Choosing among technologies and competitors

Do the reported smoke comparisons use matched filters and matching endpoints?

LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, measured a filter with NanoFlashing™ and the same media without it side by side, in one single-pass test in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; the conventional-filter curve on the Ultrafine Particles and Wildfire Smoke pages comes from a separate published source, which those pages cite.

The smoke and ultrafine-particle reports named on the Validation page are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, compared a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter of Aeropro media with C-POLAR against the same media without it, single-pass in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct: the initial fractional efficiency with C-POLAR was higher at every particle size from 22 to 604 nanometres, for example 83.6% against 57.8% at 52 nanometres, and slightly lower at 16.5 nanometres; it is an initial laboratory result on clean media, not a result over a service life or in a building. The NanoFlashing™ page's chart names its control as a conventional MERV-13 filter, and it names no competitor's model. The EPA study cited alongside it measured clean-air delivery, which is a different measurement, and the two are not the same endpoint.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/ultrafine-particles/; C-POLAR — Wildfire Smoke, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/wildfire-smoke/; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J; LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Which public comparisons with competing technologies are backed by comparable test conditions?

LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, measured a filter with NanoFlashing™ and the same media without it side by side, in one single-pass test in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; the conventional-filter curve on the Ultrafine Particles and Wildfire Smoke pages comes from a separate published source, which those pages cite.

The smoke and ultrafine-particle reports named on the Validation page are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, compared a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter of Aeropro media with C-POLAR against the same media without it, single-pass in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct: the initial fractional efficiency with C-POLAR was higher at every particle size from 22 to 604 nanometres, for example 83.6% against 57.8% at 52 nanometres, and slightly lower at 16.5 nanometres; it is an initial laboratory result on clean media, not a result over a service life or in a building. The NanoFlashing™ page's chart names its control as a conventional MERV-13 filter, and it names no competitor's model. The EPA study cited alongside it measured clean-air delivery, which is a different measurement, and the two are not the same endpoint.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/ultrafine-particles/; C-POLAR — Wildfire Smoke, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/wildfire-smoke/; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J; LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Are particle-filtration ratings available separately from claims about viruses, bacteria or fungal spores?

The particle rating and the statement about viruses, bacteria and fungal spores rest on different tests, and each is reported on its own.

ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured. Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, certifies a ten-pocket bag filter at ISO ePM1 70% under ISO 16890, with an A class energy rating, and LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, records MERV 15A under ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter. The published position is that industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it. Certificate No. 15.06.011 covers a ten-pocket bag filter, not a flat panel filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What evidence, if any, applies to odors or gaseous pollutants rather than particles?

The company's published evidence is about particles, and none of it applies to odours or gaseous pollutants.

C-POLAR publishes no evidence for a gas, a vapour or an odour, and it makes no claim about one.

NanoFlashing™ attracts negatively charged particles through electrostatic attraction. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a customer compare total ownership costs without unsupported assumptions about life, maintenance or energy?

This site publishes no price, no service life and no running cost for a finished product.

This site publishes no shipping cost and no recommendation for a room size. Replacement is set by the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product’s own label. Every commercial NanoFlashing™ product is made by a manufacturing partner, in their facility, in their format, and a price and the terms attached to it come from the partner or the seller that makes the offer. The Terms of Use name two online stores, shop.cpolartechnologies.com and shopusa.cpolartechnologies.com, and state: “The store and every purchase from it are governed only by the terms presented there.” Those two stores are C-POLAR's own. The company names its manufacturing and distribution partners on the About page and the Air page: Aero Pro, AQ Filter, BGE Indoor Air Quality Solutions, Olympic International and VOLZ Filters. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What evidence separates an objective procurement specification from wording tailored to exclude competitors without support?

A specification written as a measured property under a named standard can be met by any product that meets it, and C-POLAR does not write a buyer's specification.

ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured. The air-filtration standards named in the company's published testing are ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, certifies a ten-pocket bag filter at ISO ePM1 70% with an A class energy rating. Certificate No. 15.06.011 covers a ten-pocket bag filter, not a flat panel filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. The published position is that industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it. The published Terms of Use state: “Nothing on the Site authorizes anyone to manufacture, integrate, market, resell, or describe a product as C-POLAR-enabled. Nothing authorizes anyone to describe itself as a C-POLAR partner. Written permission is required.” Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

For my room, would a larger conventional filter outperform a smaller NanoFlashing unit?

