer products that are pur-
chased and where and how the consumer and
other occupants of the residence use them.
• Decisions about the types of house or apart-
ment furnishings that are purchased, for
example, the presence of carpets and curtains
in various rooms, and remodeling choices.
• Decisions about the types of appliances that
are purchased, for example, a central air
cleaning system or a high-efficiency vacuum
cleaner.
• Personal cleaning habits.
Examples of the sources of indoor pollu-
tants such as lead, pesticides, polycyclic aro-
matic hydrocarbons (PAHs), allergens, and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) include
consumer products, the dust present in carpets
and furniture, household pets, or pollutants
entering the house from outside air. The accu-
mulation of dust, dust mites, and tracked-in
soil in old carpets, sofas, and mattresses appears
to be a major source of exposure to lead, pesti-
cides, allergens, PAHs, and VOCs and can be
affected by cleaning habits such as the fre-
quency of vacuuming and the washing of bed
linen and towels (Roberts and Dickey 1995).
Other personal behaviors in indoor environ-
ments. Personal behaviors such as opening win-
dows and using exhaust fans can have significant
impacts on reducing exposures from activities
such as paint stripping (Riley et al. 2000).
Window-opening behaviors can have a strong
effect on a home’s air change rate; thus, this fac-
tor should be incorporated into exposure analy-
ses when estimating human exposure to indoor
air pollutants (Howard-Reed et al. 2002).
Behaviors related to heating and cooling the
building can also affect the air-exchange rate
and the prevalence of microbial and chemical
contaminants (Flannigan and Miller 2001).
Common household water-use activities such as
showering, clotheswashing, handwashing,
bathing, dishwashing, and indirect shower expo-
sure can increase indoor chemical exposures by
inhalation of vaporized or aerosolized chemicals
and by inadvertent ingestion of water. For
example, some of the greatest increases in sys-
temic exposure to trihalomethanes (THM) have
been associated with showering (direct and indi-
rect), bathing, and hand dishwashing (McKone
2005; Nuckols et al. 2005). Activities such as
cooking, arts and crafts, cleaning floors, and
painting can contribute to short-term increases
in indoor VOC levels. Diminished VOC levels
were achieved by turning on the air-condition-
ing system (Clobes et al. 1992). Activities shown
to generate considerable amounts of indoor par-
ticulate matter include cooking, smoking, clean-
ing, sources such as cigarette side-stream smoke,
pure wax candles, scented candles, a vacuum
cleaner, an air-freshener spray, a flat iron (with
or without steam) on a cotton sheet, electric
radiators, and electric and gas stoves (Afshari
et al. 2005).
A study by Ferro et al. (2004) of the per-
sonal, indoor, and outdoor particulate matter
(PM) concentrations for a variety of prescribed
human activities found that the activities that
resulted in the highest exposures to PM with
aerodynamic diameters ≥ 2.5 µm (PM2.5),
≥ 5 µm (PM5), and ≥ 10 µm (PM10) were
those such as dry dusting, folding clothes and
blankets, and making beds. Such activities dis-
turbed dust reservoirs on furniture and textiles.
The vigor of activity and type of flooring were
also important factors for dust resuspension.
The findings demonstrate that a wide variety of
indoor human resuspension activities increases
human exposure to PM and contributes to the
“personal cloud” effect (Ferro et al. 2004).
Consumer products and their use in resi-
dences. Various household products can be used
alone or together with other products for clean-
ing, cosmetics, or a variety of other purposes.
Consumer studies have found that there can be
large intra- as well as interindividual variation in
the frequency, duration, and amount of use of
products such as dishwashing detergents, pesti-
cides, cleaning products, and hair-styling prod-
ucts (Weegels and van Veen 2001). Common
household activities can raise exposures to
volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) up to a fac-
tor of 100 compared with exposures during the
sleep period and far above the highest observed
outdoor concentrations. Major associations of
consumer products with particular indoor
chemical exposures include deodorizers and the
level of p-dichlorobenzene, dishwasher and
laundry detergents and the level of chloroform,
smoking and the levels of benzene and styrene,
and painting and using paint remover and the
levels of n-decane and n-undecane (Wallace
et al. 1989).
Moreover, combinations of consumer
products, or a mix of consumer products with
outdoor air, can produce respiratory tract irri-
tants. Cleaning agents and air fresheners can
contain chemicals that react with other air cont-
aminants to yield potentially harmful secondary
products. For example, terpenes from consumer
products can react with ozone in indoor air to
generate secondary pollutants (Clausen et al.
2001; Nazaroff and Weschler 2004).
Home furnishings and decorating. Decisions
about home furnishings and decoration, such as
the types of furniture purchased, the presence of
carpets and curtains in various rooms, and
remodeling choices, can also affect indoor cont-
aminant exposures. For example, the remodel-
ing of a residence and the adoption of energy
conservation methods can reduce ventilation
and increase relative humidity. The changes in
these factors could increase the levels of dust,
dust mites, molds, VOCs, and other indoor air
pollutants (Roberts and Dickey 1995).
