Central City Air

Crisis in Motion - - Residential Sick Building Syndrome

How the effort of the EPA and the DOE encouraging utilities to save energy has ruined the lives of thousands.

A relatively new term has entered our lives in the past 10 years, namely, "Sick Building Syndrome". This term did not exist until the early 1980s. It is interesting to analyze how and why this condition is penetrating the residential market, having already created a mounting crisis in the commercial building industry.

The energy consumption of the 1970s was noted for the short supply of fossil fuels. President Jimmy Carter's statement that we were running out of natural gas encouraged the Congress to ban the fuel to generate electricity. Controlling market forces caused shortages of all fuels and long lines at the gas pumps in a misdirected attempt to stay ahead of the problem. Efforts were made to conserve fuels, reducing the energy we use in our homes, cars, and businesses. The results were the seeds that were sewn to create the catastrophic consequences we are facing today.

A sensible approach by the leading experts of their time was directed at reducing energy used by comfort systems. Modern buildings could not exist as they are built without air conditioning. However, since ways to reduce usage often paid back the investment in less than five years, they made economic sense.

The air conditioning industry responded to DOE directions with more efficient designs. They did reduce energy usage, especially in the smaller units designed for residences. In the 1980s, efficiencies of 12 SEER replaced systems that were 10 SEER. While the reduction in energy usage was a positive, a long term negative was set in motion - Sick Building Syndrome. Rebates were given to homeowners and contractors to encourage the homeowner to install equipment a certain way for higher efficiency. Cooling coils were oversized to remove more heat and less humidity, resulting in mold potential increasing in high efficiency system designs. The EPA and the DOE are the force behind this encouraging the direction of energy savings in residential design. The net effect is little or no actual savings because pure comfort is compromised and health is at risk.

At the same time, home construction joined the frenzy to take a turn in the same direction. Homes were sealed tighter so as to preserve the energy and contain the conditioned environment. New unproven methods were developed to accomplish this. Equipment was installed in a race to see who could get the highest SEER rating. Higher SEER ratings meant more market share in the business. No one wanted to talk about the repercussions of the equipment selection. The manufacturers' equipment designs and recommendations match up the same in Phoenix, Houston, Boston, and Seattle. Although climate needs vary widely, the equipment selection used was nearly the same. This allowed extremely humid conditions to dominate some homes while totally avoiding other seemingly similar structures. It was dependent on the equipment design and application, the way the house was built and the interactions of these components.

Thus was set in motion the unstoppable torrent of Sick building Syndrome. As the frequency of mold contamination appears in the news, shock sets in to neighborhoods as they wonder if they are next. The mechanical system must make the house breathe correctly with comfort, correct humidity levels and fresh air to compensate and restore the quality needed for healthy occupants. We all pay the price in increased claims and higher rates or exclusions for problems that few seem to be able to answer. The solution is pure physics in an environmental application.

As we progress and the problem gets worse, not better, insurance companies have moved to remove mold coverage for residential applications. It may then become an expensive option that will only be offered if your home is designed and built correctly. The standards to do this exist now but are rarely applied. In some instances, homes have been burned to destroy the mold with every item in the house incinerated. Businesses have been shut, and lives have been compromised by this major health concern.

The EPA, DOE, and ARI unknowingly encourage all of these wrong practices, thinking energy use will go down. It is not necessarily so. The EPA even sued the owner of their own building in Washington D.C. for Sick Building Syndrome and WON! Major utilities use the American Refrigerant Institute guidelines (SEER ratings) based on United States average temperature. These conditions don't even exist in Texas, yet ignorance drives systems to be installed to the standard that does not apply. Consumers tend to buy higher efficiencies to save energy. It doesn't always happen with the results usually promised or promoted. Everyone points the finger at the problem, none taking responsibility, resulting in difficulty in proving anything concrete and failed lawsuits. Thus the consumer is left trying to find a solution so he can breathe safely in his own home. If the consumer can find the solution, he is usually stuck with the repair costs out of his own pocket. Bankruptcies abound as people move out and have 2 mortgages, one on the home they live in and one on the home they abandoned. Neighbors put their house up for sale thinking it is contagious. It is not.

The EPA, DOE, the air conditioning industry, contractors, and home builders, along with the rating of equipment by the ARI are all at fault for the precarious position we are in today. The EPA encourages the mismatching of equipment, no matter how the home is built, to try to reduce energy usage. The location is not relevant nor is the lifestyle of the occupants. These are grave, insurmountable errors that precipitate conditions unfit for human habitation. Most homes' air conditioning systems are installed by the "low bidder". Thus, putting in quality and design performance is not an issue. Price dominates the market nationwide. Those who put in the most SEER for the least money get the business. Utility rebates drive equipment selection resulting, in many cases, in death for the indoor environment. This is the breathing air we live on conditioned by the "low bidder" resulting in allergic reactions treatable with medicine to allow us to live in the environment that is making us slightly or miserably ill. Cases of brain damage and spitting up blood are documented by the insurance industry and a recent 20/20 expose on a sick home in Dallas.

The answer to why this is happening is fairly clear. The air in a tight home is different than the air in a loose home. Infiltration of air in a tight home may be near zero, where in a loose home it may be 25% per hour. A vast difference exists throughout the country and there are not exact guidelines that determine solutions for every single problem. Sick Building Syndrome is clearly a humidity problem, as well as, out-gassing from materials used to construct the home and lack of fresh air to compensate.

There are two types of heat in the house. Dry heat or sensible heat is the heat transferred by conduction, convection, or radiation. Wet heat or latent heat is the heat transferred by the vapor pressure deferential between outdoor and indoor environments. Outdoor air in humid climates needs to be handled differently than dry climates. In humid areas, sensible, dry heat can be kept out of the structure while latent, wet heat cannot. The thermostat measures the dry heat level and shuts the equipment off when the dry load is satisfied.

Since the wet load has no control on the thermostat or its performance, humidity levels vary widely. Inside the home, levels of moisture above 60% result in mold growth that begins at the time of equipment installation and contaminates the home in 3 to 6 years. Mold cannot exist in low humidity environments. The build-up of mold is often evasive and not discovered. Insurance companies move the homeowner out of the moldy environment that is making them sick. Thus, a new industry has evolved, Mold Remediation. There are few scientific guidelines in this business. Most Mold Remediation companies see it as primarily a moneymaking opportunity. Methods of treatment vary from company to company. The real tragedy is they don't always solve the reason mold grows in the home environment. It is nearly always caused by a lack of humidity removal in a fairly tight home. Once Mold Remediation is done, the humidity removal must be addressed or the process starts all over again.

The question is where has the air conditioning industry failed? It is in the equipment selection and performance. More aggressive humidity removal is often sacrificed for lower energy usage. The true irony is that a high temperature setting with lower humidity indoors is more efficient in certain areas of the country. Whole house humidity removal equipment designated to 24-hour dehumidification is another solution. It makes sense to install equipment throughout the nation uniquely adapted to the needs of each locale.

Click here to return to the library...