A measured advantage belongs to the filter that was measured.

A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. The published Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” C-POLAR publishes no comparison between filter sizes or between units. A rating applies to the filter that was tested, not to every product that carries the technology. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How should I compare NanoFlashing with HEPA filtration at the same delivered airflow?

A comparison with a HEPA filter is made at the same delivered airflow and under the same standard.

A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured. The company's published note is that the hardest size for any filter to catch is about 0.3 microns, the size HEPA is rated on. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller; the ratings published on cpolar.tech are MERV 15A (LMS Technologies, Report 6847, a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter) and ISO ePM1 70% (Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011); cpolar.tech publishes no HEPA rating. Certificate No. 15.06.011 covers a ten-pocket bag filter, not a flat panel filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/ultrafine-particles/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How should I compare it with activated carbon when my main problem is a gas?

The company publishes no comparison with activated carbon and no evidence for a gas.

C-POLAR publishes no evidence for a gas, a vapour or an odour, and it makes no claim about one.

NanoFlashing™ attracts negatively charged particles through electrostatic attraction. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Would adding ventilation provide more benefit than upgrading this filter in my building?

The filter and ventilation do different things, and the company's label states that the filter works alongside ventilation and cleaning, not in place of them.

A combination of measures is a matter for the building, and C-POLAR publishes no comparison of combined systems. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How should I compare a treated filter with an ionising purifier for byproducts and maintenance?

For byproducts, the air leaving the filter has had nothing added to it, and for maintenance, the filter is replaced at the point stated on its own label.

NanoFlashing™ is passive. It generates no ozone, releases nothing, and adds nothing to what passes through. In a forced-air system, the system's own fan moves air through the filter, and its resistance adds to the pressure the fan works against. The filter is passive. It draws no power, and it has no power supply, electrode, lamp or reservoir. Maintenance is the replacement of the filter itself, at the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product's own label. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. This site publishes no noise measurement, no price and no running cost. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a comparison with ultraviolet treatment account for the complete system's operating requirements?

Yes, when it counts what each option needs to run: ultraviolet light needs a lamp and runs on electricity, while the filter draws no power and has no lamp.

NanoFlashing™ is passive. It generates no ozone, releases nothing, and adds nothing to what passes through. In a forced-air system, the system's own fan moves air through the filter, and its resistance adds to the pressure the fan works against. The filter is passive. It draws no power, and it has no power supply, electrode, lamp or reservoir. Maintenance is the replacement of the filter itself, at the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product's own label. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. This site publishes no noise measurement, no price and no running cost. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Water, https://cpolar.tech/water/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a comparison include the cost of a fan needed by one option but not the other?

The filter needs no fan of its own: it is passive, and the ventilation system's own fan moves the air.

NanoFlashing™ is passive. It generates no ozone, releases nothing, and adds nothing to what passes through. In a forced-air system, the system's own fan moves air through the filter, and its resistance adds to the pressure the fan works against. The filter is passive. It draws no power, and it has no power supply, electrode, lamp or reservoir. Maintenance is the replacement of the filter itself, at the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product's own label. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. This site publishes no noise measurement, no price and no running cost. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can I compare noise at the airflow needed to meet my requirement rather than at the quietest setting?

This site publishes no noise measurement; the NanoFlashing™ filter has no fan and no moving part, and its resistance adds to the pressure the fan works against at any airflow.

NanoFlashing™ is passive. It generates no ozone, releases nothing, and adds nothing to what passes through. The filter is passive. It draws no power, and it has no power supply, electrode, lamp or reservoir. Maintenance is the replacement of the filter itself, at the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product's own label. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. This site publishes no noise measurement, no price and no running cost. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a comparison assume both products are replaced at equally conservative intervals?

Replacement is set by the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product's own label, and a comparison uses the same basis for both products.

