Never ceases to stump me that we have the technology to kill 99.95% of airborne viruses, proven to work, non-invasive, cheap to deploy and install, and is produced at scale already and we just like - collectively - kind of just don't really use it.

HEPA-grade air filtration is proven, cheap, and makes everyone's lives strictly better. It, like, makes zero fiscal sense for governments not to mandate its use in all covered public spaces ASAP.

Decided today that next month I'll be buying a Blast Mini Mk II purifier: https://smartairfilters.com/en/product/blast-mini-ffu/

My partner has an art space they share with a couple of other folks; and like, the right thing to do is to make sure the indoor air quality there is as good as it can be.

The unit is fairly pricey, but that's without any sort of tax rebates or incentives to install. Bought privately so we have to pay full tax on it + import costs. At scale this would be a rounding error for a lot of places.

@yosh if it helps any, I bought a Rabbit Air Minus A2 and I really like it. I just bought it based on a recommendation from a friend who had done some efficiency testing and said it was the best, but I it quotes some good numbers and it's very quiet on the low settings. Mine's measuring 42dbA at arm's length on medium (not sure what the airflow is, though, as I don't have tools for that).

@sophiajt I haven’t! - A requirement for this space is going to be that it looks good though; so I don't think I can just show up with four filters and a box fan 😅

@yosh So one would think.

I know no good sentence starts with this, but: I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but maybe someone took a long hard and psychopathic look at the demographic projections ...?

Thanks for the pointer to this! The Blast is quieter than my current filter and more effective.

@yosh Do you work for Big Air?

@matzipan lmao, if only there were such a thing

@jaycee heh, honestly? They probably would make more money if people made more informed decisions about their health.

How can you sell vaccines, test, cures, and treatments for something people don’t register as important?

@yosh HEPA and UV are too slow to work for Covid infection control. One needs to wear a respirator for that whenever around people even if they are present in the space. Once people leave a space and those tools are given sufficient time to sanitize the air, then the respirator can come off. But in public buildings one is not often by oneself by the public nature of the space.

@zephyrleifrenner I’m not even talking about masks, I don’t even see how you get there? I mean, are you saying that HEPA filtration shouldn’t be deployed? I don’t get it?

Also; you really can’t make blanket statements about HEPA efficacy. It’s too situational to say anything meaningful. It depends on the system, location it’s deployed in, and occupancy.

@yosh HEPA and UV would bring all sorts of benefits. To alter covid transmission, it won’t work for schools, restaurants, bars, anywhere a person is talking to you from normal conversational distance. That person’s exhalations cover you in fractions of a second and the time to infection can be as low as seconds. Both HEPA and UV take many minutes in any public building setup. E.g. UV is 16 minutes at regulatory max exposure to reach 95%.

@zephyrleifrenner Sorry, you're just talking at me now. I know how COVID is transmitted, thank you.

@yosh your assertion that it's cheap is wrong.

We don't mandate HEPA filters because it's a massive cost and doesn't actually stop virus spread in itself.

Nano particle level filtration is insanely expensive and you'd need to change the air completely every few minutes to even have a chance to make a dent at all.

@WagesOf ah right, yeah I agree that perfect should be the enemy of good.

Perfect filtration sure takes effort, but the point is not perfection — it’s reduction. Like, I can go to IKEA today and buy a HEPA-grade filter for $6. Not best in class, but certainly affordable. Why? Because they’re produced at scale.

“To make any dent at all” is unsubstantiated by evidence. It’s clear that any amount of ventilation is better than none. Any amount of filtration is better than none.

@yosh @cadey We have a policy at work, that you need approval for purchases above a certain sum. We also found HEPA filters with air ionizing, and UVC for less than that sum -> we bought the devices individually over several months, to get around the “Is this a required investment?” discussion. I’d do it again in a heartbeat.

@schrotthaufen Oh fwiw, please do be careful with ionizing air filters. My understanding is that they emit ozone, which is generally considered harmful. I don’t know enough about your setup to say anything authoritatively, but figured it might be worth a mention.