Household appliances. Decisions about the
types of appliances that are purchased can be
driven partly by personal cleaning habits, for
example, how clean the residence is kept.
Further, using air-conditioning while sleeping
can lead to a considerable build-up in the room
of carbon dioxide (CO2) from all types of air-
conditioning systems. These CO2 levels were
substantially higher than the levels in naturally
ventilated bedrooms. A survey was conducted to
investigate whether the occupants exhibited
Healthy building design
Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 967
Figure 2. U.S. government investments (US$) in
research to achieve healthy indoor environments
(Office of Management and Budget 1998).
Abbreviations: DOE, Department of Energy; EH, envi-
ronmental health; EPA, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency; GSA, General Services Administration; NIH,
National Institutes Health; NSF, National Science
Foundation. Blue bars, total U.S. federal research
funding; black bars, U.S. built environment research
funding; GSA white bar, total construction dollars,
not total research dollars; NIH white bar, environ-
mental health research funding but not directly built
environment research funding.
B
il
li
on
s
of
U
S
$
in
R
&
D
18
1
6
14
1
2
10
8
6
4
2
0
DOE NIH GSA EPA NSF
$17
$11.6
$0.35 $0.42 $0.01
$7
$3
$11
in construction
$0.58
in EH
$0.04
symptoms of SBS while sleeping in air-condi-
tioned as well as naturally ventilated bedrooms.
Almost all occupants who used air-conditioning
while sleeping exhibited one or more SBS symp-
toms and usually displayed more SBS symptoms
after using air-conditioning than when they
used natural ventilation. The survey also
revealed that the frequency and duration of
using air-conditioning has an important impact
on the exhibition of the SBS symptoms (Wong
and Huang 2004).
Ongoing Developments in
Controlling Emissions from
Products and Building Materials
Today, more consumer products and building
materials are being studied and certified as low
chemical-emitting products and materials to
serve as primary control measures for achieving
good indoor air quality. Key products identified
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) as sources of indoor air pollution are
office furniture, flooring, paints and coatings,
adhesives and sealants, wall coverings, office
equipment, wood products, textiles, insulation,
and cleaning products. Product emission testing
protocols have been designed to help ensure
that the test results can be translated into real-
world product usage scenarios.
The American Society for Testing Materials
(ASTM) has established guidelines for measur-
ing chemical emissions using environmental
chambers. ASTM D5116-97 (ASTM 2007a)
and D6670-01 (ASTM 2007b) are the founda-
tion for some product-specific test protocols.
One testing laboratory, the Greenguard
Environmental Institute (GEI) in Atlanta,
Georgia, has established performance-based
standards to label goods with low chemical and
particle emissions for use indoors, primarily
building materials, interior furnishings, furni-
ture, cleaning and maintenance products, elec-
tronic equipment, and personal care products.
The standards of GEI establish certification
procedures, including test methods, allowable
emissions levels, product sample collection and
handling, testing type and frequency, and pro-
gram application processes and acceptance
(GEI 2005). The Carpet and Rug Institute’s
“Green Label” Testing Program for Carpets
and Vacuum Cleaners in Dalton, Georgia, is
another example of testing and certification of
low-emitting products (Carpet and Rug
Institute 2005).
“Smart” construction materials and coatings
are being developed through a test program for
innovative construction materials, with the goal
of decreasing indoor air pollution. One example
is the PICADA (Photo-catalytic Innovative
Coverings Applications for De-Pollution
Assessment) project, involving a European con-
sortium of private enterprises, research institu-
tions, and the European Commission’s Joint
Research Centre. The “smart” construction
materials (plaster, mortar, architectural concrete)
and coatings contain titanium dioxide (TiO2).
Nitrogen oxide (NOx) gases and organic com-
pounds diffuse through the porous surface of
the materials and coatings and stick to the TiO2
nanoparticles. Absorption of ultraviolet light by
the TiO2 leads to its photoactivation and the
subsequent degradation of the pollutants
adsorbed onto the particles. The acidic products
created by this process are washed away by rain
and/or neutralized by alkaline calcium carbonate
contained in the materials. Such new construc-
tion materials could help to reduce levels of
NOx gases that cause respiratory problems and
trigger smog production, and of other toxic sub-
stances such as benzene.
Tests with photocatalytic materials under
field conditions have shown that outdoor air
quality can be significantly improved. For
example, up to 60% reduction in the concen-
tration of NOx at street level was detected after
7,000 m2 of road surface in Milan, Italy, were
covered with a photocatalytic cementlike mate-
rial. Such new construction materials and coat-
ings could play a major role in helping meet the
European Union (EU) target of reducing NOx
levels to < 21 ppb/year by 2010. Although EU
researchers have focused on the development of
these types of materials for outdoor applica-
tions, future work is planned to determine
whether these products can also be used as
depolluting building materials and coatings in
indoor environments (PICADA 2005).
Fungal Resistance of
Construction Materials
and Finishes
Dampness, moisture, and mold problems in
buildings are a major factor affecting the quality
of indoor air worldwide [Institute of Medicine
(IOM) 2004]. These phenomena have a well-
documented link to health effects such as respi-
ratory symptoms and asthma (Bornehag et al.
2001, 2004; IOM 2004; Peat et al. 1998).
Various signs of dampness or moisture damage
are common in modern buildings (Nevalainen
et al. 1998), and the prevalence of observations
of mold varies from 1.5–20% (Bornehag et al.
2005; Anonymous 1993).
Dampness and mold are complex problems
both from the point of view of building con-
struction and human health. Although fungal
spores are present everywhere, it is when damp-
ness and moisture are uncontrolled that fungi
grow and thus develop into visible mold. Use of
fungicides or disinfection products do not solve
the problem and may even be an additional
load to indoor chemical exposures. Moisture
control may be difficult to manage in existing
buildings, and therefore any delay in the devel-
opment of actual mold damage allows time for
drying of the moistened materials. It is evident
that the materials of a healthy building should
be sturdy and resistant to microbial growth. It
is also evident that both dissemination of infor-
mation and access to training about the risks of
dampness and mold are necessary for control of
the problem. Training should be directed to
professionals in building design and construc-
tion as well as in building maintenance, man-
agement, and renovation. Furthermore, the
general public, as the users and occupants of
buildings, plays an important role in prevention
and control of these problems. Therefore, their
awareness of the risks of dampness and inter-
ventions to control it is critical.
Adan (1994) found that the finishing mate-
rials on buildings play a pivotal role in mold
growth and the quality of the indoor environ-
ment. Effects are most pronounced in places
with highly transient moisture loads such as
bathrooms. Regardless of insulation levels and
even with high ventilation rates, moistening of
surfaces cannot be avoided. Moisture retention
in the finish may cause sustained high surface
humidity, even when the indoor air is dry. This
explains why, in modern highly insulated
dwellings in cold and temperate maritime cli-
mates, mold risk is primarily a matter of mater-
ial properties. Considering the industrial trend
toward ecofriendlier products, which is gener-
ally accompanied by an increase in constituent
biodegradability, the situation is growing worse.
Therefore, a sustained strategy of indoor
fungal growth control must consider the piv-
otal role of finishing products. Two major
developments are promising:
• Research and development is under way in
the supply industry, with the goal of reduced
material susceptibility. This initiative is driven
primarily by environmental legislation and
concerns biocides in particular.
• Performance requirements in building codes
and/or consumer-oriented product labeling
are being considered for finishes. The finish-
ing materials very often are a designer’s or
consumer’s choice. Labeling can make the
end-user conscious of the consequences.
Reducing biosusceptibility. Presently, suffi-
cient resistance of materials to microbial attack
requires addition of biocides, with paints being
the main application area. There are two major
technical limitations in terms of release and
environmental impact.
First, the activity period of the biocide is usu-
ally much shorter (maximum 1–2 years) than the
desired service life of the finish, leading to early
replacement. Biocides tend to leach out quickly
in the early stages of the coating’s lifespan,
thereby decreasing the amount of active material
available for the longer term. Raising initial bio-
cide concentrations tries to counter this effect.
Biocides must be sufficiently mobile to find
their way to the surface. Consequently, biocides
are inherently sensitive to leaching, especially
when the surface is in direct contact with water.
To prolong the effective release period, a
viable approach is to incorporate a retarding step
Loftness et al.
968 VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 • Environmental Health Perspectives
before the diffusion of the biocide to the surface
occurs. A number of such approaches have been
introduced. Most are based on reservoir proper-
ties of added porous materials such as zeolites
and silica (e.g., Edge et al. 2001). Other release-
concepts are emerging, addressing release-on-
demand (inclusion of nanopackages), slow
release, and so-called bioswitches, which have
been applied successfully in other areas such as
medical applications and food packaging.
Second, most traditional biocides, for
example, mercury compounds, are or will soon
be under prohibitive rules. In this context, the
EU Biocides Directive 98/8/EC (European
Parliament and the Council of the EU 1998)
reflects a tightened environmental policy.
Therefore, European industries are eagerly
searching for ecofriendlier alternatives.
Toward performance requirements and
product labeling. The recognition of the crucial
role of the interior finish calls for an approved
method for assessing the its mold control per-
formance. Such a method is a basic instrument
for product labeling and end-user implementa-
tion. In addition, control of fungal growth on
materials has been identified as a priority in EU
member states responding to mandate M/366
(approved November 2004; EU Commission
2005c). The CPD applies to all construction
products that are produced for or incorporated
within building and civil engineering construc-
tion works. It harmonizes all construction
products subject to regulatory controls for
marking purposes.
