北京地区办公建筑室内典型污染物日均浓度与工作时均浓度对比分析

作者:厉明 韦古强 乐辰前 迟洪均 朱基诚 刘聪 李婷
单位:中国绿发投资集团有限公司 东南大学 清华大学
摘要:以办公建筑为代表的具有明确作息规律的建筑中,以污染物浓度24 h平均值作为室内污染物评价指标的合理性尚不清楚。本文以北京某办公建筑为对象,利用为期1个月的室内CO2和PM2.5浓度的实时监测数据,分析了24 h日均浓度和工作时均浓度(07:00—19:00)的关系。结果表明,对照我国GB/T 18883—2022,室内CO2和PM2.5日均浓度的超标率小于2%,但工作时均浓度的超标率远高于日均浓度(1.25~20倍)。日均浓度与工作时均浓度之间存在较大偏差,PM2.5相对偏差的最大值为0.45,中位值为0.14;CO2相对偏差的最大值为0.34,中位值为0.04。对照我国标准,室内CO2的漏判率为100%,错罚率为0;室内PM2.5的漏判率为62.3%,错罚率为19.7%。错罚率和漏判率与所采用的评价标准密切相关,随着浓度标准的提高,即浓度限值减小,错罚率和漏判率均下降。因此,针对实际办公建筑的空气质量评价,应当同时关注污染物的工作时均浓度而非仅采用24 h日均浓度,并选择合适的评价标准和浓度限值。本文的研究结果为更加准确、有效地评价办公建筑的空气质量评价提供了新思路。
关键词:办公建筑室内空气质量评价指标CO2浓度PM2.5浓度
作者简介:厉明,男,1970年生,硕士研究生,高级经济师;*刘聪,210018江苏省南京市四牌楼2号东南大学,E-mail:liuc@seu.edu.cn;
基金:中国绿发投资集团有限公司科技项目“恒温恒湿恒氧技术体系研究与关键技术研发”(编号:529000210009);
尊敬的用户,本篇文章需要2元,点击支付交费后阅读
参考文献[1] 段小丽.中国人群暴露参数手册:成人卷[M].北京:中国环境出版社,2013:435- 540.

[2] LIU N R,LIU W,DENG F R,et al.The burden of disease attributable to indoor air pollutants in China from 2000 to 2017[J].The lancet planetary health,2023,7:e900- e911.

[3] 中国疾病预防控制中心环境与健康相关产品安全所,复旦大学,清华大学,等.室内空气质量标准:GB/T 18883—2022[S].北京:中国标准出版社,2022:1- 3.

[4] WHO (World Health Organization).Air quality guidelines global update 2005:particulate matter,ozone,nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide[S].Copenhagen:World Health Organization,2006:217- 415.

[5] ABDUL-WAHAB S A,EN S C F,ELKAMEL A,et al.A review of standards and guidelines set by international bodies for the parameters of indoor air quality[J].Atmospheric pollution research,2015,6(5):751- 767.

[6] 香港环保署.办公室及公众场所室内空气质素检定计划指南:CB(1)1129/17-18(05)[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.iaq.gov.hk/zh-cn/iaq-certification-scheme-references-and-useful-forms-sc/.

[7] DOSH (Department of Occupational Safety and Health).Industry code of practice on indoor air quality 2010:JKKP DP(S)127/379/4-39[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.dosh.gov.my/index.php/legislation/codes-of-practice/chemical-management.

[8] Institute of Environmental Epidemiology.Guidelines for good indoor air quality in office premises[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.bca.gov.sg/GreenMark/others/NEA_Office_IAQ_Guidelines.pdf.

[9] Safe Work Australia.Workplace exposure standards for airborne contaminants[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/doc/workplace-exposure-standards-airborne-contaminants-2019.

[10] Health Canada.Residential indoor air quality guidelines:carbon dioxide[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/healthy-living/residential-indoor-air-qual ity-guidelines-carbon-dioxide.html.

[11] ANSI/ASHRAE.Ventilation for acceptable indoor air quality[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://webstore.ansi.org/Standards/ASHRAE/ANSIASHRAE622019.

[12] Czech Republic.Nation indoor air quality action plan[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.interreg-central.eu/Content.Node/InAirQ/National-IAQ-Action-Plan-Czech-Republic.pdf.

[13] CEN (Comité Européen de Normalisation).Ventilation for buildings:design criteria for the indoor environment[S/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.aivc.org/resource/ventilation-buildings-design-criteria-indoor-environment.

[14] WHO (World Health Organization).WHO guidelines for indoor air quality:selected pollutants[S].Copenhagen:World Health Organization,2010:1- 13.

[15] Health Canada.Guidance for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in residential indoor air[EB/OL].[2022-01-23].https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/publications/healthy-living/guidance-fine-pa rticulate-matter-pm2-5-residential-indoor-air.html.
Comparison of daily and working-time mean concentrations of indoor typical pollutants in an office building in Beijing
Li Ming Wei Guqiang Le Chenqian Chi Hongjun Zhu Jicheng Liu Cong Li Ting
(China Green Development Investment Group Co., Ltd. Southeast University Tsinghua University)
Abstract: The reasonability of using 24-hour mean pollutant concentration to evaluate the indoor air quality in the buildings with clear working schedules, as presented by office buildings, is not clear. Based on one-month real-time monitoring data of indoor CO2 and PM2.5 concentrations in an office building located in Beijing, this paper investigates the correlation between the daily(24-hour) mean concentration and the working-time(07:00-19:00) mean concentration. The results show that the exceeding rates of indoor CO2 and PM2.5 daily mean concentrations are less than 2% against the GB/T 18883-2022, but the exceeding rate of the working-time mean concentration is 1.25 to 20 times higher than that of the daily mean concentration. There is a large deviation between the daily mean value and the working-time mean value. The maximum value of PM2.5 relative deviation is 0.45, and the median value is 0.14. The maximum value of CO2 relative deviation is 0.34, and the median value is 0.04. Compared to the Chinese standard, the probability of missed judgment of indoor CO2 is 100%, while the probability of wrong penalty is 0. Similarly, the probability of missed judgment and wrong penalty of indoor PM2.5 is 62.3% and 19.7%, respectively. Moreover, the probabilities of wrong penalty and missed judgment are closely related to the evaluation standard, and decrease when the stricter standard with the smaller limit is applied. Thus, for the air quality evaluation of real office buildings, specific attention should be paid to the working-time mean pollutant concentration, and the appropriate evaluation standards as well as suitable concentration limits should be selected. The results provide a new perspective to accurately and effectively evaluate the air quality of office buildings.
Keywords: office building; indoor air quality(IAQ); evaluation indicator; CO2 concentration; PM2.5 concentration;
230 0 0
文字:     A-     A+     默认 取消