IAQ 2016 Defining Indoor Air Quality: Policy, Standards and Best Practices Co-Organized by ASHRAE and AIVC

Due to the EPBD (2010/31/EU) and the related Dutch regulation there's a strong focus on energy savings and efficiency in buildings for many years now. At the same time awareness is growing on all levels that building energy efficiency should not result in a reduction in (thermal) comfort and indoor air quality. Ventilation systems in buildings play an important role for obtaining good IAQ. Indeed, good working ventilation systems should be normative in relation to upcoming NZEB. Recent in situ research (e.g. MonICAIR see earlier AIVC conferences 2014/2015) shows that Dutch legislation and related ventilation standards and guidelines are not futureproof when it comes to achieving the desired IAQ in residential areas in homes. The Dutch National Standards Body (NEN) is currently working together with the market on a completely new generic standard (NEN 1087) for determination of the ventilation capacity of buildings. This standard will be connected to new Building Code, which under construction in the Netherlands and turns into effect for all buildings in 2017/2018 at latest. The Dutch government is also working on a new legislation system which is focusing on guaranteed building quality at the end of a building project. This will result in an "as built dossier" which proves the actual build quality (including the building services and energy performance) to the client. So in the future, only having the technical knowledge and skills will not be sufficient. It can be expected that qualification and certification schemes will become much more important. It offers the ability to demonstrate actual build quality, also with regard to the buildings services like ventilation systems.

USGBC’s LEED green building rating system has been a significant driver for market transformation since its debut in 2000. Even with much accomplished, the urgency still exists to improve our built environment. LEED v4, the next version of LEED, was released in 2013 and redefines leadership in green building. It includes many new concepts and more rigorous requirements to continue the transformation of our construction industry. One credit where this increased stringency is evident is the Indoor Environmental Quality credit for Indoor Air Quality Assessment. The air testing option in this credit aims to verify better quality indoor air in newly constructed buildings. Earning this option involves air testing for several contaminants commonly found in indoor air. LEED requires testing for specific volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and total VOC (TVOCs) by utilizing standardized methods; namely EPA TO-1, TO-17, the EPA compendium method IP-1 or the ISO 16000-6 method for TVOCs and ASTM D5197, EPA TO-1, TO-11, TO-17, EPA compendium methods IP-1 and IP-6, ISO 16000-3 and ISO 16000-6 for specific VOCs (including formaldehyde and acetaldehyde). Here, we ask the questions: what are the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the various VOC and TVOC testing methods and what are the technical challenges that chemical testing laboratories may encounter while undertaking VOC and TVOC testing?

The BCA Green Mark scheme launched in 2005 is a green building rating system tailored for the tropics and sub-tropics. Based on the Green Mark scheme, BCA rolled out the 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rdGreen Building Masterplans (GBMP) to provide directions and targets for Singapore’s built environment. The 1^st GBMP was aimed at new developments to create green buildings from the design stage through incentives, R&D and capability enhancement. 3 years later in 2009, the 2^nd GBMP was formulated to focus on greening existing buildings and set the target of “80% of the buildings in Singapore to be green by 2030”. To achieve this target, $100 million cash and extra floor area incentives were introduced along with the building environmental sustainability regulation requiring new developments to fulfil the minimum Green Mark standard. In 2014, BCA released the 3^rd GBMP to encourage building tenants for energy conscious behaviour and to better address occupant wellbeing. In addition, more stringent regulatory requirements came into effect, namely, minimum Green Mark standard for existing buildings, 3-yearly energy audit and annual building energy data submission. This series of efforts resulted in the number of green buildings exponentially increasing from 17 in 2005 to more than 2500 today. This translates to about 73 million m²of green GFA, equivalent to nearly 30% of the total building stock in Singapore. The Green Mark criteria have also continuously evolved over the past decade, while its framework remained the same with energy efficiency being the most significant factor. Energy Efficiency requirements constitute more than half of the total score in the current version 4.1 as opposed to less than 5% for IEQ. However, the 5^thversion of Green Mark called GM 2015 (pilot released in September 2015) introduces sustainability in a more balanced and holistic manner with more than 25% of the points allocated for occupant health and wellbeing. The revamped version strategically outlines IAQ fundamentals (ventilation, filtration, source and humidity control) through prescriptive and performance based requirements. Various IAQ prerequisites such as low VOC paint, MERV 14 filters and minimum outdoor ventilation provision are applied to all Green Mark projects to ensure good IAQ, while higher ratings must demonstrate better IAQ through post occupancy evaluation and IAQ audits according to local standards. GM 2015 also widely adopts the new Singapore Standards 2015 to promote best practices for building occupants in the areas of visual, acoustical, spatial and thermal comfort.

Although indoor air is mentioned by several writers over the last two centuries – and even by some ancient writers - most modern concerns of indoor air quality (IAQ) began in the 1980s (1^stASHRAE IAQ conference was in 1986). Since then most work dealing with IAQ was in reaction to IAQ complaints. The accumulated experience of many workers identified several issues that collectively cause most of the common IAQ problems. This laid the basis for recognizing and correcting most IAQ problems, but after the problem occurred. More recently, proactive programs or parts of programs sought to lower the chances of IAQ problems, but as only one of several topics (energy and water use, materials, sites, etc). Perhaps best known is the indoor environment portion of LEED, but rating systems in Asia, the Middle East and other areas also include IAQ protective elements. These systems usually emphasize design elements and construction though, rather than performance during occupancy. A proactive scheme is available that relies on occupants rather than specialists for an assessment and is specifically tailored for schools. Regional and international plans have been recently introduced that emphasize performance rather than design (SS554, GB/T18883) but address the impact on people as only one of several environmental features. Another recent program (WELL) centers on occupants but includes several non-IAQ issues and one program focuses on IAQ (rather than multiple aspects) and on the performance (rather than design) of the building during ongoing occupancy (rather than only at completion of construction/renovation). Initial data on IAQ centric programs are sparse. Comparison of requirements for these programs reveals diversity that reflects the different objectives. Each program contains proactive components for IAQ. This contrasts with the routine attention to IAQ in past decades which almost invariably reacted to complaints. The emphasis on moisture in buildings is prominent in several of the programs which will be beneficial in most tropical areas of the world as well as humid or severe climates in non-tropical areas. The rapidity with which these programs have been introduced and are being accepted indicates that building owners, operators and occupants are realizing the benefits of good IAQ.