(Far-)UVC slaps though; I’m really happy you found a way to introduce this at work!

@yosh
The covid policy at my local hospital is apparently "ehh, whatever". Masks are recommended if you feel symptomatic.
We will never get out of this.

@silvermoon82 My ray of hope here is that the current policy of: “hey if we ignore it, it'll go away” is sending entire economies into nose-dives. Germany went into a recession last year because of unprecedented amounts of sick leave [1]. The UK is going through something very similar right now [2].

Legislating clean indoor air standards strikes me as a solution which will strongly appeal to technocrats. No social changes, just tech.

[1]: https://www.barrons.com/news/germany-s-economy-ails-as-sick-leave-hurts-output-087dcc0e
[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/feb/17/record-long-term-sickness-bodes-ill-for-uk-economic-growth

@silvermoon82 There are so many angles here to clean air, I think it might be one of the most productive points to pressure.

1. It reduces sick leave, which means more economic production.
2. It improves academic performance, which the governing class at least claim to care about.
3. It is largely invisible when deployed, meaning never losing face on having absolutely flunked pandemic response.
4. It’s Technology! - Everyone loves technology! /s
5. Provides a chance for tax rebates, etc.

@silvermoon82 Finally there is also a very direct connection to worker's rights. Unions do not yet seem to be onto the idea that clean air is a worker's rights issue.

But the second it is, it will align in yet another way. This seems like a win/win/win for everyone, as long as governments can come through with enough support to make installation cheap.

Less asthma, fewer allergy responses, no more getting colds in fall, kids being less restless, no more indoor mold smell, etc. etc. etc.

@yosh and we can do upper room germicidal UV too which can help mitigate the draftiness and noise of filtration and add an extra layer of protection in high risk settings!

So much cool and relatively cheap technology! That saves us from a scourge we never imagined we’d be free of!

@susannah 💯💯

@dibben @yosh

It's over a 100 for this type. And energy use was a key reason why society moved to CFL bulbs in the 1990s ;-)

The average Dutch household uses about 3000 kWh a year. Running this one continuously (which apparently is what a lot of people do) is about a 1000 kWh.

I'd say that's a lot. And it'll often be more as these tend to be installed in closed buildings with active air conditioning: the increases heath load will have to be removed.

@Pepijn @dibben

Note that your numbers on household *energy* aren’t quite accurate. Dutch households also burn a signicant amount of gas to produce heat-energy, which isn’t accounted for if you just measure electricity. On average households also burn 1200m3 of gas, or an additional 12660 kWh of energy.

This also does not account for fuel used in transportation, the heating and electricity cost of offices and schools, and so on. There is a lot to consider when discussing energy usage!

@Pepijn @dibben

Also I’m not sure what numbers you’re using for the purifier? Virtually nobody will be running one on high, 24/7. It’s just too loud for that. Instead most people will likely run it at low/medium most of the time. And only occasionally set it to high. Or even off if nobody is home.

But say they did leave it on on low or medium 24/7, that would result in costs of:

- low: 360 kWh/year
- medium: 720 kWh/year

In comparison: a mid-range gaming PC can easily slurp 1000 kWh/year.

@yosh

I think we're very much in different realities. So sorry for having bothered you, and sorry for leaving you feeling attacked.

@dibben

@Pepijn @dibben

Huh? I’m not feeling attacked? I thought you raised an interesting point about energy cost, but I thought you made some flawed assumptions - and I figured they would be worth pushing back on.

I can be firm when I make an argument, but please understand I didn’t take anything you said in bad faith!

@larsmb

I'm not sure if "disabling the entire population over the next years" is going to achieve that goal…

@yosh

@graviton Ah, but if it further marginalizes the aging population while gaslighting them about being merely "unwilling" to be able to work, and ideally lowers the life expectancy, the retirement funds suddenly look much better!