How Healthy Schools Save Money
Reducing Indoor Chemical Exposure
PHOTO © LOOKER_STUDIO
While exposure to outdoor air pollution can make you sick,
exposure to indoor pollution is often worse, as studies show
we spend most of our time indoors. Wayne R. Ott, Department
of Statistics, Stanford University, found that U.S. “persons
… spend only about two percent of their time outdoors,
six percent of their time in transit, and 92 percent of their time
indoors,” concluding: “We are basically an indoor species.”
In addition, classrooms have dense — no reference to
intelligence — populations. Per C. Kenneth Tanner, writing
for ASBO’s School Business Affairs: “Classroom density
may be a more important planning consideration than
size. The lower middle range for human social distance is
seven feet — not met in most classrooms containing
20 to 25 students.”
Plus, each of the 20 to 26 people in a “dense” classroom releases a mix of chemicals from deodorants,
hairsprays or gels, fragrances,
fabric treatments, etc.
Add to that the materials, furnishings,
cleaners and other substances
brought into schools that emit airborne
pollutants, and school facilities can
become very unhealthy.
Exposure to Chemical Soup
Per the U.S. EPA, there are more
than 80,000 chemical substances in
legal use under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA). Most of these
have not been tested for long-term
health risks; and they are most often
found in mixtures with other chemicals.
The complex “soup” of chemicals
in school environments exacerbates
sourcing the cause of illness or malaise,
and results in applying to unhealthy
schools the general descriptor
of “sick building syndrome.”
The importance of reducing
exposure to synthetic chemicals is
reinforced as we’ve learned the “dose
makes the poison” adage does not
apply to common legal chemicals that
affect human hormones in parts per
billion (ppb), also known as endocrine
disruptors.
Physical, Educational and
Fiscal Solutions
Less chemicals = more students and
teachers in class, with better health
and focus.
A 1997-2001 study at Charles
Young Elementary School showed that
improving the indoor environment
through renovation and healthier cleaning
raised attendance from 89 percent
to 93 percent along with a “qualitative
indication of reduced asthma.”
The Young study noted “a direct
connection between healthy school
environments, behaviors and attitudes
of students, parents and educators;
and academic performance and
achievement.”
Also, fewer chemicals means lower
cost of buying, shipping, storing and
handling chemicals. For example, Northern
Tioga School District, in Pennsylvania,
reduced annual supply costs by
$19,883.25 by not buying aerosols and
harsh products such as bowl cleaners.
A study led by Mark J. Mendell,
Ph.D., MPH, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, and published in
the American Journal of Public Health,
stated: “Improving building environments
may result in ... economic
benefits of $5 to $75 billion annually
[and] offers enormous potential health
and economic returns.”
Thus, preventing exposure to
chemicals provides a triple benefit:
1) healthier people, 2) better learning
and 3) healthier budgets.