Air Pollution is Bad For Productivity, Even in Office Jobs (qz.com) 41
It seems reasonable that breathing in pollution would affect worker productivity, but only recently has the damage been documented. From a report: In a series of studies that match readings from air monitors with the results of workers who are paid for daily piece work, researchers demonstrated that breathing polluted air impedes the ability of workers to pick berries, pack fruit, or even make phone calls from office cubicles.
The studies, which were collected in the journal Science (pay wall) in January, were conducted over 10 years by team of researchers at Columbia, the University of Southern California, and the University of California, San Diego. The biggest impact of air pollution was measured in farm workers in California's Central Valley, who were paid by the volume of grapes and blueberries they collected. On days that had higher readings of ground-level ozone -- a harmful gas formed when tailpipe emissions mix with sunlight -- worker productivity slumped.
Over the two years they measured the ozone, readings ranged from 10 to 86 parts per billion, and averaged 48 ppb. For every 10 ppb increase in ozone, worker productivity fell 5.5%. For farm workers paid about $9 or $10 an hour, the lost productivity translates into about 45 cents an hour of lower pay, said Matthew Neidell, an economist at Columbia and an author of the studies.
The studies, which were collected in the journal Science (pay wall) in January, were conducted over 10 years by team of researchers at Columbia, the University of Southern California, and the University of California, San Diego. The biggest impact of air pollution was measured in farm workers in California's Central Valley, who were paid by the volume of grapes and blueberries they collected. On days that had higher readings of ground-level ozone -- a harmful gas formed when tailpipe emissions mix with sunlight -- worker productivity slumped.
Over the two years they measured the ozone, readings ranged from 10 to 86 parts per billion, and averaged 48 ppb. For every 10 ppb increase in ozone, worker productivity fell 5.5%. For farm workers paid about $9 or $10 an hour, the lost productivity translates into about 45 cents an hour of lower pay, said Matthew Neidell, an economist at Columbia and an author of the studies.
Confounding variables? (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest impact of air pollution was measured in farm workers in California's Central Valley, who were paid by the volume of grapes and blueberries they collected. On days that had higher readings of ground-level ozone -- a harmful gas formed when tailpipe emissions mix with sunlight -- worker productivity slumped.
I'd be curious about how (or whether) they controlled for other factors from the weather phenomena that generated the ozone exposure: Temperature, humidity, sunlight vs. cloudy vs. rain. Also other pollution components: Smoke, NOx, CO, etc.
Re:Confounding variables? (Score:5, Funny)
The air inside my office space is great. The problem is that the company forces me to go outside and stand next to traffic huffing exhaust for periodic 10-minute stretches. If they'd let me smoke inside I wouldn't have this problem.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're complaining that you inhale toxic fumes because you're forced to go outside to inhale you own toxic fumes?
That's either a failed troll, a failed joke, or I'm too tired to think afdsagxz.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I had a co-worker in Florida who would also take ten or fifteen minute breaks from coding...
Periodically taking a break from your code can be really useful sometimes and I think I could rationalize taking a couple of smoke breaks during the day, but I don't. I was just messing around. I am a smoker, but not before or during work. I don't like smelling like an ashtray around my coworkers. Mostly I use cigarettes in the evenings to get the pot off my breath.
Re: (Score:2)
The air inside my office space is great. The problem is that the company forces me to go outside and stand next to traffic huffing exhaust for periodic 10-minute stretches. If they'd let me smoke inside I wouldn't have this problem.
I think I found your biggest confounding variable.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd be curious about how (or whether) they controlled for other factors from the weather phenomena that generated the ozone exposure: Temperature, humidity, sunlight vs. cloudy vs. rain. Also other pollution components: Smoke, NOx, CO, etc.
This is the wrong place to ask. The right place is the study. The study is paywalled, but the abstract is linked from the story. Using the abstract, you can find out who the authors are. Using the title and the authors, you may be able to find a preprint or even the full article with google; when that is not true, you may have luck contacting an author or the authors directly. Literally every time I have tried this, the author has provided me with a copy of the article. If you are actually curious about thi
Ozone? Really? (Score:5, Interesting)
What's interesting is that ozone is often used in office environments as a way of getting rid of other odors (e.g. mold). So there are several possibilities:
I think this calls for some more direct experimentation.
Re: (Score:3)
And don't forget CO2. (Score:4, Informative)
Excitingly, elevated levels of CO2 — such as those found in poorly ventilated rooms, or as atmospheric CO2 levels continue to climb, in our environment at large — also diminish our cognitive ability. See, e.g. this paper [doi.org] among others.
If we don't stop burning coal and hydrocarbons soon, we'll be too stupid to ameliorate the consequences,
Not a problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, you're not far off. Perfumes and colognes are major contributors to office toxic pollutants, especially in low air exchange modern office environments.
Give a hoot, don't perfume!
For those born after the 1980s (Score:2)
10 ppb ozone? (Score:1)
Having worked around ozone producing electronics most of my life, it's really a stretch to believe that a minuscule 10 ppb increase could possibly cause a 5.5 percent decrease in productivity. Ozone is known to cause irritation to the lungs and mucous membranes in concentrations above 100 ppb, but having done it's damage to these tissues it seems logical that very little of it would make it into the blood as O3. What could possibly be the mechanism for the effects found by this research?
Since ozone found at
Folks need a study for this? (Score:2)
EPA looking a bit more useful now, eh? (Score:3)
(see title)
Workers are subject to environmental effects! (Score:2)
Frail human workers are subject to environmental effects! They slow down when they can't breathe or it's too hot! we must replace them with robots!
Office air pollution is the worst (Score:2)
Offices are the worst. Many offices reek of toxic chemicals leaching from the furniture, the carpets, the toxic cleaning chemicals used, the air conditioning system, and so on. This together with the toxic white flourescent lighting, it really is a health hazard. The buildings are sealed up tight trapping all of the toxic air. The WORST is the hideous and health destroying LED lighting which should be declared a human health hazard. We really need OSHA regulations becuase it's such a workplace health haza
Re: (Score:2)
I forgot to mention all the flame retardant chemicals such as PBDEs. Society is being poisoned and saturated with chemicals, you need a gas mask to go into these buildings.
Give OSHA a ring (Score:2)
if you suspect the air quality in your work environment is unhealthy. Few things motivate a company
faster than OSHA threatening to shut their entire building down if they don't get shit fixed asap. Years
of complaining, corporate bureaucracy and being told " We don't have the budget " get shoved aside and
amazing amounts of budget money are quickly found to appease the OSHA inspector overlords.
This comes with a risk, however.
The company may decide it's cheaper to make you drive 100+ miles a day to another l