|
||||||||||||||
| Ozone Disinfection of SARS-Contaiminated Areas | ||||||||||||||
| Download this article (pdf) | ||||||||||||||
Why
do we need air disinfection?
The
outbreak of SARS worldwide in March 2003 has increased people awareness of
the transmission of respiratory diseases in indoor environment. Evidences(1)
show that SARS could survive on respiratory droplets for up to several days
and people breathing air containing these droplets will be at high risk to
get the diseases. Therefore, there is a need for a reliable and efficient
air disinfection method to decontaminate these high-risk areas. Technologies
for air disinfection
The
most common air disinfection method is using ultraviolet (UV) radiation. UV
radiation (UV-C) kills bacteria and viruses by damaging the DNA/RNA of the
cells of microorganisms. However, UV radiation could only disinfect air
close to the lamps as UV light has limited penetration capacity. In case of
SARS contaminated room, UV disinfection alone is not adequate to provide
virus-free environment for us. Another
well-known air cleaning method is to employ High Efficiency Particulate Air
(HEPA) filter. HEPA filter can capture particulate sizes down to 0.3
microns, and so bacteria with size larger than 0.3 microns could be trapped
in the filter. Although HEPA filters are effective in reducing airborne
bacteria in air, it is not
effective to remove viruses, which are nanometer (10-9 m) in
size. Also, air must pass through the filter in order for it to be cleaned.
Hence HEPA filters can only clean air that is within a short distance of the
HEPA unit. These drawbacks make HEPA filters become an unsatisfactory
candidate for disinfection of SARS contaminated areas. Chemical
disinfectants could also be used for air disinfection, usually by means of
vaporizing or spraying. However, these chemical disinfectants are usually
difficult to decompose, leaving toxic chemical residues that are hazardous
to human health. Ozone
is a well-known powerful oxidizer which could kill microorganisms
effectively. Ozone applications in water and wastewater treatments are
well-documented and it is widely used by most of the modern cities. Although
studies for using ozone to disinfect air are relatively limited,
experimental results (2,3) indicate that ozone could also be an effective
air disinfectant as in water. For example, Kowalski et al (2) investigated
the bactericidal effects of high ozone concentrations on E.
coli and S. aureus and
concluded that more than 99.99% death rate was achieved for both species
after ozonation. In
addition to the strong oxidizing power of ozone, properties of ozone also
help it to be an ideal aerial disinfectant. In contrast to UV radiation and
HEPA filter, ozone is a gas that could penetrate to every corners of the
room, thus it could disinfect the entire room effectively. As ozone is
unstable, it is readily converted back to oxygen, leaving no harmful
residual ozone after disinfection. Although
ozone is success as an aerial disinfectant in laboratory experiments (1),
its effectiveness in real situation needs to be further explored. In this
article, the effectiveness of ozone in disinfection of a conference room
will be evaluated and discussed. Disinfection
capacity of ozo
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Effectiveness
of ozone on reducing airborne bacteria
The total airborne bacteria in the conference room was measured before and after each ozonation. Measurement was carried out using an Andersen N-6 single-stage sampler with Tryptone Soya Agar (Oxoid) in petri dish. 283L of air was taken for each sampling. The petri dish was incubated at 35oC for 48 hrs before counting. The disinfection efficiency of ozonation at different concentration was tabulated in Table 1. |
||||||||||||||||
Table
1. Reduction of Airborne Bacteria after Ozonation
|
||||||||||||||||
|
The
results show that ozone is effective in reducing airborne
bacteria. At higher ozone level, the sanitizing effect
increased. Over 90% of airborne bacteria could be reduced at
2.5 ppm concentration. Further increase of ozone concentration
to 5 ppm does not beneficial in bacteria reduction percentage.
Unlike
laboratory experiments conducted by Kowalski et al (1) that
could remove 99.99% airborne bacteria after ozonation, the
best reduction percentage in our case was around 93% only.
High removal percentage could not be achieved because the
conference room was not 100% sealed. Doors should be opened
briefly during each air sampling (for placing a new agar dish
on the sampler) and air exchange from outside was unavoidable.
For
safety reason, excessive high concentration ozone should be
avoided and the lowest ozone concentration that could kill
most of the microorganisms should be selected as optimum.
Depends on the contamination level, 0.5 – 2.5 ppm ozone
level is adequate for air disinfection. Conclusion
Experimental
data shows that ozone is effective in reducing airborne
bacteria of unoccupied room. Over 90% of airborne bacteria
could be reduced after ozonation. As viruses are generally
more susceptible to ozone than bacteria, it could assume that
all viruses are killed if large percentage of airborne
bacteria are removed. Ozone is a gas that has good penetration
capacity and powerful oxidizing power, thus its disinfection
efficiency is superior to UV radiation and HEPA filter. As
ozone disinfection is conducted in unoccupied room only and
all the residual ozone will be decomposed after the treatment,
ozone toxicity to human is therefore not a concern. Given the
advantages of strong oxidizing power, good penetration
capacity and no harmful residues left after the treatment,
ozone is recommended to be used in disinfection of SARS-contaminated
environments. References
1.
Gérard V. Sunnen, SARS
and Ozone Therapy: Theoretical Considerations, http://www.triroc.com/sunnen/topics/sars.html
(2003). 2.
W. J. Kowalski, W. P. Bahnfleth, and T. S. Whittam, Ozone
Sci. & Eng., 20, 205-221 (1998). 3. T. Masaoka; Y. Kubota, S. Namiuchi, T. Takubo, T. Ueda, H. Shibata, H. Nakamura, J. Yoshitake, T. Yamayoshi, H. Doi, T. Kamiki, Appl. & Environ. Microb., 43, 509-513 (1982). |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Hong Kong : Rm. 611 Hong Leong Plaza, 33 Lok Yip Road, Fanling N.T. Hong Kong Tel : 852 - 26762545 Fax : 852-26762860 ShenZhen China : Flat D., 9/F., Xin Din Ge, Zhong Gang Cheng, 3004 Fu Qian Road, ShenZhen, 518048 P.R. China Tel : 0755-83850251 Fax : 0755-83850253 |