A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. The label states that the filter is replaced when the pressure drop reaches the stated value, or at the stated interval, whichever comes first. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Would a reusable frame change the waste comparison with a disposable assembly?

C-POLAR publishes no waste comparison.

The label states that the filter is not washed, vacuumed, brushed, blown out or reused, and that a used filter and its packaging are disposed of as ordinary household or commercial waste under Federal, State and local requirements, and are not burned. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is a lower purchase price offset by higher shipping costs for frequent replacements?

This site publishes no price, no service life and no running cost for a finished product.

This site publishes no shipping cost and no recommendation for a room size. Replacement is set by the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product’s own label. Every commercial NanoFlashing™ product is made by a manufacturing partner, in their facility, in their format, and a price and the terms attached to it come from the partner or the seller that makes the offer. The Terms of Use name two online stores, shop.cpolartechnologies.com and shopusa.cpolartechnologies.com, and state: “The store and every purchase from it are governed only by the terms presented there.” Those two stores are C-POLAR's own. The company names its manufacturing and distribution partners on the About page and the Air page: Aero Pro, AQ Filter, BGE Indoor Air Quality Solutions, Olympic International and VOLZ Filters. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can I compare products when one publishes full performance curves and the other publishes only a peak result?

The company publishes its filtration measurement size by size across the measured range on the NanoFlashing™ page, and each headline value on the Ultrafine Particles and Wildfire Smoke pages is stated with what it measured.

The size-by-size table on the NanoFlashing™ page names no report. The smoke and ultrafine-particle reports named on the Validation page are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J. LMS Technologies' Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471 of 20 October 2025 measured single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. The published position is that industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Ultrafine Particles, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/ultrafine-particles/; C-POLAR — Wildfire Smoke, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/wildfire-smoke/; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J; LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a claimed advantage remain when both filters are loaded with ordinary dust?

The NanoFlashing™ page states: “NanoFlashing™ does not fade.” The independent testing that page describes used smoke; the Bacteria page shows NanoFlashing™ beside a control under a heavy dust load, 100× the standard test dose, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the bacteria, and destroys it.” The company publishes no capture comparison of the two filters loaded with ordinary dust.

The published position is that industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it. The Validation page lists heavy dust loaded among the conditions of its pathogen testing, and each result belongs to the article that was tested under that condition. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Bacteria, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/bacteria/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Would a combination of technologies be more suitable than either product alone?

The filter and ventilation do different things, and the company's label states that the filter works alongside ventilation and cleaning, not in place of them.

A combination of measures is a matter for the building, and C-POLAR publishes no comparison of combined systems. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. Where C-POLAR's pages compare NanoFlashing™ with other filters, they compare it with conventional filters as a class and name no competitor's model. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a buyer compare service availability and replacement supply separately from performance?

Supply and service come from the maker and the seller of the product.

The published position is that every commercial NanoFlashing™ product is made by a manufacturing partner, in their facility, in their format. The Terms of Use name two stores, shop.cpolartechnologies.com and shopusa.cpolartechnologies.com, which are C-POLAR's own and carry their own terms. The manufacturing and distribution partners named on the published pages are Aero Pro, AQ Filter, BGE Indoor Air Quality Solutions, Olympic International and VOLZ Filters. The published Terms of Use state: “The manufacturer and seller of a finished product are responsible for its design, manufacture, labeling, instructions, claims, sale, and warranty, except for a responsibility C-POLAR expressly accepts in a Separate Agreement.” General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is a comparator's model still sold in the configuration used for the comparison?

The company's published comparison names the control as a conventional MERV-13 filter, and it names no competitor's model.

The published Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The smoke and ultrafine-particle reports named on the Validation page are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J. LMS Technologies' Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471 of 20 October 2025 measured single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J; LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, single-pass fractional efficiency in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a comparison account for the space needed to install each option?

The NanoFlashing™ Air Filter fits an existing filter track, and the published position is that it does not require retrofit.

A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. Dimensions for a finished product come from its maker. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a technology's broad theoretical advantage be separated from the actual model's measured advantage?

A measured advantage belongs to the filter that was measured.

A comparison means something only when both products are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. The published Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” C-POLAR publishes no comparison between filter sizes or between units. A rating applies to the filter that was tested, not to every product that carries the technology. General enquiries go to [email protected].

