GET THE FACTS ~ Healing Homes Guru

GET THE FACTS INDOOR AIR QUALITY

COVID changed everything, at least that is, regarding our perception of indoor air quality. Previous to the pandemic, increasingly health-conscious consumers spent a lot of money on a lot of things to get healthier, but gave our indoor air quality little thought. According to Green Builder Media—a publisher of trade publications targeted to contractors building high-performance homes—Americans collectively spend $40 billion a year on organic food; $20 billion a year on bottled water; and $44 billion on dietary supplements. But spent a relatively paltry $781 million on indoor air cleaners even though we ingest seven times more air than food and water each day. On top of that, one of my favorite healthy home statistics as reported by the EPA back in 1987 and 1989: “Americans on average, spend approximately 90 percent of their time indoors, where the concentrations of some pollutants are often 2 to 5 times higher than typical outdoor concentrations .” (Emphasis mine) Enter COVID and an age of airborne viruses and that same Green Builder Media reports in their 2020 survey of home-buying consumers that indoor air quality is a top priority. In fact, Millennial and Gen Z consumers now view indoor air quality as a fundamental right and ventilation/ filtered air as important as water purification. So what causes poor indoor air quality? In a conventionally-built home there are a host of factors at play and potential sources of pollutants. These include combustion gases, particulates like dirt or dust, radon, formaldehydes, and a host of other volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds (VOCs and SVOCs) that off-gas from the myriad of synthetic finishes and furnishings typically found in a conventional home. These factors get magnified when there is water intrusion or faulty/insufficient ventilation. Sewer gases for instance can pollute indoor air if not vented properly or if vent piping get clogged or cracks. Incomplete combustion of any gas-fired appliance like a hot water heater or furnace/ boiler or gas stove or fireplace are other sources of pollutant gases in the home—most commonly carbon monoxide and methane. Commonly used household products like dryer sheets, plug-in air fresheners and fabric POLLUTANT SOURCES

softeners give off many VOCs the EPA considers hazardous air contaminants. And my wife the fireman has been in way too many gas-fired appliance homes where carbon monoxide detectors were blaring solely because an occupant’s home with leaky combustion was under-ventilated. One VOC that justifies being singled out and deserves its own mention because of its prevalence in a modern home and its negative impact on indoor air quality is formaldehyde. Formaldehyde is a chemical gas used to manufacture many building materials and products used around the home. As it off-gases, acute exposures can lead to headaches, fatigue, short-term memory loss, etc. Chronic exposures have been shown to lead to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and shown to be a factor in leukemia development. Common sources of household formaldehyde include plywood, particleboard, MDF boards, caulks and adhesives, carpeting and carpet pads, foam cushions, latex paint, even cosmetics.

According to the American Cancer Society, exposure to formaldehyde has been shown to cause cancer in laboratory test animals. Their primer on the topic may be found here.

Consequently, indoor air quality has as much to do with how a home is designed and the materials used to build and finish it as it does with the furnishings and personal and body care products and household cleaners we bring into our homes. I always like to say that I can build a home that is healthy all day long, but to keep it so requires occupants to live as healthy and chemically-free lifestyle as possible.

SYNTHETIC MATERIALS

Non-organic, synthetic materials and finishes are a large contributor to poor indoor air quality. The petrochemicals used in these materials are everywhere within the home: paints, adhesives, insulation, engineered wood products, flooring, etc. That ‘new home’ (or for that matter as a point of comparison, that ‘new car’) smell may be appealing, but is a sure sign of the release of dozens of VOCs that make our indoor air toxic. Common VOC sources around the home include synthetic carpets and pads, upholstered fabrics treated with stain guards, dry cleaned clothing, and even copy machines and printers. My homes reduce these effects by maximizing the use of natural materials and fully ventilating indoor air. Another nasty by-product of using man-made synthetic materials? Because of their low water absorption properties, synthetic materials create static charges and much more easily condense water vapor. As the next section shows, healthy indoor air depends on moisture control and using natural materials of high hygroscopic capacity. Man-made synthetic materials and finishes are neither.

