Environmentally Friendly and Low-Emissivity Construction Materials and Furniture

  • Ilaria ObertiEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Public Health book series (BRIEFSPUBLIC)


Creating a healing environment that nurtures the curing process requires paying attention to all that patients eat, drink and breathe. This approach is correct, although, very often, IAQ monitoring is neglected. The causes of poor IAQ are numerous, among which there are the building products that emit VOCs (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, naphthalene, toluene, xylene, isocyanates, etc.), important pollutants that arouse great concerns. Improving IAQ and avoiding materials responsible for some of the worst toxic chemicals released into healing environments should be one of the top priorities during the design decision-making, evaluating environmental performances of construction materials. Therefore, the paper argues several strategies towards green materials with considerations on how to design healthcare settings, such as using locally durable and recyclable products with low environmental and human impacts, introducing renewable resources and reducing wastes.


Building materials IAQ Hospital design Chemical pollutants Sustainability 


  1. Alfonsi E, Capolongo S, Buffoli M. Evidence based design and healthcare: an unconventional approach to hospital design. Ann Ig. 2014;26(2):137–43. doi: 10.7416/ai.2014.1968.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anastas PT, Warner JC. Green chemistry: theory and practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  3. Baglioni A, Capolongo S. Ergonomics in planning and reconstruction. G Ital Med Lav Ergon. 2002;24(4):405–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck NB, Becker RA, Erraguntla N, Farland WH, Grant RL, Gray G, et al. Approaches for describing and communicating overall uncertainty in toxicity characterizations: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) as a case study. Environ Int. 2016;89–90:110–28. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.12.031.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bottero MC, Buffoli M, Capolongo S, Cavagliato E, di Noia M, Gola M, et al. A multidisciplinary sustainability evaluation system for operative and in-design hospitals. In: Capolongo S, Bottero MC, Buffoli M, Lettieri E, editors. Improving sustainability during hospital design and operation: a multidisciplinary evaluation tool. Cham: Springer; 2015. pp. 31–114. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-14036-0_4.
  6. Brambilla Pisoni E, Raccanelli R, Dotelli G, Botta D, Melià P. Accounting for transportation impacts in the environmental assessment of waste management plans. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2009;14(3):248–56.Google Scholar
  7. Buffoli M, Capolongo S, Cattaneo M, Signorelli C. Project, natural lighting and comfort indoor. Ann Ig. 2007;19(5):429–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Buffoli M, Nachiero D, Capolongo S. Flexible healthcare structures: analysis and evaluation of possible strategies and technologies. Ann Ig. 2012;24(6):543–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Buffoli M, CapolongoS, di Noia M, Gherardi G, Gola M. Healthcare sustainability evaluation systems. In: Capolongo S, Bottero MC, Buffoli M, Lettieri E, editors. Improving sustainability during hospital design and operation: a multidisciplinary evaluation tool. Cham: Springer; 2015. pp. 23–30. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-14036-0_3.
  10. Capolongo S, Buffoli M, Oppio A, Rizzitiello S. Measuring hygiene and health performance of buildings: a multidimensional approach. Ann Ig. 2013;25(2):151–7. doi: 10.7416/ai.2013.1917.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Capolongo S, Bellini E, Nachiero D, Rebecchi A, Buffoli M. Soft qualities in healthcare method and tools for soft qualities design in hospitals’ built environments. Ann Ig. 2014;26(4):391–9. doi: 10.7416/ai.2014.1998.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Capolongo S, Gola M, di Noia M, Nickolova M, Nachiero D, Rebecchi A, et al. Social sustainability in healthcare facilities: a rating tool for analyzing and improving social aspects in environments of care. Ann Ist Super Sanità. 2016;52(1):15–23. doi: 10.4415/ANN_16_01_06.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. D’Alessandro D, Tedesco P, Rebecchi A, Capolongo S. Water use and water saving in Italian hospitals. A preliminary investigation. Ann Ist Super Sanità. 2016;52(1):56–62. doi: 10.4415/ANN_16_01_11.
  14. Edwards B. Rough guide to sustainability. London: RIBA Publishing; 2010.Google Scholar
  15. EPA. EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Program Progress Report and Report to Congress U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Office of Research and Development. Washington DC: EPA;2015.Google Scholar
  16. Faggioli A, Capasso L. Inconsistencies between building regulations in force in Italy for indoor environment and wellness factors. Ann Ig. 2015;27(1):74–81. doi: 10.7416/ai.2015.2025.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Guenther R, Vittori G. Sustainable healthcare architecture. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons; 2014.Google Scholar
  18. Huisman ERCM, Morales E, van Hoof J, Kort HSM. Healing environment: a review of the impact of physical environmental factors on users. Build Environ. 2012;58:70–80. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.06.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. IARC. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Overall evaluations of carcinogenicity: an updating of IARC monographs Volumes 1 to 4. 1987; Suppl7.Google Scholar
  20. IARC. IARC classifies formaldehyde as carcinogenic to humans. Lyon: IARC; 2004. No. 153.Google Scholar
  21. Martuzzi M, Tickner JA. The precautionary principle: protecting public health, the environment and the future of our children. Copenhagen: WHO; 2004.Google Scholar
  22. Morena M. Conscious design and new technologies for the optimization of therapeutic space. Techne. 2015;9:216–33. doi: 10.13128/Techne-16124.Google Scholar
  23. Oberti I. Building products: beyond ostensible sustainability. In: VV.AA. Cleantech for smart cities and buildings-from nano to urban scale. Lausanne: Proceedings CISBAT; 2013a. pp. 217–222.Google Scholar
  24. Oberti I. Prodotti edilizi per edifici ecocompatibili. Uno strumento per orientare la scelta Rimini: Maggioli; 2013b.Google Scholar
  25. Oberti I. Healthy indoor air for all. In: Steffan IT, editor. Design for all—the project for everyone. Method, tools, applications. Rimini: Maggioli Editore; 2014. pp. 65–75.Google Scholar
  26. Oppio A, Buffoli M, Dell’Ovo M, Capolongo S. Addressing decisions about new hospitals’ siting: a multidimensional evaluation approach. Ann Ist Super Sanità. 2016;52(1):78–87. doi: 10.4415/ANN_16_01_14.
  27. Paleari M, Lavagna M, Campioli A. Life-cycle assessment and construction costs of a low energy residential building. Life-Cycle and Sustainability of Civil Infrastructure Systems—Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Life-Cycle Civil Engineering, IALCCE. 2012;1650–6.Google Scholar
  28. Pisello AL, Castaldo VL, Poli T, Cotana F. Simulating the thermal-energy performance of buildings at the urban scale: evaluation of inter-building effects in different urban configurations. J Urban Technol. 2014;21:3–20. doi: 10.1080/10630732.2014.884386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schettler T, Stein J, Reich F, Valenti M, editors. In harm’s way: toxic threats to child development. Cambridge: Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility; 2000.Google Scholar
  30. Settimo G. Residential indoor air quality: significant parameters in light of the new trends. Ig Sanita Pubbl. 2012;68(1):136–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Signorelli C, Riccò M. The health-environment interaction in Italy. Ig Sanita Pubbl. 2012;68(2):374–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Tucker WG. Volatile organic compounds. In: Spengler JD, Samet JM, McCarthy JF, editors. Indoor air quality handbook. New York: McGraw Hill; 2000. pp. 31.1–20.Google Scholar
  33. Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW. Semivolatile organic compounds in indoor environments. Atmos Environ. 2008;42(40):9018–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction EngineeringPolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations