BSEE-NOV21-PG24.qxp_Layout 1 25/10/2021 11:36 Page 24
BSEE
he world has had to change. How we work, socialise, learn and even shop has all altered because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Driving the change is a sudden lack of safety felt by consumers in indoor spaces – the types of spaces we used to frequent without a second thought – and buildings and facilities managers have been left to figure out how to make these spaces safer, in order to bring back workers, students, shoppers and restaurant goers.
T
Emma Segelov, EMEA marketing operations manager for MK Electric, part of the Honeywell family, examines what can be done to make electrical touchpoints safer, now and long after the pandemic ends.
As we make our way back into indoor spaces, there is still debate about whether it is safe to work, shop, study and play inside. With this in mind, we look at the key areas of concern amongst workers in the UK, and how anti-bacterial and anti-viral materials are being employed in electrical products to minimise the spread of contaminants via touchpoints in the workplace.
How has the way we think about health and safety in buildings changed due to the pandemic? One of the biggest changes that we’ve seen at Honeywell is how people’s awareness levels have increased about how being indoors impacts on infection spread. This has resulted in people being more attuned to what’s happening to make the spaces that they use safer, especially considering aspects like touchpoints and adherence to safety guidelines which weren’t top of mind before. Think of how an emphasis on safety changed the way that we fly after 9/11. We’re experiencing a similar moment of inflection now.
How does this affect how we are feeling about returning to normalcy, especially as many companies are still implementing their return-to- work plans?
In a recent study commissioned by Honeywell and carried out by Wakefield Research of workers’ perceptions on the health and safety of their workplace, a staggering majority of the UK respondents (71%) do not feel completely safe working in their employer’s buildings. This number is even higher for those working remotely (78%), who are especially sceptical about the safety of work sites. In the UK, half of the participants interviewed are equally concerned with transmission of COVID-19 through touching a surface that has the virus (51%) and through the air (49%). In fact, their level of worry for surface transfer is significantly higher compared to other employees around the world (44%).
What is being done to address these concerns, and what are the implications for building owners in the long-term?
Many buildings have changed procedures to keep occupants safer, but more permanent modifications are not being made to the buildings themselves – and their occupants have noticed.
A percentage of 62% of respondents in the UK believe that their building management is likely to make short-term changes in response to COVID- 19, rather than long-term investments in building systems to keep them safer.
With nearly one in five (22%) surveyed remote employees saying that they would look for a new job rather than return to a site that did not implement the necessary safety measures, it is clear that companies that don’t take the provision of safer and healthier environments seriously enough in the future, even when the current pandemic ends, could risk losing valuable staff.
So, what can building managers and owners do beyond short-term measures to meet user expectations of indoor health and safety? The challenge for building owners, operators and employers is how to make long-term improvements to create a healthier environment overall. As part of this plan, consideration should be given to minimising the spread of contaminants via touchpoints, such as electrical switches and sockets.
This is part of the reason why there is an increased demand for electrical products with inherent anti-bacterial and anti-viral properties, such as MK’s urea formaldehyde wiring devices. Electrical accessories that are scratch free, thanks to high quality mould tools, also minimises surfaces for pathogens to hide, providing another way to help stop the spread of infections.
In the current economic environment, it may not be easy to justify infrastructural upgrades. There are, however, anti-bacterial and anti-viral wiring devices available on the market, such as MK’s Logic Plus range and our latest collection designed for prudent budgets – MK Base, so that healthier building environments can be created whatever the project budget.
What are the standards that specifiers should look for in anti-viral and anti-bacterial products? To provide adequate protection for users against contracting an infection from frequently touched surfaces like electrical sockets and switches, products that have been tested to the latest internationally-recognised standard – ISO 22196:2011 – should be recommended. To comply with this standard, the testing must follow the specified method – for example, the product must remain in contact with the microbes for 24 hours. The tests also must be carried out under set temperatures and humidity levels. What’s more, multiple test samples are required, and control tests are also done to provide reliable results. Claims made on products that have not been tested to an industry recognised standard such as ISO 22196:2011 may not be as scientifically robust.
24 BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER NOVEMBER 2021
What pathogens should specifiers look for protection against?
Specifiers and installers should look for efficacy across a range of pathogens, some of which could be more relevant to the end-client’s sector. For example, MRSA can cause a serious infection and often poses a higher risk to patients in hospitals and other healthcare environments. Wiring devices, such as Logic Plus and MK Base portfolios are the most widely tested on the market, with outstanding kill rate protection against MRSA as well as Listeria, Staphylococcus Aureus 6538p (which is known to be resistant to antibiotics),
E.coli and Salmonella, which is why they are a popular choice within healthcare settings.
Viruses too, can cause a wide variety of illnesses. One of the smallest known non-enveloped viruses, Phi-X174, is used as an internationally recognised standard in anti-viral testing to analyse the resistance of critical PPE and air filtration systems to blood-borne viruses. Non-enveloped viruses are much harder to kill because they carry the proteins used to infect cells in an inner layer which is less susceptible to disinfectants. This is in contrast to their enveloped counterparts which have an outer membrane. The membrane contains the proteins used by the virus to enter its victim’s cell and is sensitive to chemical and physical treatments. Because non-enveloped viruses are harder to disinfect, it is one of the reasons why protection against Phi-X174 is used as a standard for evaluating anti-viral performance. The Logic Plus and MK Base ranges have been tested in accordance with ISO 22196: 2011 against the Phi- X174 virus, with kill rates of over 99.99% and 99.99% respectively.
As we make our way back into indoor spaces, cleanliness and safety are key factors in reassuring people a space is safer. This means that from offices and schools to hospitals, hotels, airports and malls, every building manager should be thinking how to make their premises a healthier environment. By using the technological solutions available to upgrade their building infrastructure, companies can get a healthy return on their investment via improved staff retention and recruitment, and potentially more customers through their doors.
BUILDING CONTROLS & TECHNOLOGY
Minimising contaminants at electrical touchpoints
www.hwll.co/MKAntimicrobial Read the latest at:
www.bsee.co.uk
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