MOISTURE CONTROL IS KEY

Here is one of my most favorite Building Biology graphs, from Dr. Elia Sterling’s book, Criteria for Human Exposure to Humidity in Occupied Buildings :

In such a straight-forward and simplistic way, this graph shows how the 8 factors listed on the left fall and/ or rise as relative humidity changes. Bioaerosols like bacteria, most viruses, and dust mites simply can’t live within the middle range of relative humidity. The optimum zone that minimizes the sum of all these factors is a relative humidity between 40-45%, going to show that moisture control inside a home is key to healthy indoor air quality. My homes are designed to keep indoor air moisture within this range.

MOLDS

Given that mold is practically synonymous with unhealthy indoor air quality and given its prevalence in American homes, this topic deserves a discussion on its own.

Mold exists naturally in the world and can be found almost everywhere, including our indoor environments. Molds live in our air, our soils, and even our foods. If you are a fan of bleu cheese or tempeh, for example, you can be thankful for the molds that produce it.

Mold is a group of fungi that thrive best in humid/ damp spaces. Many molds inside our homes lurk behind our walls and in our ducts hidden from view. It has been estimated that anywhere from 50% to 70% of American homes have mold issues. Experts from the David Asprey produced documentary Moldy (2015), claim “environmental mold is far more dangerous than lead paint or asbestos.” In order to grow, mold requires both an organic food source—the paper facings of conventional drywall being the largest food source inside a home—and moisture, which my homes guard against by weather protecting materials upon delivery to the job site and further mitigate by using interior finishes that absorb and retain excess moisture. Mold in buildings is a concern because it can lead to a host of acute or chronic health problems: stuffy nose, wheezing, asthmatic reactions, immune deficiency, even cancer. That “musty” or “moldy” odor inside a home is a sure sign that “mycotoxins”—that is, the toxic gas byproducts of microbial metabolism—are present. Bottom line? Preventing the growth of mold in buildings is critical to occupant health and building integrity, and some would argue the single most important factor in a healthy home design. One more thing, and this can’t be said enough: The key to mold growth and therefore healthy indoor air quality begins and ends with moisture control.

The best place to learn about mold is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Here’s the best overview I know of. And actually, Wikipedia has a nice summary as well.

MY APPROACH

Most builders’ efforts to control moisture is to make a home as tight as possible to seal out moisture. Passive House builders are notorious for reducing air exchanges to an absolute minimum. They do so by typically super insulating, sealing every nook and cranny with synthetic tapes and compounds that fill air gaps, then reintroducing a very strict and controlled amount of treated air.

My homes are designed to do things differently. We can’t ever truly seal a home—water always finds a way—so instead I fully ventilate and holistically design for Health first, confident that as we do, energy efficiency, comfort, and moisture control WILL follow.

Our tools to build a moisture-regulating home? Natural unadulterated building materials of high thermal mass finished with materials that are highly hygroscopic, in a building envelope designed with “flow through” walls that, like our skin, protects from the elements while allowing water vapor to escape. When combined with a radiant heat source and adequate insulation, this is the best way to build healthy, ‘mold-free’ homes.

HOW TO REMEDIATE MOLD

No matter how hard we try though, sometimes mold happens and remediation is required. In these instances, here are a few things to keep in mind:

1. The very first step to remediation is to first identify ALL sources of moisture. Removal

of mold

will be ineffective if moisture sources are not totally eliminated first; 2. Before attempting mold removal, contain the area to prevent cross-contamination; 3. Begin remediation by removing all porous material and dry all other material for 48 to 72 hours. Use dehumidification equipment if required; 4. Sand or wire brush any visible mold growth; 5. HEPA vacuum all surfaces; and 6. When removing mold from non-porous surfaces, try to avoid bleach. Instead try natural alternatives like distilled vinegar, tea tree oil, or hydrogen peroxide. Keep in mind that when some homes advertise or brag about their “mold-resistant” drywall, these materials are not “mold-proof.” A lot of mold resistant drywall gets that way by adding chemicals during manufacture. These microbial additions are rarely identified by the manufacturer and often thought to be carcinogenic and mutagenic—just another example of how builders and manufacturers of building products try to make their homes “healthier” by adding more chemicals . And that is precisely what my homes are trying to avoid.

