P1: FXSOctober 11, 2000 0:36 Annual Reviews AR118-15Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 2000. 25:537–66HEALTH AND PRODUCTIVITY GAINS FROMBETTER INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS ANDTHEIRRELATIONSHIP WITH BUILDINGENERGY EFFICIENCY1William J. FiskIndoor Environment Department, Environmental Energy Technologies Division,Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720;e-mail: [email protected] Words economics, health, productivity■ Abstract Theoretical considerations and empirical data suggest that existingtechnologies and procedures can improve indoor environmentsinamannerthatsignifi-cantly increases productivity and health. The existing literature contains moderate tostrong evidence that characteristics of buildings and indoor environments significantlyinfluence rates of communicable respiratory illness, allergy and asthma symptoms,sick building symptoms, and worker performance. Whereas there is considerable un-certainty in the estimates of the magnitudes of productivity gains that may be obtainedby providing better indoor environments, the projected gains are very large. For theUnited States, the estimated potential annual savings and productivity gains are $6 to$14 billion from reduced respiratory disease, $1 to $4 billion from reduced allergiesand asthma, $10 to $30 billion from reduced sick building syndrome symptoms, and$20 to $160 billion from direct improvements in worker performance that are unre-lated to health. Productivity gains that are quantified and demonstrated could serveas a strong stimulus for energy efficiency measures that simultaneously improve theindoor environment.CONTENTSINTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES ................................ 538METHODS..................................................... 538RESULTS AND DISCUSSION...................................... 539Communicable Respiratory Illness................................... 539Allergies and Asthma............................................ 544Sick Building Syndrome Symptoms.................................. 5481The US Government has the right to retain a nonexclusive, royalty-free license in and toany copyright covering this paper.537P1: FXSOctober 11, 2000 0:36 Annual Reviews AR118-15538 FISKDirect Impacts of Indoor Environments on Human Performance ............. 553The Cost of Improving Indoor Environments........................... 556Limitations of Analysis........................................... 557Productivity Gains as a Stimulus for Energy Efficiency.................... 558CONCLUSIONS................................................. 560APPENDIX: DEFINITIONS OF STATISTICAL TERMS.................... 561INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVESPrior literature on the relationship of indoor environments to productivity has fo-cused primarily on potential direct improvements in worker’s cognitive or physicalperformance from changes in temperatures or lighting. The published literatureconsists primarily of reports on individual laboratory or field studies or reviewsthe current literature (e.g. 1–3), without estimates of the nationwide implicationsfor health or productivity. Prior reviews have generally not considered the currentevidence suggesting that indoor environmental conditions also affect the preva-lences of several very common health effects. These health effects lead to healthcare costs plus the costs of sick leave and reduced performance during periods ofillness.Based on the available literature and statistical and economic data, Fisk &Rosenfeld (4) estimated the annual productivity gains in the United States po-tentially achievable from improvements in indoor environmental conditions thatreduce these health effects or directly improve worker performance. An updatedand much longer review of this issue will be published as a book chapter (5).This article summarizes the updated analyses, incorporates additional updates,and reviews the implications for building energy efficiency.METHODSRelevant papers were identified through computer-based literature searches, re-views of conference proceedings, and discussions with researchers. Evidence sup-porting or refuting the hypothesized linkages was synthesized based on thesepapers. The categories of health effects identified for further consideration arecommunicable respiratory illnesses, allergies and asthma, and acute nonspecifichealth symptoms often called sick building syndrome symptoms. The economiccosts of these adverse health effects were estimated, primarily by synthesizing andupdating the results of previously published cost estimates. The economic resultsof previous analyses were updated to 1996 to account for general inflation, healthcare inflation, and increases in population (6). Estimating the magnitudes of thedecreases in adverse health effects and the magnitudes of direct improvements inproductivity that could result from improved indoor environments was the mostuncertain step in the analysis. These estimates are based on the reported strengthP1: FXSOctober 11, 2000 0:36 Annual Reviews AR118-15INDOOR ENVIRONMENTS 539of associations between indoor environmental characteristics and health outcomesand on our understanding from building and engineering science of the degree towhich relevant indoor environmental conditions could practically be improved.Nationwide health and productivity gains were then computed by multiplying theestimated potential percentage decrease in illness (or percent direct increase inproductivity) by the associated cost of the illness (or by the associated magnitudeof the economic activity). With current information, estimates of the health andproductivity gains potentially attainable from improvements in the indoor envi-ronment have a high level of uncertainty.Improvements in the indoor environment depend on changes to building design,operation, maintenance, or occupancy. Manyofthese changes will influence build-ingenergyuse. In1998, amulti-disciplinaryinternationalcommittee(7)developeda list of building energy efficiency measures and identified the most common im-pacts of these measures on indoor environmental quality (IEQ). The committee’sassessment, based on existing literature, scientific and technical knowledge, andprofessional experience, is the source for the discussion of energy implicationswithin this paper.To make this article understandable to a relatively broad audience, the use ofpotentially unfamiliar statistical terminology has been minimized. For example,as substitutes for the odds ratios or relative risks
View Full Document
Unlocking...