How building stakeholders (e.g. owners, tenants, operators, and designers) understand impacts of indoor air quality (IAQ) and associated energy costs is unknown. We surveyed 112 stakeholders across the United States to ascertain their perceptions of their current IAQ and estimates of benefits and costs of, as well as willingness to pay for, IAQ improvements. Respondents' perceived IAQ scores correlated with the use of high efficiency filters but not with any other IAQ-improving technologies. We elicited their estimates of the impacts of a ventilation-filtration upgrade (VFU), i.e., doubling the ventilation rate from 20 to 40 cfm/person (9.5 to 19 L/s/person) and upgrading from a MERV 6 to 11 filter, and compared responses to our estimates derived from IAQ literature and energy modeling. Minorities of respondents thought the VFU would positively impact productivity (45%), absenteeism (23%), or health (39%). Respondents' annual VFU cost estimates (mean = $257, SD = $496, median = $75 per person) were much higher than ours (always < $32 per person), and the only yearly cost a plurality of respondents said they would pay for the VFU was $15 per person. Respondents holding green building credentials were not more likely to affirm the IAQ benefits of the VFU, and were less likely to be willing to pay for it. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#7,789,465
of 30,070,006 outputs
Outputs from Indoor Air
#681
of 1,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,646
of 277,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indoor Air
#12
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,070,006 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,802 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