Present methods use a single moisture
regime and do not explicitly consider effects of
transient moisture loads and subsequent mater-
ial performance in relation to the transient loads.
Most tests are based either on a more or less
steady-state level of the relative humidity below
saturation (Anonymous 1968, 1975, 1978,
1986, 1988a) or unambiguous surface moisten-
ing (Anonymous 1988b, 1989a, 1989b). Adan
et al. (1999) proposed a new test that considers
the effect of indoor climate dynamics.
Pilot application of the test during the past
decade yielded a highly reproducible and dis-
criminating picture of material performance in
terms of fungal resistance and showed perfor-
mance that might differ considerably based on
the moisture load. Tests were conducted specifi-
cally on silicon caulking typically applied in san-
itary rooms (Adan and Lurkin 1997a); a wide
range of coating types including waterborne
interior paints (Adan et al. 1999); specialties
such as high-absorbing claddings (Adan and
Lurkin 1997b) and ceramic coatings (Sanders
2002a); fiber products, gypsum-based plasters,
and wallpapers including glues (Adan et al.
1999); and cement-based panels (Sanders
2002b). Fungal resistance was found to be a
product-based feature and application oriented,
emphasizing the importance of indoor climate
dynamics for mold resistance. These findings
laid the foundation for an approved product
qualification system in the Netherlands with
respect to fungal resistance. Such a system is a
step toward performance requirements in build-
ing regulations. Moreover, product labeling pro-
vides support to end users, i.e., tenants and
building owners, the actual occupants.
Labeling is defined by a three-level classifi-
cation system: I, resistant; II, fairly resistant;
and III, sensitive (Table 1). These definitions
are based on analysis of the entire growth pat-
tern as a function of time (Adan 1995; Adan
et al. 1999).
The basic principle underlying the classifi-
cation system is the potential of most products
to exhibit widely divergent behavior as a func-
tion of the moisture load. In the past decade, in
about 50% of the tested products, steady-state
and transient (i.e., condensation) conditions
showed highly differing behavior, underlining
the importance of considering both climatic
conditions in assessing product performance.
Consequently, a labeling system should be con-
nected to a recommended application. The best
quality (labeled “I”) in terms of resistance
reflects that the majority of mold problems
occurs in indoor areas with a distinct vapor pro-
duction [e.g., bathrooms and kitchens in 60
and 40% of cases in the Netherlands, respec-
tively (Anonymous 1993)]. In all other indoor
areas, with a more or less steady-state indoor
humidity, risks of surface growth are a conse-
quence of interaction of finishing product,
building construction—thermal bridging in
particular—and average humidity or ventila-
tion. In these cases, product labeling discrimi-
nates between fairly resistant products that can
be applied on thermal bridges and sensitive
products that should be applied only on inner
constructions in dry environments.
Conclusions
We discussed the issue of how to design a
healthy building from three viewpoints. The
first approach describes sustainable develop-
ment, focusing on what should be considered
in design and land use. Second, the analysis of
how occupants affect their indoor air quality
links the everyday use of the building to its
design. Third, the overview of recent develop-
ments in products and materials and their cer-
tification and labeling indicates a trend toward
addressing current problems.
Sustainable design rediscovers the social,
environmental and technical values of pedes-
trian, mixed-use communities, using existing
infrastructures, including main streets and
small-town planning principles, and recaptur-
ing indoor–outdoor relationships. Sustainable
design introduces benign, nonpolluting materi-
als and assemblies with lower energy require-
ments and higher durability and recyclability.
Humans have a major role in maintaining
the healthy indoor environment, especially in
residences. This role includes personal cleaning
habits and other personal behaviors. The occu-
pants of the building decide the types of con-
sumer products to be used and furnishings and
appliances to be purchased, as well as where
and how they are used. Thus, the occupant has
a key role in determining the quality of indoor
air in his/her residence.
Certification of consumer products and
building materials as low-emitting products is a
primary control measure for achieving good
indoor air quality. Key products in this respect
are office furniture, flooring, paints and coat-
ings, adhesives and sealants, wall coverings,
wood products, textiles, insulation, and clean-
ing products. The finishing materials have a key
role in moisture retention and mold growth.
The goal of product development is to reduce
material susceptibility, to establish performance
requirements for finishes in building codes and
to require consumer-oriented product labeling.
Training professionals in various fields of
design, construction, maintenance, and man-
agement of the building is necessary in devel-
oping healthier environments for living and
work. Dissemination of information concern-
ing the healthiness of the indoor environment
and what a consumer can do about it is essen-
tial to increase root-level activities toward
obtaining and maintaining healthier buildings.
