Tobacco.org

• Implications of ASHRAE’s Guidance On Ventilation for Smoking-Permitted Areas (PDF) 

The issue of how to deal with secondhand smoke has been a subject of debate within ASHRAE for many years.1 This debate has centered around ANSI ASHRAE Standard 62, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality, whose stated purpose is to “specify minimum ventilation rates and indoor air quality that will be acceptable to human occupants and are intended to minimize the potential for adverse health effects.” Acceptable indoor air quality is defined as “air in which there are no known contaminants at harmful concentrations as determined by cognizant authorities and with which a substantial majority (80% or more) of the people exposed do not express dissatisfaction." . . .

This approach alarmed the tobacco industry because, as Philip Morris noted, it “would effectively double the costs for heating and cooling in areas which allow smoking.”1 This increased ventilation cost became a reason for building owners to make buildings smoke-free, and these smoke-free policies reduce cigarette consumption by 29% by making it easier for people to cut down or stop smoking.2 As a result, the tobacco industry, working both directly and through the hospitality and gaming industries,1,3 has mounted a continuous campaign to have ASHRAE Standard 62 provide for smoking in buildings. . . .

Given the high levels of ventilation required to meet even a “comfort” design goal based on modern evidence, combined with the demand for “guidance” encouraged by the tobacco industry and its allies, 1 what is ASHRAE to do?

There are two broad ASHRAE policies that are relevant: On June 9, 2002, “The Board of Directors affirm[ed] the implied policy that ASHRAE standards shall consider health impacts where appropriate” (100-117-006 & 520-166-013) and the ASHRAE Code of Ethics states in part: “Our efforts shall be directed at all times to the enhancement of the public health, safety and welfare.”22 As noted, spaces designed in accordance with the guidelines in Standard 62-2001 Appendix I can lead to levels of RSP that are not consistent with “public health, safety, and welfare."

These policies would seem at odds with recommendations in Standard 62-2001 Appendix I, which are based on unrealistic assumptions, which bias recommendations to lower ventilation rates. In many ways, Appendix I was similar to a civil engineering society developing recommendations for bridge construction based on liberal assumptions about strength of building materials, while assuming that the number of vehicles on the bridge was low. While such guidance might serve economic needs of contractors who wish to cut corners, it could be viewed as violating basic engineering principles and ethics.

Since ASHRAE seems unwilling to develop a standard based on de minimus risk,1,13 perhaps it would be best to simply include a statement in Standard 62, as the Board Policy Committee did in its report to the ASHRAE Board of Directors on June 25, 2002, that “There is evidence that acceptable air quality cannot be achieved where smoking is permitted,”5 delete Section 6.1.3.5, the statement in the standard about the need for additional ventilation or air cleaning when smoking is permitted, drop the forthcoming ETS design guide, and leave it at that.

Jump to full article »