Many building products can provide nutrients that allow for mold growth. In drywall, cellulose and starch found in paper facings and the core of drywall panels can serve as food for mold.[12] Drywall can be made more mold resistant by removing the food sources for mold (for example swapping paper facing for fiberglass facing) or by adding biocides to the core and paper facing.[13] Paper-faced mold and moisture resistant drywall panels, (the latest iteration of previous moisture resistant panels, sometimes called greenboard), are often used in interior applications where there is periodic elevated humidity, such as bathrooms or laundry rooms. They are not intended for use where there is direct exposure to water or in areas with continuous high humidity. Mold resistant drywall with a fiberglass matt facing can be used for additional applications, such as behind tile in wet areas (tub and shower) where allowed by code, and when drywall is installed before the building is fully enclosed.[14] Both paper-faced and fiberglass-faced mold resistant products commonly contain additives to help repel moisture as well as antimicrobial additives.[15] The specific antimicrobial additives used are not typically disclosed, but antimicrobials that have been identified for use in drywall can be carcinogens and mutagens and most are considered toxic to aquatic life. Keep in mind that mold resistant drywall is not “mold-proof.”[16] Use best practices for material handling during construction and implement proper moisture control and ventilation in buildings as primary mold prevention strategies. For applications where mold resistant drywall is needed, ask manufacturers to fully disclose product content, including antimicrobials, and associated hazards through Health Product Declarations. Because of the potentially hazardous antimicrobials, and the fact the mold resistant drywall costs more than standard drywall,[17] avoid using mold resistant drywall when it is not necessary.

GET THE FACTS TOXIC BUILDING MATERIALS

The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that Americans spend a lot of time inside their homes—as much as 90% of their day. During COVID, that number is most assuredly higher, maybe much higher when you consider the lockdowns, the school closures, the home deliveries. In the aftermath, pundits of pop culture are calling home the new safe haven, but how safe are they really? Not so much when you do the research. The stark reality is that given the current inventory of approximately 86,000 chemicals listed as part of the 1979 and amended 1982 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), only a small subset of approximately 200 chemical substances have ever been tested for safety and only 9 have been completely banned from use (five of which were banned before the Act even took effect).

The architectural firm of Perkins & Will puts this in context in the following graphic:

Our homes are an unhealthy—some might even say toxic—stew of chemically-based building materials and finishes and electromagnetic pollution. I’ll discuss the latter in the next flip-page magazine; a discussion on chemicals in the home begins right here.

HOW WE MAKE MATERIAL CHOICES

Sometimes our choices for building materials are dictated by law or code. Two examples:

 Lead pipes were MANDATED by Chicago Code for making the water connection between homes and street until 1996. I’ve never heard an explanation for why but I imagine the greater malleability of lead

made it better to withstand the ground weight with less chance of breaking the home’s service line; and  Lead paints were outlawed for residential use in 1978 but perfectly legal up until then. The EPA estimates that 87% of U.S. homes built before 1940 were built using lead-based paint. Acknowledging the problem is one thing, solving it is another. In neither case have we solved the problem. Lead piping still serves hundreds of thousands of Chicago homes and lead paint is still present in many Chicago homes (though less dangerous to occupants as it has typically been covered up by layers of newer latex paint). Sometimes our choices for building materials are dictated by use or functionality. The building of outdoor deck spaces and fencing comes to mind. Responding to the need to increase the longevity of the lumber used in these applications and protect against insects like termites, the building industry began impregnating their lumber with chemicals decades ago—a use of chemicals around the home that consumers don’t often think about and don’t seem to mind, but like lead piping, is still there. In fact, the process of making “pressure treated wood’ is a rare instance of self-regulation and healthier change; a process that evolved from the nasty use of creosotes distilled from coal tar, to the use of chromated arsenicals (a combination of chromium, copper, and arsenic ), to the current common day practice of treating wood made for residential construction with a less potent mix of fungicides and insecticides known as ‘alkaline copper quarternary’. This is a rare example of an industry that tried to reduce its own toxic footprint (or a more cynical interpretation, that tried to avoid regulation) resulting in public benefit. The manufacturing of these products however, continues to pose health risks to the workers who apply these coatings at the factory. Most frequently though, our choices of building materials are dictated by exactly that: our choices. Builders and consumers make conscience choices every day as they decide on the types of paints, or sealants, or caulks, or types of flooring, or insulations, or even drywall when doing a remodel or a new build. Up-front costs typically play a big role in our building material choices with unfortunately little information on externalities or life-cycle costs or specific information on which of the choices before us are healthier or safer. As a group called the Healthy Building Network (HBN) points out on their web site: “Most people think that chemicals used in building products are strictly regulated or tested for their impacts on human health, but that is not the case. In fact, it is difficult to get clear and reliable information about product ingredients. Even manufacturers are often uninformed about the chemicals in their products, and

