Re: Re: Ozone is NOT photochemical oxidants

[Guest guest]

Thank you for the response . You hit on a very good subject. Not all PCO designs are the same. If you will look on the document Air purifiers that diffuse reactive oxygen species potentially cause DNA damage http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jts/35/6/929/_pdf this will explain my case for safety concerns. I do not believe enough research of this type product has been published to make an educated decision of its safety.

With a true PCO design the reaction occurs fractions of an inch from the catalyst. The hydroxyl radical has a life of 10 to the negative 9th second. It simply can't survive away from of the energy source and the TIO2. Our catalyst design encompasses the entire airstream and is six inches thick of a pleated substrate with close to 48 sq of surface area with a .05 pressure drop. Its very difficult to over whelm our catalyst in an HVAC airstream. We use a non doped TIO2.

Now what I term as a Hybrid-PCO system, the use a doped TIO2 substrate with an ozone producing lamp to purposely produce peroxides to broadcast in to the space. There is also a light production of ions that are broadcast also. These ions react with the organic contaminates in the air creating hydroxyl radicals in the space. After coagulation the particulate reduction at this point is negligible if at best. The test results published on line are of surface reductions from Kansas State and very few of the companies have unique third part tests of there own. They all refer to the Kansas State paper on surface contact reductions.

And frankly the claims of no ozone from these systems can not be true. Typically they use a UVGI lamp in the 100nm range, the claim is that all of the ozone is consumed with in the chamber of the doped PCO. A catalyst of this size should be over whelmed in a short period of time when the electron holes plug up with contaminates and it deactivates. Most of these hybrid PCO chambers are no more that 12 inches in length and around 4 inches cubed or cylindrical. My question is: What happens to the ozone after the catalyst deactivates? Broadcast into the airstream maybe? And what other intermediaries are there?

With this type system you are most likely smelling ozone. Now some of the newer players in this market are using the same over seas TIO2 which is meant to cover building structures and outdoor surfaces for cleaning purposes. The Sol Gel binder in this product will oxidize with the use of UVGI and plug up the catalyst. You will get intermediaries when this happens like UC Berkeley found out with there honeycomb monolith during their case study of PCO many years back. The binder will off gas as it oxidizes from the UVGI lighting. That is why you see a white chalky substance on some of the catalyst on the market. Some catalyst can off gas from the assembly process.

My best advise for anyone looking at using or advising the use of a PCO product. Take a good look at the third party testing. Make sure they have testing and data that proves that there is no intermediary production and it is made public. Look at the test data, what reductions can be documented in multiple tests (single pass). What is the catalyst life? And a safety item to point out, many of the IAQ products on the market are not UL Listed or Classified. Just because they claim that they are built with UL approved parts doesn't clear them through UL. There may be liability issues with the building or HVAC manufacturers liability insurance if the equipment is installed on the air handler or in the airstream.

Genesis Air Inc.

Subject: Re: Ozone is NOT photochemical oxidantsTo: iequality Date: Sunday, July 17, 2011, 9:20 AM

, I'm glad Wane mentioned your response, I missed it the first time around. I really appreciated your answers and information to Wane's questions.Since you are involved with photo-cat, I know a little, and have questions still unanswered.I am told that the process delivers molecular H2O2 to the space, does not deliver measurable ozone or other hydroxyls. Some of the typical sales pitches mix up the science, confuse the terms (i.e., ion v. hydroxyl, etc.). Most of the sales people, installers and marketers do not understand the reactions, the life spans, of some of these reactive components.What do you know about the peroxide?Also, the photo-cats I've tested or inspected all deliver a very unique, "ozone-like" odor. And that odor is pervasive and long lasting. It can fill a room many feet downstream of the in-line device.So, what do you know about the odor?>> > Wayne this is off of the OSHA’s website. I really don’t know who else’s  opinion matters in the subject of ozone being used as an indoor air purification system. OSHA/NIOSH will be the ones handing out the fines. I believe the liabilities are too high for the use of attempted control of ozone in an indoor setting. The broadcasting of any agent in to a space with people present can have un-intended consequences. >  > Ozone>  > General Description > Synonyms: Triatomic oxygen > > OSHA IMIS Code Number: 1980 > Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry Number: 10028-15-6 > NIOSH, Registry of

Toxic Effects (RTECS) Identification Number: RS8225000 > NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards, Ozone: chemical description, physical properties, potentially hazardous incompatibilities, and more > Exposure Limits > OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for General Industry: 29 CFR 1910.1000 Z-1 Table -- 0.1 ppm, 0.2 mg/m3 TWA > > OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for Construction Industry: 29 CFR 1926.55 Appendix A -- 0.1 ppm, 0.2 mg/m3 TWA > > OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) for Maritime: 29 CFR 1915.1000 Table Z-Shipyards -- 0.1 ppm, 0.2 mg/m3 TWA > > American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV): Heavy Work - 0.05 ppm TWA; Moderate Work - 0.08 ppm TWA; Light Work - 0.10 ppm TWA; Heavy, Moderate, or light workloads (≤ 2 hrs) - 0.20 TWA; Appendix A4 - Not Classifiable as a Human Carcinogen > > National Institute

