Touchless application with electrostatic sprayers deliver faster, more complete disinfection, as well as preventing cross contamination from microfibre towels and the like, which can transfer microbes from one surface to another. Once time saving efficiencies are realised, teams would also be able to increase the frequency of disinfection protocols, further reinforcing outbreak mitigation.


Compliance is another key challenge the cleaning industry continuously faces. Levels of compliance are directly proportional to cleaning success. High level compliance around industry best practices leads to good quality results, safer and cleaner facilities. Low levels not only lead to poor results, but make it difficult for managers to achieve consistency across teams of different sizes.

Standardisation of touchless disinfection processes would go a long way toward solving many compliance concerns. It would also allow users to make more environmentally preferable choices for cleaning products. Best practices include limiting chemical variation or, when possible, consolidating cleaning protocols around one broad- spectrum disinfectant that’s safer, yet more effective.

Instead of managing multiple chemical usage guides and dwell times, choosing one chemistry with simple directions that works for almost every stage of the cleaning process would prevent potential incidents of breakdown, increase worker safety, eliminate hazardous chemical exposure, and ensure greater compliance overall.

To successfully introduce a new technology to cleaning professionals, it should be as clear and streamlined as possible. Programs designed for simplicity are consistently more compliant in almost any industry. However in the cleaning industry, where multilingual staff and high turnover rates are prevalent, it’s all the more crucial for training programs and processes to be simplified so they can be replicated and easily scaled. Assistive technology like electrostatics help bridge gaps in staff experience levels and ensure more consistent outcomes.

Taking responsibility

With wide-scale adoption of this revolutionary technology comes the responsibility to implement proper usage guidelines. Processes must be established to ensure safe and effective application of chemicals in a manner that protects the public health as well as that of custodial teams.

Outlining well-defined precautions is a responsibility both equipment and chemical manufacturers share. Sprayer specifications must be properly aligned with the right chemistry so that the resulting protocols are consistent with the registered chemical claims, as well as the regulatory guidelines for worker safety.

While there are chemicals available that are well suited for electrostatic application, there are others like QUATs that are not, due to potential safety hazards or material incompatibilities, or accumulation of sticky residue over time. All parties involved are responsible for taking these considerations into account.

Features such as droplet size, spray patterns, sprayer output, charge mechanism, and chemical equivalency are all part of an electrostatic disinfection system which, when properly designed, can optimise processes to ensure they are as practical and affordable as they are safe, effective, and scalable.

It’s also important for operators to remember that electrostatics are not a free pass to blanket the world in more chemicals, but rather to leverage the technology’s efficiency to do more with less.

Cleaning protocols standardised around electrostatic technologies with well-defined safety guidelines have the potential to transform the cleaning industry, which in turn, would create healthier populations.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70