many chemical companies refuse to disclose details. Healthier options often come at a price premium or are deficient in performance.” Bottom line? When it comes to healthy building, product info is rarely robust, some products are indeed quite toxic even if their use is not yet banned or regulated, and those products that claim to be healthy are not always cost or performance competitive. I created this web site and wrote this flip-book to raise awareness around these issues. So my advice to you if you plan to renovate or build healthy on your own, is to be vigilant about checking and corroborating manufacturer claims and use the resources I am about to give to choose the healthiest, most durable, most affordable natural material options that fit you and your lifestyle. I can tell you first hand that making these choices requires a lot of homework and usually fraught with some very hard tradeoffs, especially if one broadens my healthy home perspective beyond you and your home to also include the health of our planet. I have found a decision-making framework that beautifully guides one through this process, sourced from a group I have known for years. The group goes by the name BuildingGreen out of Brattleboro, Vermont and their framework for selecting better, healthier, and more environmentally-responsible building products is known as “The 12 Product Rules,” and I link to them here: To show you how difficult some of the tradeoffs can be, take the case of simple drywall, otherwise known as gypsum board. Gypsum, if you did not know, is a natural product mined from the earth or it can be synthetically made from treated waste gathered at coal-fired power plants. Which is the better source for gypsum? Mining it naturally seems like an obvious choice, but mining gypsum has its own environmental concerns. On the other hand, manufacturing it synthetically actually creates recycled content and diverts wastes from landfills. But that too has its own problems as the process to manufacture it can introduce mercury into the environment. It is not clear which approach is better. TRADE-OFFS

My approach is to use a different wallboard that avoids using gypsum altogether.

BUILDING MATERIAL RESOURCES

There are various sources of information you can tap into if you want to learn about the chemicals used in modern America and the increasing list of healthier building materials that avoid using them. Sources that provide information on toxic chemicals and the relative health of various building materials include: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the Healthy Building Network (HBN) and its cousin HomeFree. Other groups include the mindful MATERIALS Collaborative and private groups and subscription services like BuildingGreen, Pharos, and a European concern called Friendly Materials. Also, green building certification programs like the Living Building Challenge can be additional sources of information.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

The EPA is the first place to look for information on toxic chemicals used in the U.S., though the EPA’s emphasis is on toxic materials primarily used in industrial applications. The EPA is the group tasked with enforcing the Toxic Substances Control Act and maintains the official inventory of chemical substances that are manufactured or processed in the United States. You can access the list here.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG)

The EWG is just a phenomenal group chock full of all kinds of useful consumer information on a full range of household health hazards with Toxic Chemicals being just one of seven of their major Areas of Focus. Their Consumer Guides to things like sunscreens, pesticides in produce (their so-called ‘Dirty Dozen’ report), and tap water are superb and need to be a part of everyone’s arsenal of information on day-to-day products used and consumed around your home. For over 20 years, HBN has been on the forefront of researching healthy building materials, advocating for their use and educating others so everyone can more easily make informed decisions about the chemical hazards within the building products industry HBN was founded by one of the giants in the healthy building space, a man named Bill Walsh. I have never met or spoken to Mr. Walsh but the Internet has allowed me to look over his shoulder and surreptitiously check-in periodically to see how his ventures are doing. It is clear that this organization very much reflects Mr. Walsh’s own values and ideals. I especially like HBN’s Mission Statement and Values, and their eloquently Healthy Building Network (HBN)