for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Recommended Exposure Limit (REL): 0.1 ppm, 0.2 mg/m3 Ceiling > Health Factors > NIOSH Immediately Dangerous To Life or Health Concentration (IDLH): 5 ppm > > Potential symptoms: Eye, mucous membrane irritation; headache, fatigue, dizziness, drowsiness; anorexia, nausea, vomiting; cough, sore throat; shortness of breath, pulmonary edema; chronic respiratory disease; conjunctivitis; eye, skin burns; frostbite (on contact with liquid); rapid heart rate (tachycardia), low blood pressure (hypotension). > > Health Effects: Irritation-Eyes, Nose, Throat, Skin---Marked (HE14); Lung edema (HE11), Cumulative lung damage (HE10), Respiratory sensitization (HE9). > > Affected organs: Eyes, respiratory system > > Notes: > 1.    Generally recognized as safe by the Food and Drug Administration for use as an antimicrobial

agent in bottled water at a maximum residual concentration of 0.4 mg/liter (21 CFR 184.1563); use in treatment, storage, and processing of other foods is also regulated by 21 CFR 173.368. > 2.    Ozone can increase sensitivity to bronchoconstrictors and allergens, and may facilitate the development of asthma. > 3.    One proposed mechanism for ozone-induced lung cell damage is the stimulation of lipid peroxidation, which produces aldehydes like 4-hydroxynonenal that can form adducts with cysteine, lysine, and histidine in lung proteins. > http://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/CH_259300.html>  > I will also direct you to the Desert Diamond issue in Arizona. The U.S. Labor Department has asked a federal judge to allow safety inspectors into a local

casino after receiving complaints alleging high ozone levels. Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/local/article_5fd9b049-4987-50f2-bcd1-067f197447d2.html#ixzz1S5POLvwo> Â > As far as the 4 questions you posted. It is true that oxidation is the only technology that oxidizes VOC contaminates. But ozone is not the only game on the block. Of course thermal oxidizers but they are too expensive to operate in a casino setting. There are oxidizers that can be mixed into carbon sorption systems but as you most likely know the pressure drop and the life cycle costs are horrendous. Next is bi polar ionization which over time is efficient but with the continuing addition of contaminates it reduces the efficiencies considerably. This is another article that might help you in your endeavors: Air purifiers that

diffuse reactive oxygen species potentially cause DNA damage  http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jts/35/6/929/_pdf>  > Then there is photo catalytic oxidation what we design and manufacture  for Trane known as the TCACS system. These systems are retro fitted in the field and can be installed at the factory from Trane as an airside option. For casino smoke particulates would be removed with Merv 13 -16 filtration in the HVAC system and the VOCs and biologics are oxidized within the air handler and do not broadcast any ions or ozone in to the airstream. I can tell you this we were tested for efficiencies and bi products out the wazoo before we were signed on as a Trane sourced product. Ozone is a powerful oxidant but a PCO can create a more powerful oxidant and not have to be broadcast in to the space.>  >

As for ozone deaths I would direct you to the 2005 New York Times article. Environment: Linking High Ozone to Increased Death Rates: Three teams of researchers conducting separate studies have concluded that high ozone pollution is linked to higher death rates. The studies, which appear in the July issue of Epidemiology, "point to the urgent need to reduce public exposures to ambient ozone by all possible means," an accompanying editorial argues. Two of the new studies came to a very similar finding. For every 10 parts per billion the daily ozone level goes up, they said, the death rate over the next three days goes up about 0.85 percent. One study reported finding "strong evidence of a short-term association between ozone and mortality, with larger effects for cardiovascular and respiratory mortality." Older people were especially at risk, the researchers said. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/21/health/21envi.html> Â Lastly I would direct you to the Air filter materials, outdoor ozone and building-related symptoms in the BASE study. Abstract Used ventilation air filters have been shown to reduce indoor environmental quality and worker performance and increase symptoms, with effects stronger after reaction of filters with ozone. We analyzed data from the US EPA Building Assessment Survey and Evaluation (BASE) study to determine if ozone and specific filter media have interactive effects on building-related symptoms (BRS). We analyzed a subset of 34 buildings from the BASE study of 100 US office buildings to determine the separate and joint associations of filter medium [polyester/synthetic (PS) or fiberglass (FG)] and outdoor ozone concentration (above/below the median, 67.6 microg/m(3)) with BRS. Using logistic regression models and general estimating equations, we estimated odds

ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for the association of filter medium,> ozone, and filter medium x ozone with BRS. Relative to FG + low ozone, PS alone or high ozone alone, were each significantly (P < 0.05) associated only with fatigue/difficulty concentrating (ORs = 1.93 and 1.54, respectively). However, joint exposure to both PS + high ozone, relative to FG + low ozone, had significant associations with lower and upper respiratory, cough, eye, fatigue, and headache BRS (ORs ranged from 2.26 to 5.90). Joint ORs for PS + high ozone for lower and upper respiratory and headache BRS were much greater than multiplicative, with interaction P-values <0.10. Attributable risk proportion (ARP) estimates indicate that removing both risk factors might, given certain assumptions, reduce BRS by 26-62%. These findings suggest possible adverse health consequences from chemical interactions between outdoor ozone and PS filters in buildings. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18333993> Â > > > Â > > > > > > > > > > Genesis Air Inc.> Applications/Field Operations> Â > Â > Â > Â >