Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
must work, sleep, and often live in the cabin environments of aircraft and space
vehicles. Throughout the world, the possible adverse effects of cabin atmosphere
content on the health of air crews and travelers have been evaluated (Brown et al.
2001
; Brundrett
2001
; Fulton
1985
; Harding
1994
; Rayman
2001
,
2002
; Rayman,
RB
2001
; Vieillefond et al.
1977
; Wyss et al.
2001
). Congressional bills that relate
to aircraft cabin air quality, and a report on the same topic by the US National
Academy of Sciences, have addressed the topic of aerospace medicine (Rayman
2001, 2002
; Rayman, RB
2002
). Before 30 years ago, the quality of cabin air was
apparently not an issue in commercial aviation, and the reporting of disease result-
ing from airborne vectors or toxic fumes was uncommon (Abeyratne
2002
).
Modern jetliners may pose a greater threat of disease because their ventilator sys-
tems are designed for optimum eficiency, and may lapse in the recycling of clean air,
and/or in the effective blocking of engine exhaust fumes that may enter cabin areas.
Aerotoxic fumes are most common in the cockpit, and therefore, crew members are
the most susceptible to the aerotoxic syndrome (Abeyratne
2002
). In a comprehensive
review of 21 studies, in which authors examined the effect of the airliner cabin envi-
ronment and other factors on the health and comfort of light attendants, Nagda and
Koontz (
2003
) found that various complaints and symptoms reported by the atten-
dants appeared to be associated with their job duties and with the cabin environment.
The “dryness” symptoms were attributable to low humidity, and the “fatigue” symp-
toms to the disruption of circadian rhythm. Certain light attendant complaints were
consistent with possible exposure to air pollutants, but that relationship has not been
established because such complaints also were consistent with other causes. Despite
health issues associated with air travel, there are enormous beneits of this mode of
travel to travelers, to commerce, to international affairs, and to health (DeHart
2003
).
Stresses (e.g., airport tumult, barometric pressure changes, immobility, jet lag
(Sanders et al.
1999
), noise, vibration, and radiation) imposed on travelers by com-
mercial lights, and the capability of US air carriers to deal with in-light illness and
medical care have been addressed in an earlier review article (Rayman
1997
). The
“cabin air quality” topic has been controversial and of concern to the Aerospace
Medical Association (AsMA). As a result, the AsMA has reviewed the scientiically
accepted facts associated with the different elements (e.g., pressurization, ventila-
tion, contamination, humidity, and temperature) of aircraft cabin atmospheres
(Thibeault
1997
). The AsMA recommended that regulators, airlines, and scientiic
associations work together on the issue of cabin air quality, since technical data
alone is inadequate to solve the problem.
Aircraft cabin carbon dioxide (CO
2
) concentrations, calculated from the pub-
lished ventilation ratings, were found to be intermediate to those obtained by
actual measurement. These indings were used to arrive at recommendations for
aircraft builders and operators to help improve aircraft cabin air quality at mini-
mum cost (Hocking
1998
). Several factors were considered that pertained to cabin
air quality before proposals were made. These factors included the trends, effects,
and societal costs of cabin air quality on passengers and crew. Improvement was
successfully made in cabin air quality that has resulted in a net, multistakeholder
savings and improved passenger comfort (Hocking
2000
). Aviation-industry and
Search WWH ::
Custom Search