simple ‘Aspirational Statement’ which very much reflects my own Mission (as given on my Home Page) and my own wishes for my healthy home development work:  HBN Mission: To advance human and environmental health by improving hazardous chemical transparency and inspiring product innovation;  HBN Values: Collaboration, Equity, Excellence, Independence, Innovation, Transparency, Trust, Science-Based; and  HBN ‘Know Better’ Aspirational Statement: When we know better, we can build a world where human health takes priority over toxics, and chemicals of concern are simply eliminated from our products. We will create a world where all people, and the planet, thrive. When we know better, we do better. Two absolute “Must Bookmark” pages from HBN are their Transformation Targets page and their Hazards Spectrum page. Both contain critical information for those making decisions about what products to specify in any home building project. Pharos is a database founded and maintained by the Healthy Building Network. As I mention above, HBN’s goal is to reduce the use of hazardous chemicals and improve the inherent safety of materials and products. Pharos is the most comprehensive database that I know of that assesses the human and environmental health hazards of chemicals and building materials. Through its Common Product Profiles and various other data sources, users can investigate the health hazards posed by generic, non-manufacturer-specific products like “Drywall Joint Compound” or “Cork Flooring” or “Closed Cell Spray Foam Insulation.” HBN then uses these profiles to provide building product guidance on their sister website ‘HomeFree’. Parts of Pharos are free to use and other parts require a daily, weekly, monthly, or annual fee. Users without a paid subscription can access the Pharos Discussion Board and get limited building product content information under the Common Product Profiles I mention above. Pharos

Two additional absolute “Must Bookmark” pages:

HomeFree

Healthy Building Network’s HomeFree is a national initiative supporting leaders in affordable housing who are improving human health by using less toxic building materials. Though their web site’s educational tools and product spec sheets and workshops and webinars are really geared to developers, architects, contractors and material specifiers working in the affordable housing sector, they welcome anyone striving to create a healthier world. Their introductory course, “Why Materials Matter” is a killer course and really does offer a great overview of healthy building materials and why they matter. Another giant in the healthy home space is Alex Wilson, Founder of BuildingGreen and publisher of a newsletter which back in the day was called Environmental Building News (EBN). I was a subscriber for a number of years and EBN quickly became my go-to reference for unbiased reviews of the latest healthy and sustainable building products. BuildingGreen like Pharos is another subscriber-based resource. But unlike Pharos, it conducts name-brand product reviews which is helpful for my work. Some might view the name brand reviews as problematic until you learn that they accept no advertising or sponsorships in any of their publications. They are a name you can trust. If you subscribe you will gain access to feature articles, news analysis, webcasts, product guides, and what I like most about their work, their opinions. I go to this web site for out-of-the-box thinking and profiles on materials I am generally not familiar with. When I do visit, I almost always learn something new and I like the methodology they use to evaluate the relative healthfulness of various materials. Their database of products is almost exclusively products from European manufacturers. I know for a fact however I can get at least one of their products here in the States as I have already spec’ed it for my development work and sourced it from a Brooklyn supplier. Friendly Materials BuildingGreen

Living Building Challenge

There are a handful of green building certifications that can increase the marketability of one’s home and in some cases are a source of information on healthy building materials. The Living Building Challenge is the only green building certification that requires any kind of validation after a building’s construction that proves it does what it was designed to do. It is a very rigorous and comprehensive certification.

CONCLUSION

I go back to what Healthy Building Network says about their work:.”.….when we KNOW better, we DO better.” Please get to know the resources listed within these pages and you too will do better and lead a healthier, more productive life. If you are looking to purchase healthy home building materials locally, there are only a couple places left in the Chicago area that specialize in healthy sustainable building materials and who can advise those wishing to create a healthier home. The local expert on this topic is Andy Pace who founded the Green Design Center in Waukesha, Wisconsin. Coming from a family that worked in construction, no one knows this field better. I trust his judgment and sage advice. I would not hesitate to call Andy about any healthy home problem or situation you want to address. Another resource locally is E.L. Faust in Elmhurst. They built a local niche by primarily helping those who suffer from Multiple Chemical Sensitivities. Faust focuses on air purifiers, water filters, and like Mr. Pace, is a local supplier of AFMSafecoat products. A second local option is Karen Kalmek’s eco-friendly interior design services known as Green Home Chicago at her very handsome West Loop design center. And finally, I urge everyone to read fellow Bau Biologist Paula Baker Laporte’s book, Prescriptions for a Healthy House, which provides comparison lists and makes numerous explicit material recommendations for your healthy home. In the Resource section of this eBook I have additional links to organizations that have either specific expertise in evaluating toxic building materials or have long advocated for building with safer alternatives. These references include links to groups like architectural firm Perkins & Will, an advocacy group called the Green Science Policy Institute, and the Chicago Tribune which produced an excellent 2012 Watchdog Report on Flame Retardants (and I might add, an excellent 2019 report on excessive cell phone radiation).

.