Food consulting firm develops method to test effectiveness of air cleaning systems


Campden BRI, the food consulting and research organisation, has developed a new test procedure to determine whether air cleaning systems can effectively inactivate and remove the virus that causes Covid-19 from the air and surfaces.

It comes as businesses attempt to protect their workforces with these systems which are sometimes marketed as being effective against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the respiratory disease.

In a recently published position paper, the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) highlighted the need for these systems to be independently validated.

Story continues below

The paper identified a lack of robust scientific data supporting the efficacy of such systems against relevant test organisms under realistic in-use conditions.

Annette Sansom, senior research officer at Campden BRI, who led the development of the method, said: “Knowing coronaviruses to be spread by airborne transmission, many businesses have put in place extra measures to protect their employees, including the installation of air cleaning systems.

“Some of these devices state effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2, but without these claims being validated, businesses can’t be sure that they’re protecting their staff. With an aerobiology laboratory capable of representing workplace conditions, we steered our ongoing research project on the effective control of viruses towards a method that could validate these claims and help businesses create Covid-secure environments.”

The new method uses a surrogate organism, structurally similar to SARS-CoV-2, in a specialist aerobiology laboratory to validate air cleaning systems on a scale not replicated elsewhere in the UK.

The test itself has been developed to adapt to various environments, including those seen in sectors such as the food and drink industry.

SAGE highlighted that the application of these technologies – which include UV-C light, plasma, filters and chemical sprays – may be a useful strategy to reduce airborne transmission risks in poorly ventilated spaces.

This paves the way for these devices to be used in any closed spaces that are prone to poor ventilation.

However, having identified the potential chemical hazards associated with some systems, SAGE’s position paper makes clear that these hazards should be fully understood and properly mitigated to ensure safe operation.

Rob Limburn, microbiology group manager at Campden BRI, who helped develop the validation method, said: “Some air cleaning systems produce ozone and/or other potentially hazardous by-products, such as CO2, during operation. It’s therefore important that such devices are tested to ensure that levels of these substances do not exceed recommended maximum levels under in-use conditions.”

The current UK workplace exposure limit for ozone is 0.2 ppm according to the Health and Safety Executive.

As well as in the air, some systems claim to be effective against SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces. It is believed that testing these claims at the location the device will be used is a robust way of ensuring this effectiveness.

Having recently trialled the new method on a boat, Mr Limburn demonstrated how the test can assess claims of surface activity in a number of different settings which can include hotel rooms, offices and canteens.

Businesses can therefore assess which of these technologies is most effective and safe for their specific area to help them determine which would be a worthwhile investment.

“We’ve found that the ‘next virus’ is a real concern for many businesses and is partly the reason why they’re considering installing these systems. They’re thinking of both the current health crisis and future pandemics,” he said.

Tags : Campden BRIcoronavirusVentilation
Andrew Seymour

The author Andrew Seymour

1 Comment

  1. There are many air purifiers on the market but you need to understand who manufacturers the filters and how often need replacing, Freudenberg are by far the worlds best tested. Smaller and more units works better than larger. Don’t forget the virus has to go into the filter to get caught but research claims it’s better than opening the windows.

Leave a Response

Thank you! Your subscription has been confirmed. You'll hear from us soon.
Enter your email to join the thousands of other professionals receiving breaking news from Foodservice Equipment Journal