Research article
Normal background levels of air and surface mould reserve in English residential building stock: a preliminary study towards benchmarks based on NAHA measurements
Authors
- Yasemin Didem Aktas
(University College London (UCL), Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering (CEGE), Epicentre Research Group, London WC1E 6DE, UK)
- Morten Reeslev (Mycometer A/S, Dr Neergaards Vej 3, 2970 Hørsholm, Denmark)
- Hector Altamirano
(UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings (UKCMB), University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)
- Neil May (UK Centre for Moisture in Buildings (UKCMB), University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)
- Dina D’Ayala
(University College London (UCL), Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering (CEGE), Epicentre Research Group, London WC1E 6DE, UK)
This is version 2 of this article, the published version can be found at: https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444/ucloe.000005
Abstract
This paper reports results obtained from a surface (both visually clean and dirty/dusty surfaces) and active (aggressive or activated) air testing scheme on 140 residential rooms in England, without visible water damage or mould growth, along with a few rooms with visible mould growth/water damage tested for comparison purposes. The aim was to establish normal background levels of mould in non-water-damaged interiors to benchmark a ‘normal’ indoor environment, and in turn when there is a need for further investigation, and, possibly, remediation. Air and surface mould was quantified based on the activity of β-N-acetylhexosaminidase (EC 3.2.1.52; NAHA). The obtained readings showed a log-normal distribution. Ninety-eight percent of the samples obtained from visually clean surfaces were equal to or less than 25 relative fluorescence units (RFU), which is suggested to be the higher bound for the range which can be used as a success criterion for surface cleaning/remediation. Of samples obtained from visually dirty/dusty surfaces, around 98% were below 450 RFU, which is suggested to define the lower-bound for abnormally high levels of mould, rare even on dirty/dusty surfaces. Similarly, around 98% of the air samples were found to have 1700 RFU or below. Values above 1700 RFU are therefore deemed unlikely in a non-problem indoor environment and can be indicative of a possible problem inducing mould growth. The samples with values below 1700 were further divided into three proposed sub-categories. Finally, the obtained RFU values and the suggested benchmarks were compared to those obtained from 17 non-residential indoor environments tested previously in Copenhagen, and the benchmarks that are currently used in Danish national standards, and they were both found to be highly congruent, suggesting that local climate regimes and room functions might not be as influential on indoor mould levels as commonly thought, or that the nuances between England and Denmark in terms of these factors are not strong enough to lead to sizable changes in the typical indoor mould levels in these countries’ building stocks.Keywords: mould, surface sampling, active (aggressive or activated) air sampling, NAHA, England, Denmark
Rights: © 2020 The Authors.