REFERENCES
Adan OCG. 1994. On the Fungal Defacement of Interior Finishes
[PhD Thesis]. Eindhoven, the Netherlands:Eindhoven
University of Technology.
Adan OCG. 1995. Response of fungi to transient relative humidi-
ties. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Moisture Problems in Building Walls, 11–13 September 1995,
Porto, Portugal, 62–74.
Adan OCG, Lurkin JHM. 1997a. The fungal resistance of Dutch sil-
icon caulking. In: Proceedings of the CIB-W40 Meeting, 7–10
October 1997, Kyoto, Japan. Rotterdam, the Netherlands:
CIB, 1–10.
Adan OCG, Lurkin JHM. 1997b. The Fungal Sensitivity of Three
Types of Condensate Absorbent Cladding ‘Firet
CondenStop’. Report 97-BT-R1222. Delft, the Netherlands:
TNO Building and Construction Research.
Healthy building design
Environmental Health Perspectives • VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 969
Table 1. The Dutch classification system for fungal resistance of interior finishes.
Class Quality Recommended application
I Resistant Indoor environments with transient moisture loads such as bathrooms,
kitchens, production processes, swimming pools
II Fairly resistant All other indoor areas, with a more or less steady-state indoor humidity,
such as living rooms, attics, storage rooms, or depots
III Sensitive Only on inner constructions not being part of the building envelope in
environments other than class I
Adapted from Adan et al. (1999).
Loftness et al.
970 VOLUME 115 | NUMBER 6 | June 2007 • Environmental Health Perspectives
Adan OCG, Lurkin JHM, Van der Wel GK. 1999. De schimmel-
gevoeligheid van afwerkmaterialen [in Dutch]. Report 1999-
BT-MK-R0205-02. Delft, the Netherlands:TNO Building and
Construction Research.
Afshari A, Matson U, Ekberg, LE. 2005. Characterization of indoor
sources of fine and ultrafine particles: a study conducted in
a full-scale chamber. Indoor Air 15:141–150.
Anonymous. 1968. BS 1982. Methods of Test for Fungal Resist-
ance of Manufactured Building Materials Made of, or
Containing, Materials of Organic Origin. London:British
Standards Institution.
Anonymous. 1975. Designation G 21-70 (Reapproved 1975).
Standard Recommended Practice for Determining Resist-
ance of Synthetic Polymeric Materials to Fungi. Consho-
hocken, PA:American Society for Testing Materials, 860–863.
Anonymous. 1978. ISO 846. Plastics—Determination of Behaviour
Under the Action of Fungi and Bacteria—Evaluation by
Visual Examination or Measurement of Change in Mass or
Physical Properties. Geneva:International Organization for
Standardization.
Anonymous. 1986. Designation D 3273-86. Standard Test Method
for Resistance to Growth of Mold on the Surface of Interior
Coatings in an Environmental Chamber. Conshohocken,
PA:American Society of Testing Materials, 596–599.
Anonymous. 1988a. IEC Publication 68-2-10. 1988. Basic
Environmental Testing Procedures. Part 2: Tests- Test J and
Guidance: Mould Growth. Geneva:International Electro-
technical Commission.
Anonymous. 1988b. Test Methods Manual, no. 2.6.1. Fungus
Resistance Printed Wiring Materials. Bannockburn,
IL:Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic
Circuits.
Anonymous. 1989a. BS 3900. British Standard Methods of Tests
for Paints, Part G6. Assessment of Resistance to Fungal
Growth. London:British Standard Institution.
Anonymous. 1989b. ML-STD-810F. Environmental Engineering
Considerations and Laboratory Tests. Washington,
DC:Department of Defense.
Anonymous. 1993. Kwalitatieve Woningregistratie 1989–1991
Resultaten Landelijke Steekproef [in Dutch]. The
Hague:Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and the
Environment.
ASTM. 2007a. D5116-97 Standard Guide for Small-Scale Environ-
mental Chamber Determinations of Organic Emissions from
Indoor Materials/Products (Withdrawn 2006). West
Conshohocken, PA:American Society for Testing Materials.
ASTM. 2007b. D6670-01 Standard Practice for Full-Scale
Chamber Determination of Volatile Organic Emissions from
Indoor Materials/Products. West Conshohocken, PA:
American Society for Testing Materials.
Birnbaum H, Morley M, Leong S, Greenberg P, Colice G. 2003.
Lower respiratory tract infections: impact on the workplace.
Pharmaeconomics 21:749–759.
Bornehag CG, Blomquist G, Gyntelberg F, Jarvholm B, Malmberg P,
Nordvall L, et al. 2001. Dampness in buildings and health.
Indoor Air 11:72–86.
Bornehag CG, Sundell J, Bonini S, Custovic A, Malmberg P,
Skerfving S, et al. 2004. Dampness in buildings as a risk fac-
tor for health effects, EUROEXPO: a multidisciplinary review
of the literature (1998–2000) on dampness and mite exposure
in buildings and health effects. Indoor Air 14:243–257.
Bornehag CG, Sundell, Hagerhed-Engman L, Sigsgaard T,
Janson S, Åberg N. 2005. Dampness at home and its associ-
ation with airway, nose, and skin symptoms among 10,851
preschool children in Sweden: a cross-sectional study.
Indoor Air 10(suppl 10):48–55.
Carpet and Rug Institute. 2004. “Green Label” Testing Program—
Carpet Criteria and Vacuum Cleaner Criteria. Available:
http://www.carpet-rug.com/drill_down_2.cfm?page=
8&sub=6 [accessed 4 September 2005].
Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics/Advanced
Building Systems Integration Consortium. 2005. eBIDS—
Energy Building Investment Decision Support. Pittsburgh,
PA:Carnegie Mellon University. Available: http://cbpd.arc.
cmu.edu/ebids/ [accessed 20 September 2005].
Clausen PA, Wilkins CK, Wolkoff, P, Nielsen GD. 2001. Chemical
and biological evaluation of a reaction mixture of R-(+)-
limonene/ozone. Formation of strong airway irritants. Environ
Int 26:511–522.
Clobes AL, Ananth GP, Hood AL, Schroeder JA, Lee KA. 1992.
Human activities as sources of volatile organic compounds
in residential environments. Ann NY Acad Sci 30:79–86.
Dainoff MJ. 1990. Ergonomic improvements in VDT workstations:
health and performance effects. In: Promoting Health and
Productivity in the Computerized Office: Models of
Successful Ergonomic Interventions (Sauter SL, Dainhoff
MJ, Smith MJ, eds). London:Taylor & Francis, 49–67.
Deloitte & Touche. Employer Health Care Strategy Survey 2003.
New York:Deloitte & Touche USA LLP.
Edge M, Allen NS, Turner D, Robinson J, Seal K. 2001. The
enhanced performance of biocidal additives in paints and
coatings. Progr Org Coat 43:10–17.
European Commission. 2005a. Institute for Health and Consumer
Protection, Physical and Chemical Exposure Unit. Brussels:
European Commission. Available: http://www.jrc.cec.eu.
int/pce_news_events.htm [accessed 10 September 2005].
European Commission. 2005b. Final Report: The INDEX Project:
Critical Appraisal of the Setting and Implementation of Indoor
Exposure Limits in the EU. Institute for Health and Consumer
Protection, Physical and Chemical Exposure Unit. Brussels:
European Commission. Available: http://www.jrc.cec.eu.int/
pce_news_events.htm [accessed 10 September 2005].
European Commission. 2005c. Development of Horizontal
Standardised Assessment Methods for Harmonised
Approaches Relating to Dangerous Substances under the
Construction Products Directive (CPD). Brussels:European
Commission. Available: http://209.85.165.104/search?q=
cache:Ma7tC2ejGfoJ:kepler.han-solo.net/uba/bauprodukte/
dokumente/m366en +mandate+366&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=
1&gl=us&client=safari [accessed 15 May 2007]
European Parliament and of the Council of the EU. 1998. Directive
98/8/EC: Placing of Biocidal Products on the Market. Off J Eur
Commun L 358 article7(2).
Fendrick AM, Monto AS, Nightengale B, Sarnes M. 2003. The eco-
nomic burden of non-influenza-related viral respiratory tract
infection in the United States. Arch Int Med 163:487–494.
Ferro AR, Kopperud RJ, Hildemann LM. 2004. Elevated personal
exposure to particulate matter from human activities in a res-
idence. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 14(suppl 1):S34–S40.
Fisk WJ, Rosenfeld AH. 1997. Estimates of improved productivity
and health from better indoor environments. Indoor Air
7:158–172.
Fitz-Enz J. 2000. The ROI of Human Capital: Measuring the
Economic Value of Employee Performance. New York:
American Management Association.
Flannigan B, Miller JD. 2001. Microbial growth in indoor environ-
ments. In: Microorganisms in Home and Indoor Work
Environments (Flannigan B, Samson RA, Miller JD, eds).
New York:Taylor & Francis, 36–67.
GEI. 2005. Product Applications or the Sum of Their Emissions.
Atlanta:Greenguard Environmental Institute. Available:
http://www.greenguard.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=
43&ItemId=376 [accessed 4 September 2005].
General Services Administration. 2003. Real Property Perform-
ance Results and International Facility Management
Association (IFMA). Research Report 23: Project Manage-
ment Benchmarks. Washington, DC:General Services
Administration.
Guo H, Tanaka S, Halperin W, Cameron L. 1999. Back pain preva-
lence in US industry and estimates of lost workdays. Am J
Public Health 89:1029–1035.
Heschong L, Wright RL, Okura S. 2002. Daylighting impacts on
retail sales performance. J Illum Engineer Soc 31:21–25.
Howard-Reed C, Wallace LA, Otto WR. 2002. The effect of open-
ing windows on air change rates in two homes. J Air Waste
Manag Assoc 52:147–159.
IFMA. 2001. Research Report 21: Operations and Maintenance
Benchmarks. Houston:International Facility Management
Association.
IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2004. Damp Indoor Spaces and
Health. Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational
Trust. 2003. Employer Health Benefits: 2003 Annual Survey.
Menlo Park, CA:Kaiser Family Foundation and Health
Research and Educational Trust.
Kroeling P. 1988. Health and well-being disorders in air-condi-
tioned buildings; comparative investigations of the “building
illness” syndrome. Energy Buildings 11:277–282.
Leaman A. 2005. Building investment decision support. In:
American Institute of Architects 2005 Report on University
Research. Washington, DC:AIA Press, 12–21. Available:
http://www.aia.org [accessed 14 May 2007].
Loftness V, Hartkopf V, Gurtekin B, Hua Y, Qu M, Snyder M, et al.
2005. Building investment decision support. In: American
Institute of Architects 2005 Report on University Research.
Washington, DC:AIA Press, 12–21. Available: http://www.
aia.org [accessed 14 May 2007].
McKone TE. 2005. Human exposure to volatile organic com-
pounds in household tap water: the indoor inhalation path-
way. Environ Sci Technol 21:1194–1201.
et al. 2002. Improving the health of workers in indoor envi-
ronments. Am J Public Health 92:1430–1440.
Menzel P. 1994. Material World. A Global Family Portrait. San
Francisco:Sierra Club Books.
Nazaroff WW, Weschler CJ. 2004. Cleaning products and air
fresheners: exposure to primary and secondary air pollu-
tants. Atmos Environ 38:2841–2865.
Nevalainen A, Partanen P, Jääskeläinen E, Hyvärinen A,
Koskinen O, Meklin T, et al. 1998. Prevalence of moisture
problems in Finnish houses. Indoor Air 4(suppl 4):45–49.
Nuckols JR, Ashley DL, Lyu C, Gordon SM, Hinckley AF, Singer P.
2005. Influence of tap water quality and household water use
activities on indoor air and internal dose levels of tri-
halomethanes. Environ Health Perspect 113:863–870.
Office of Management and Budget. Budget of the United States
Government, Fiscal Year 1998. Washington, DC:Office of
Management and Budget
Peat JK, Dickerson J, Li J. 1998. Effects of damp and mold in the
home on respiratory health: a review of the literature.
Allergy 53:120–128.
PICADA (Photo-Catalytic Innovative Coverings Applications for
De-pollution Assessment) Project. Available: http://www.
p i c a d a – p r o j e c t . c o m / d o m i n o / S i t e P i c a d a / P i c a d a .
nsf?OpenDataBase [accessed 12 September 2005].
Riley DM, Small, MJ, Fischhoff B. 2000. Modeling methylene chlo-
ride exposure-reduction options for home paint stripper
users. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 10:240–250.
Roberts JW, Dickey P. 1995. Exposure of children to pollutants in
house dust and indoor air. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol
143:59–78.
Rosenfeld A, Romm J. 1997. Painting the Town White and Green.
Berkeley, CA:Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Available: http://eetd.lbl.gov/HeatIsland/PUBS/PAINTING/
[accessed 13 October 2006].
Sanders MM. 2002a. Fungal Resistance of an Interior Coating [in
Dutch]. Report 2002-BS-R0012. Delft, the Netherlands:TNO
Building and Construction Research.
Sanders MM. 2002b. Fungal Resistance of Cement Based Panels
[in Dutch]. Report 2002-BS-R0020. Delft, the Netherlands:
TNO Building and Construction Research.
Silverstein B, Viikari-Juntura E, Kalat J. 2000. Work-related
Musculoskeletal Disorders of the Neck, Back, and Upper
Extremity in Washington State, 1990–1998. Technical Report
Number 40-4a-2000. Olympia, WA:Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries.
Srinivasan S, O’Fallon L, Dearry A. 2003. Creating healthy commu-
nities, healthy homes, healthy people: initiating a research
agenda on the built environment and public health. Am J
Public Health 93:1446–1450.
Towers Perrin HR Services. 2003. Towers Perrin 2004 Health Care
Cost Survey. Valhalla, NY:Towers Perrin HR Services.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 2003 Employee Benefits Study.
Washington, DC.
U.S. DOE. 1998. 1995 Commercial Building Energy Consumption
Survey. U.S. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Energy.
U.S. DOE. 2004. Buildings Energy Databook 2003. Washington,
DC:U.S. Department of Energy.
