Smart Restart APS- ventilation studies
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| The Smart Restart group is in way over their heads. They are making gross assumptions in their calculations. Thankfully, APS is consulting with actual experts and following best practices. Looks like we will learn more about it tonight. |
Anonymous
Perhaps. But just remember who has a bigger reason to withhold or shade some information. APS has not exactly been forthcoming with this information and seems to be providing it now because Smart Restart rang alarm bells. I read on AEM that APS is going to say that all but 46 of its classrooms will have 4 air changes per hour (ACH), on a scale of 6. That doesn't sound too bad. But here are the stratifications of that scale: 6 is ideal; 5-6 is excellent; 4-5 is good; 3-4 is bare minimum; below 3 is low. So getting almost all APS classrooms to 4 ACH is both "good" AND the "bare minimum" that is safe. To get to 5 or even 6 ACH would not take many more steps and you don't have to be an expert to know that. There are a ton of resource papers from Harvard (Dr. Joseph Allen and other building safety experts) that give schools advice on this stuff. Personally, I'd like to know which schools and which classrooms within those schools have just the bare minimum. And how APS intends to improve the air quality in those rooms/schools so everyone has at least a full good. |
Anonymous
Great. That is better for all of us. Good thing SR people were advocating for this and pushing APS to be transparent and fully implement all necessary changes. |
Anonymous
They clearly don’t understand the data they’re trying to interpret or what changes are actually necessary, but sure. |
Anonymous
They had to make assumptions because APS wouldn’t provide additional data. They were clear on that. |
Anonymous
What ever could go wrong in using thinly stretched human resources to collect dense data and provide it to people who don’t know what the hell they’re looking at? |
Anonymous
+1000 |
Anonymous
Joseph Allen fully supports a 4 ACH - that is really all that is needed - sure 6 is higher but it is not required and only a modest reduction in transmission risk going from one to the other. I think there was a wrong study used in the SR work that pointed to a 50% reduction in risk going from 4 ACH to 6 ACH but that was for a single case of a very infectious person with measles - which are much more infectious than COVID. Going from 4 to 6 actually only provides less than 1% risk reduction based on other studies. I think that is shown in the studies linked on that AEM post you reference. The fact that 6 ACH is listed as optimal is, perhaps, bad wording when the 4 ACH is completely acceptable. Allen has tweeted this and written op-eds on all of this. I think APS put out documents that disclosed the rooms. Also, in the School Docs that APS just released for tonight's Board Meeting it looks like APS is putting in additional HEPA filters for some rooms based on the expert's work. And it looks like all those rooms have windows that can and do open. |
Anonymous
Uh.....they should have already been doing these calculations themselves. 
That is the bigger concern here. Why did it take a parent group to make this happen? |
Anonymous
Turns out they were right. Go figure. |
Anonymous
Excellent outcome. Thank you to the SR people for pushing to make this happen. Just hope that the air cleaners get used and the windows are opened.... |
Anonymous
No, they should have been leaving the calculations to the experts, which is what they did. It didn’t take a parent group to make this happen. |
Anonymous
Sure, Jan.
If APS was already planning to have the experts do this then nothing is lost. Better find something else to complain about. |
Anonymous
K. Enjoy your SR circle jerk. |
Anonymous
| ^^ ha haa haaaaaha haaaaaaaaaaaah |