Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712-1076, USA.
Indoor Air. 2010 Jun;20(3):196-203. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0668.2010.00644.x. Epub 2010 Apr 7.
Chronic human exposure to formaldehyde is significantly increased by indoor sources. However, information is lacking on why these exposures appear to persist in older homes with aging sources. We use data from the Relationships of Indoor, Outdoor, and Personal Air study to evaluate 179 residences, most of which were older than 5 years. We assess the dependence of indoor formaldehyde concentrations (C(in)) on building type and age, whole-house air exchange rate, indoor temperature, and seasonal changes. Indoor formaldehyde had mean and median concentrations of 17 ppb, and primarily originated from indoor sources. The factors we analyzed did not explain much of the variance in C(in), probably because of their limited influence on mechanisms that control the long-term release of formaldehyde from aging pressed-wood products bound with urea-formaldehyde (UF) resins. We confirmed that the mitigating effects of ventilation on C(in) decrease with time through the analysis of data for new homes available in the literature, and through models. We also explored source control strategies and conclude that source removal is the most effective way to decrease chronic exposures to formaldehyde in existing homes. For new homes, reducing indoor sources and using pressed-wood with lower UF content are likely the best solutions.
Formaldehyde concentrations in homes due to indoor sources appear to persist throughout the lifetime of residences. Increases in ventilation rates are most effective in decreasing indoor concentrations in new homes where formaldehyde levels are high or when homes are tight. Consequently, other alternatives need to be promoted such as decreasing the amount of pressed-wood products with urea-formaldehyde (UF) resins in homes or reducing the UF content in these materials.
人类慢性暴露于甲醛主要来自室内来源。然而,人们对于为什么在使用老化来源的老旧房屋中,这些暴露似乎持续存在,却知之甚少。我们利用室内、室外和个人空气关系研究的数据,评估了 179 处住宅,其中大多数都超过 5 年。我们评估了室内甲醛浓度(C(in))与建筑类型和年龄、全屋空气交换率、室内温度和季节性变化的关系。室内甲醛的平均和中位数浓度为 17ppb,主要来源于室内来源。我们分析的因素并没有解释 C(in)的很大一部分差异,这可能是因为它们对控制脲醛(UF)树脂结合的老化压缩木材产品中甲醛长期释放的机制影响有限。我们通过分析文献中可用的新住宅数据和模型,确认了通风对 C(in)的缓解作用随时间的推移而降低。我们还探讨了源头控制策略,并得出结论,去除源头是减少现有住宅中甲醛慢性暴露的最有效方法。对于新住宅,减少室内来源和使用 UF 含量较低的压缩木材产品可能是最好的解决方案。
由于室内来源,住宅内的甲醛浓度似乎会在住宅的整个生命周期内持续存在。增加通风率在降低新住宅中甲醛水平较高或住宅密封的室内浓度方面最为有效。因此,需要推广其他替代方案,例如减少住宅中含脲醛(UF)树脂的压缩木材产品的数量,或降低这些材料中的 UF 含量。