U.S. DOL. 2002. National Compensation Survey: Occupational
Wages in the United States, 2001. Washington, DC:U.S.
Department of Labor
U.S. DOL. 2003a. Current Population Survey, Table 47.
Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Labor.
U.S. DOL. 2003b. Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey.
Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Labor.
U.S. DOL. 2004a. National Compensation Survey: Occupational
Wages in the US, July 2003. Washington, DC:U.S. Depart-
ment of Labor.
U.S. DOL. 2004b. Employer Cost for Employer Compensation, June
2004, USDL 04-1805. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of
Labor.
U.S. EPA. 1998. Cost of Illness Handbook 1991–1996. Washington,
DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Wallace LA, Pellizzari ED, Hartwell TD, Davis V, Michael LC,
Whitmore RW. 1989. The influence of personal activities
on exposure to volatile organic compounds. Environ Res
50:37–55.
Weegels MF, van Veen MP. 2001. Variation of consumer contact
with household products: a preliminary investigation. Risk
Anal 21:499–511.
Wong NH, Huang B. 2004. Comparative study of the indoor air
quality of naturally ventilated and air-conditioned bed-
rooms of residential buildings in Singapore. Build Environ
39:1115–1123.
Wyon DP. 1996. Indoor Environmental Effects on Productivity. In:
Proceedings of IAQ96. Paths to Better Building Environments,
Baltimore, MD. Atlanta:American Society of Heating
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 5–15.
What Will You Get?
We provide professional writing services to help you score straight A’s by submitting custom written assignments that mirror your guidelines.
Premium Quality
Get result-oriented writing and never worry about grades anymore. We follow the highest quality standards to make sure that you get perfect assignments.
Experienced Writers
Our writers have experience in dealing with papers of every educational level. You can surely rely on the expertise of our qualified professionals.
On-Time Delivery
Your deadline is our threshold for success and we take it very seriously. We make sure you receive your papers before your predefined time.
24/7 Customer Support
Someone from our customer support team is always here to respond to your questions. So, hit us up if you have got any ambiguity or concern.
Complete Confidentiality
Sit back and relax while we help you out with writing your papers. We have an ultimate policy for keeping your personal and order-related details a secret.
Authentic Sources
We assure you that your document will be thoroughly checked for plagiarism and grammatical errors as we use highly authentic and licit sources.
Moneyback Guarantee
Still reluctant about placing an order? Our 100% Moneyback Guarantee backs you up on rare occasions where you aren’t satisfied with the writing.
Order Tracking
You don’t have to wait for an update for hours; you can track the progress of your order any time you want. We share the status after each step.
From brainstorming your paper's outline to perfecting its grammar, we perform every step carefully to make your paper worthy of A grade.
Preferred Writer
Hire your preferred writer anytime. Simply specify if you want your preferred expert to write your paper and we’ll make that happen.
Grammar Check Report
Get an elaborate and authentic grammar check report with your work to have the grammar goodness sealed in your document.
One Page Summary
You can purchase this feature if you want our writers to sum up your paper in the form of a concise and well-articulated summary.
Plagiarism Report
You don’t have to worry about plagiarism anymore. Get a plagiarism report to certify the uniqueness of your work.
Free Features $66FREE
Most Qualified Writer
$10FREE
Plagiarism Scan Report
$10FREE
Unlimited Revisions
$08FREE
Paper Formatting
$05FREE
Cover Page
$05FREE
Referencing & Bibliography
$10FREE
Dedicated User Area
$08FREE
24/7 Order Tracking
$05FREE
Periodic Email Alerts
$05FREE
Our Services
Join us for the best experience while seeking writing assistance in your college life. A good grade is all you need to boost up your academic excellence and we are all about it.
On-time Delivery
24/7 Order Tracking
Access to Authentic Sources
Academic Writing
We create perfect papers according to the guidelines.
Professional Editing
We seamlessly edit out errors from your papers.
Thorough Proofreading
We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.
Thorough Proofreading
We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.
Delegate Your Challenging Writing Tasks to Experienced Professionals
Work with ultimate peace of mind because we ensure that your academic work is our responsibility and your grades are a top concern for us!
We Analyze Your Problem and Offer Customized Writing
We understand your guidelines first before delivering any writing service. You can discuss your writing needs and we will have them evaluated by our dedicated team.
Clear elicitation of your requirements.
Customized writing as per your needs.
We Mirror Your Guidelines to Deliver Quality Services
We write your papers in a standardized way. We complete your work in such a way that it turns out to be a perfect description of your guidelines.
Proactive analysis of your writing.
Active communication to understand requirements.
We Handle Your Writing Tasks to Ensure Excellent Grades
We promise you excellent grades and academic excellence that you always longed for. Our writers stay in touch with you via email.
Thorough research and analysis for every order.
Deliverance of reliable writing service to improve your grades.
