What evidence supports any claimed energy saving after accounting for actual airflow and filter loading?
Last reviewed: .
What evidence supports any claimed energy saving after accounting for actual airflow and filter loading?
The company does not claim an energy saving for a filter in a system it has not measured.
On the Validation page the company reports a six-month measurement at a financial landmark in London, March 2024 to September 2024, made before and after the air handling unit filters were changed to NanoFlashing™, in which particulates, bioaerosols and energy were all measured lower. The Validation page also names Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, which certifies a ten-pocket bag filter at ISO ePM1 70% with an A class energy rating; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” That is one building over one period, measured after a filter change in its own air handling units; it is not an energy figure for another system, another filter configuration or another loading condition.
Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/), C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890.
Reviewed on .
Sources
- C-POLAR — Validation
- C-POLAR — Terms of Use
- Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890