Indoor environment characteristics
Table 2 shows the median and maximum temperatures and relative humidity levels in the indoor environments.
Table 2 Indoor environments Within 1 week after construction, the temperatures of the living rooms were in the range 12.0–20.5 °C with a mean ± SD of 13.9 °C ± 3.8 °C, and the bedroom temperatures were in the range 11.5–15.8 °C with a mean ± SD of 13.6 °C ± 1.6 °C. One month after construction, the temperatures of the living rooms were in the range 12.2–30.2 °C with a mean ± SD of 17.5 °C ± 8.5 °C, and the bedroom temperatures were in the range 11.9–27.6 °C with a mean ± SD of 16.7 °C ± 6.9 °C.
The humidity range in the living rooms for the first measurement was 48–68% with a mean ± SD of 51.3% ± 7.9% and that in the bedrooms was 47–78% with a mean ± SD of 55.8% ± 12.6%. One month after construction, the humidity range in the living rooms was 42–70% with a mean ± SD of 53.5% ± 12.0% and that in the bedrooms was 44–76% with a mean ± SD of 57.9% ± 11.1%.
Table 3 shows the median and maximum values of the five substances listed in the Japanese “Housing Quality Assurance Act,” as measured in the present study, listed along with the data from IAQ-S 2009 for comparison.
Table 3 Changes in the concentrations of five regulated compounds Table 4 lists the median and maximum concentrations of the six most abundant substances and the TVOC, along with data from IAQ-S 2009. At 1 month after the construction, TVOC had a median value of 291 μg/m3 and a maximum of 354 μg/m3 in the living room, and a median value of 189 μg/m3 and a maximum of 310 μg/m3 in the bedroom; these results confirm that the houses met the TVOC target of 400 μg/m3 in Japan. These concentrations were also much lower than those recorded in IAQ-S 2009.
Table 4 Concentrations of the six most abundant substances and the TVOC of IAQ-S 2015 and IAQ-S 2009 The statistical significance of the change in IAQ over the month between these samples was determined via the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The median values of the top six substances decreased significantly, except for ethyl acetate.
In the living room and bedroom, airborne chemical concentrations were significantly lower 1 month after the construction than at 1 week after construction (Fig. 2).
All five targeted substances concentrations were below the guideline values both 1 week after construction and 1 month after construction. Furthermore, those concentrations were less than half the guideline values specified by the national act.
The concentrations of standardized substances in the houses tested by us were found to be lower than those data from IAQ-S 2009.
All concentrations were lower than the guideline values by about 0.67 to 0.1 times. The difference in the maximum values was even larger, with the values lower by about 0.25 to 0.003 times. In the houses tested by us, the concentrations of all substances were sufficiently lower than the guideline values. The median values of the top six substances were almost equal. The maximum values in this study were about 0.43 to 0.03 times lower than the maximum values recorded in the study IAQ-S 2009. As for TVOC, the median value in this study was about 0.33 times lower and the maximum value about 0.05 times lower than the data from 2009. Since the measurements were completed within 6 months after the completion of construction in IAQ-S 2009, it was emphasized that the IAQ-S 2015 houses had much better IAQ than those tested in 2009.
At the second sampling, the temperature was higher by 2.0–2.7 °C at the median value than the first time. Among the reported environmental parameters, temperature influences the VOC emissions from building materials (Bremer et al. 1993; Wolkoff 1998; Yang 1999); therefore, these differences in the temperature likely had some effects on the concentrations of VOCs in the second samples; a slight increase in temperature led to a significant decrease in chemical concentrations in the second samples even with this effect. The results indicate that the concentrations were at healthy levels according to the guideline values by the national act even 1 week after construction ended, and that the risk of chemical exposure was greatly reduced after 1 month. From this result, it may be preferable to move to new houses 1 month after the construction.
The emission rates of interior and building materials chosen in this study are shown in Table 5. These materials were examined by the chamber test. All five substances mentioned in the national act were present in very low concentrations, and estimating those emission sources was difficult. Regarding the six most abundant substances, as the interior materials used in the floors, walls, and ceilings are considered to have almost the same contribution rate, the emission source was estimated from the results of the emission rate test. The contribution rates of the sash windows, substrate panels, and doors are low considering the area used, but large amounts of adhesive and sealing agents are utilized in those materials, and it is assumed that solvent chemicals such as 2-butanone and acetone are emitted from them. Acetone also originates from the flooring (solid wood), and ethanol primarily originates from the floorboards (painted finish and solid wood), sash windows, and doors. Ethyl acetate is provided by the flooring (sheet finish and solid wood) and substrate panels. Flooring and substrate panels are also assumed to be the main sources of butyl acetate. The emission of undecane was not detected in the preliminary chamber tests conducted; however, a previous study found its volatilization from floor adhesives, floor waxes, and wood stains (Sarigiannis et al. 2011). More research is needed regarding the sources of this compound. All five substances mentioned in the national act were at low concentrations. It was difficult to estimate the emission source.
Table 5 Small-chamber tests of building materials used in the study houses With this preliminarily data about the low-VOC building materials, builders will be able to build healthier houses. In Europe, a list of substances and associated emission limits, EU-LCI values, have been developed and were issued in (European Collaborative Action 2013). In Japan, on the other hand, a labeling system for building materials is only prescribed for formaldehyde. Development of such improved labeling on building materials is expected also in Japan to protect the people’s health.
Furthermore, in the houses examined by us, the six most abundant substances have no guideline values in Japan’s national standards. Although the health risks due to these compounds have not been clarified, unregulated substances have often been used as substitutes for regulated solvents. In recent years, some reports have indicated their adverse health impacts on humans (Yu and Crump 1998; Ravindra et al. 2001; Kamijima et al. 2002; Tuomainen et al. 2004; Gallego-Iniesta García et al. 2010). Thus, to prevent diseases and symptoms which are caused by indoor air pollutants, the concentrations of these unregulated substances should still be reduced and minimized.