What to Know Before Buying an Air Purifier to Clear Wildfire Smoke
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
* If the filter is not true HEPA it is probably a garbage. Beware any HPP or HEPA-like nonsense.
* If the filter is no-maintenance it is not filtering anything.
* Check the price of the replacement filters first, it is the same business model as with printer cartridges.
* The square feet or square meter characteristic is meaningless/arbitrary, you need to know the air volume per time.
* Whatever "Allergy Association" certificates are probably meaningless marketing.
* Pre-filter makes sense - it prevents hair and bugs from clogging the HEPA filter. Any other type of filter is probably garbage, there is usually no data or metrics for efficiency.
* The typical carbon filter is probably totally useless, you would need a solid quantity of carbon to absorb anything, not just carbon film or fibres.
* The efficiency of the UV lamp for killing viruses and bacteria is questionable, at best. The germicidal effect is a function of the correct wavelength, dose and exposure time. No data as usual.
* The ionised air and ozone may be bad for you and there is no data or metrics on how much ions/ozone you get.
To add insult to injury most of the purifiers look as if they were designed in the 80's and will blemish every room.
I will invoke the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect - if a company misleads you with a film-like carbon filter, what is the chance they are telling the truth about the HEPA filter, the flow rate or the noise level?
"Pollutant emitted by forest fire causes DNA damage and lung cell death"
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171024115604.h...
So you're probably better off than not buying one of these things
"In order to be effective, the activated charcoal filter would have to be a minimum of five pounds to have any statistically significant effect, he said."
I've never seen such a device.
These types of filters get as big as you could possibly want
There are no two ways about it: the unit is expensive. However, it does not resort to using carbon, which can end up releasing pollutants, and I was told the product gets used in clean up operations by the government.
I would not call the purchase a perfect panacea, but I believe it helped, and do not regret it.
https://enviroklenz.com/remove-toxic-paint-fumes-fast/
https://enviroklenz.com/large-wildfires-in-washington-oregon...
The SweetHome (part of the NYT Company!) did not review EnviroKlenz, and I believe that is because of the whole Amazon affiliate aspect to the SweetHome.
(I'd be curious if others here have used EnviroKlenz.)
{{citation-needed}}
Sounds like misinterpreted marketing FUD.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but fundamentally HEPA is about removing tiny particles whereas other approaches catch larger particles, and organic fires mostly release larger particles. HEPA filters for your house are extreme overkill, it's like living in a medical lab.
"Activated carbon filters will remove chemical gasses. They work by adsorption, a process by which the toxic gasses are attracted to and stick to the carbon But there are problems with carbon filters. Since activated carbon simply collects toxic gasses and stores them, when the carbon becomes full of gasses, the gasses can release back into the air."
That is what I was referring to in terms of carbon not being a cure-all.
The first thing to note is that furnace filters are not HEPA filters. The second thing to note is that HEPA filters don't filter out the same things as activated charcoal (from what I understand).
I ended up going with the Coway unit the Wirecutter recommends and have been pretty happy with it. One nice feature that seems to work pretty well is that it has a particulate sensor and an "auto" mode that adjusts the speed based on particulates in the air. The normal mode is super quiet, but when it detects gunk (often triggered by walking into the room), it will kick up the fan for a bit.
I don't always love the Wirecutter/Sweethome choices, but in this case it directed me to a product I wasn't even considering and I was happy with it.
Always read the details of the reviews, what they find important may not match what you do.
Is that all the air or part of it? And does that matter? i.e. anyone knows whether smoke particles etc automatically dillute or rather stay in the same concentration given one volume of air? I mean, I can imagine if you put one of these things in the center of the room, it will take in air and spit it out, but unless there is some constant process also taking volumes of air away from the far away corners, behind tables/beds/couches and getting it to be sucked up by the machine, the machine is always cleaning the 'same' air hereby leaving volumes of air far away from it untouched and hence possibly still polluted? Or isn't that how it works because there always is some kind of air flow going on somehow leading to all air making it through the machine?
There are a few reasons this effect probably doesn't matter so much. First, the dead spaces tend to be places where people don't breath -- in closets, under furniture, in corners, near ceilings, etc. Second, where people do go, they bring thermal plumes and activity-generated eddies, which tend to mix up room air. In fact, the act of breathing also provides mechanical power that will promote mixing. The filter itself also blows air, giving more mixing than if the filter wasn't present.
The net effect is that the participating volumes of the room, where people tend to breath, probably get mixed at a rate similar to, or greater than, the rate at which the filter scrubs the air. Any non-participating volumes act as slow-filling and slow-releasing reservoirs, which delay the room's response to changes in outdoor concentrations.
I would worry more about the filter only cycling the air 4-5 times per hour. That's probably faster than the effective release rate of the indoor sources with which Mr. Hefferman (the expert cited in the NYTimes article) seems to have have experimented. However, it's the same order of magnitude at which outside air gets into most houses (especially in the parts of California affected by these fires). My gut feeling is that implies the filter isn't going to keep up so well -- though I'd want to model it to say anything definitive.
Personal recommendations for the IQAir brand, and hearsay discussion that Austin Air also makes good products. Costs about $120-$180 a year, worth every penny.
http://thesweethome.com/reviews/best-air-purifier/
I personally own a 1008-DH, which has much better filtration than the 1512 reviewed there.
Previous reviews at The Sweet Home also analyzed IQAir, which is probably even better as it filters particles down to ~0.1 microns. I'd love to see an unbiased review testing ultra-small particles.
EDIT: Yes, the filters are expensive. We've started using aftermarket ones, which look cosmetically a bit different but seem to have the same core materials. Still expensive, but I like the machines due to the airflow/noise ratio. Cheaper ones I've tried are all to noisy if you put them on a high enough speed to be useful.
I've had the Kenmore-branded version of the Whirlpool Whispure AP51030K. I see some suggestion that the newer ones since they sent production overseas are a bit lesser quality, but the price is certainly less than I paid a decade+ ago. Nice feature is that there is a separate replaceable pre-filter for dust.
3M used to make some, but discontinued them. I have a couple of those.
Honeywell also makes some decent ones, though I haven't used them personally.
Unfortunately I've not seen anyone making a HEPA filter that uses standard-sized furnace filters, which is unfortunate because the better versions of furnace filters (e.g. 3M filtrete "purple") are about equivalent to HEPA filters and usually cheaper. The discontinued 3M air purifiers used a different size, I suspect to keep up a razor-blade business model :/
On the other hand, if you have forced air heat/ac (I do not) and if you use the better furnace filters you might be fine just running that (including a fan-only mode if possible).
Perhaps all homes?
We know small particles kill. It's why smoking kills not nicotine afaik.
I get the cubic law, so comparing smoking to dust and long distance smoke is not quite the same. But I'd like to see the proper figures.
These devices extend our lives for how long? in what locations?
These filters are designed for everyday use.
Cleaning smoke polluted air should be considered extreme use.
Even if you are getting an industrial filtration system installed,
you'd had to change filters almost daily.
It's the same if you get a kids pool filter for a large pool, it's useless after a day or two.
I really hope these people will get proper help to restart their life, these protip articles are super concerning.