More Green Building News
Finding articles online that extoll the many air-cleansing benefits of houseplants is a cinch, but the assertions are mostly hype with little grounding in fact.
所以写罗宾逊梅耶一篇文章posted atThe Atlanticas he debunks a popular claim of health bloggers and more than a few magazine articles.
Typical of a pitch to buy more houseplants is this assertion from Katie Wells at her website健康妈妈. “Houseplants are an effective, simple, and inexpensive way to purify indoor air.” Without citing a source for her claims, Wells goes on to specify which plants are most effective. The list includes bamboo palm, the rubber plant, and English ivy, among others. The same prescription for clean air can be found in any number of magazine articles, like这个inThis Old House.
这一切来自哪里？Meyer写道，该索赔似乎是一个名为Bill Wolverton的NASA科学家，他在20世纪80年代后期调查了室内植物是否能够从密封空间车辆中的空气中去除挥发性有机化合物（VOC）。
Wolverton’s 1989 report, summing up two years of research, found that potted houseplants have “demonstrated the potential for improving indoor air quality by removing trace organic pollutants from the air in energy-efficient buildings.”
In considering the plight of people sealed into small spaces, Wolverton said, “If man is to move into closed environments, on Earth or in space, he must take along nature’s life support system.”
1997年，Wolverton跟进一本书，How to Grow Fresh Air.He provided a list of 50 plants that could help rid indoor air of such pollutants as ammonia, formaldehyde, and benzene, among others. Other research seemed to support the connection between clean indoor air and houseplants. The public was hooked.
A new review is less enthusiastic
但是，Meyer说，最近对近200名研究的看法表明室内植物的好处显着夸大了。德雷塞尔大学工程教授迈克尔·战争的审查，其他人发现，虽然一些植物可以在小型，密封的腔室中除去更多的VOC，但在一个大房间里没有非常有效。
这不是Wolverton的原始学习是错误的，只是因为逾越节的好处。
Warging说，有人必须将1000英尺的天花板放入一个10英尺的上空室内有8英尺的天花板，以具有相同的空气清洁能力，因为每小时改变房间空气一次。即使您选择了最有效的VOC清洁厂，您也需要每平方英尺的一个植物。
在题为的演示文稿中“BioWalls和室内室内植物：事实和虚构，”Waring describes some of the research that followed Wolverton’s initial study and how the claims have been popularized. “I do not think that houseplants clean the air,” he told Meyer, a point of view echoed by other scientists that the writer contacted.
Another study, this one led by Omed Abbass and published in the journal建筑和环境，看着室内房屋植物是否可能有效地从室内空气中移除臭氧。结果？“在假设的室内环境中的有效性计算，最佳，适度贡献约为0.9-9％的室内臭氧去除效果......”
有许多其他好处让室内植物 - 颜色来抵消冬天的阉割，新的花朵的香味，生长的东西的简单快乐 - 但清洁空气显然不是其中之一。
6 Comments
Want clean indoor air......stay outside.
并且优选地不是零重力。;）
Ironically, the place where plants would be most effective at removing VOCs from the air is in a tight, well built house with low levels of ventilation, i.e. the goal of most of those on this site. They obviously cannot and should not replace adequate ventilation, though you might be able to get away with marginally less ventilation is a room with some plants vs. one without.
Let's do some math with their figure of "one plant per square foot" for the most effective plants in a 8' ceiling room as being roughly equivalent to one air change per hour. That means each plant is good for about 0.13 cfm. Not very much, but not nothing either. ASHRAE recommends 0.03 cfm/sqft, and Joe Lstiburek recommends 0.01 cfm/sqft (both add 7.5 cfm per occupant). So the most effective plant enough to ventilate around 2-6 sq ft of living space with typical occupancy, at least in terms of VOCs. This means including a few of the more effective plants in a tight 10x10 room will likely have a measurable impact on air quality, unlike in a typical home.
当然，我们在这里没有建立空间站。正如我之前所说的那样，不能也不应该用植物替换通风：这将是危险和荒谬的。在设计通风系统时，植物也应该被占植物，这也是非常愚蠢的。但我认为人们应该在设计空间时留意植物。植物可能对紧身部家中的空气质量产生小的影响，但更重要的是他们提供的心理效益。一个人很少忽视外部景观，应该向内部提供相同的考虑因素。如果建筑师提供Windows附近的植物附近的区域，并且建造者在最终出售房屋之前提供植物，最终结果更好，更舒适的家，拥有更快乐的居住者。
AEDI，我有植物读你的评论，他们几乎同意......
植物有点像宠物，这是一种可能无法用现代科学量化的精神内容。
但是，植物在白天产生氧气，夜间呼吸氧气，所以你不希望他们在卧室里
真正的唐纳尔是植物可能会使事情变得更糟，因为它们可以根据杀虫剂是否被应用于植物/土壤以及从锅中浸出到土壤中的潜水：
https://www.treehugger.com/lawn-garden/bad-green-some-indoor-plants-release-volatile-organic-compounds.html
Log in or create an account to post a comment.
Sign up Log in