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

For a small apartment, is the premium feature useful enough to justify the added cost?

This site publishes no price, no service life and no running cost for a finished product.

This site publishes no shipping cost and no recommendation for a room size. Replacement is set by the pressure drop and the interval stated on the product’s own label. Every commercial NanoFlashing™ product is made by a manufacturing partner, in their facility, in their format, and a price and the terms attached to it come from the partner or the seller that makes the offer. The Terms of Use name two online stores, shop.cpolartechnologies.com and shopusa.cpolartechnologies.com, and state: “The store and every purchase from it are governed only by the terms presented there.” Those two stores are C-POLAR's own. The company names its manufacturing and distribution partners on the About page and the Air page: Aero Pro, AQ Filter, BGE Indoor Air Quality Solutions, Olympic International and VOLZ Filters. General enquiries go to [email protected]. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does the best choice change if the main objective is particle removal rather than a biological claim?

The particle rating and the statement about viruses, bacteria and fungal spores rest on different tests, and each is reported on its own.

ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured. Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, certifies a ten-pocket bag filter at ISO ePM1 70% under ISO 16890, with an A class energy rating, and LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, records MERV 15A under ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter. The published position is that industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it. Certificate No. 15.06.011 covers a ten-pocket bag filter, not a flat panel filter; a rating belongs to the construction that was tested. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is this a HEPA filter?

NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller, and cpolar.tech publishes no HEPA rating.

NanoFlashing™ is a permanent positive polarity engineered into filter media itself. It is a physical property of the filter. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. The ratings published on cpolar.tech are MERV 15A and ISO ePM1 70%, each on the pocket filter that was tested. LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, tested a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter under ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J and rated it MERV 15A. Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, certified a ten-pocket filter at ISO ePM1 70% under ISO 16890. Those ratings belong to the pocket filters that were tested, not to a flat panel filter for a home system. For a panel filter, LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, measured single-pass fractional efficiency on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; it is a laboratory result on that filter, not a HEPA test and not a result in a building.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 6, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is NanoFlashing just a HEPA filter with a charge on it?

NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller, and cpolar.tech publishes no HEPA rating.

NanoFlashing™ is a permanent positive polarity engineered into filter media itself. It is a physical property of the filter. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. The ratings published on cpolar.tech are MERV 15A and ISO ePM1 70%, each on the pocket filter that was tested. LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, tested a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter under ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J and rated it MERV 15A. Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, certified a ten-pocket filter at ISO ePM1 70% under ISO 16890. Those ratings belong to the pocket filters that were tested, not to a flat panel filter for a home system. For a panel filter, LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, measured single-pass fractional efficiency on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; it is a laboratory result on that filter, not a HEPA test and not a result in a building.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 6, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is a NanoFlashing filter better than a HEPA filter?

The company does not claim that a NanoFlashing™ filter is better than a HEPA filter, and it publishes no test comparing the two.

NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller, and cpolar.tech publishes no HEPA rating. A comparison means something only when both filters are measured at the same airflow and under the same standard. The ratings published on cpolar.tech are MERV 15A and ISO ePM1 70%, each on the pocket filter that was tested. LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, tested a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter under ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J and rated it MERV 15A. Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, certified a ten-pocket filter at ISO ePM1 70% under ISO 16890. Those ratings belong to the pocket filters that were tested, not to a flat panel filter for a home system. For a panel filter, LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, measured single-pass fractional efficiency on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct; it is a laboratory result on that filter, not a HEPA test and not a result in a building.

Source: C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 6, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; LMS Technologies, Report 6847, 5 November 2024, ASHRAE 52.2-2017 with Appendix J; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate 15.06.011, ISO 16890; LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is NanoFlashing the same as an ionizer, or an ionic air purifier that makes ozone?

No. The NanoFlashing™ Air Filter has no power supply or electrode, and it generates no ozone.

NanoFlashing™ is a permanent positive polarity engineered into filter media itself. It is a physical property of the filter. The polarity is a positive electric charge at rest. NanoFlashing™ attracts negatively charged particles through electrostatic attraction. In a forced-air system, the system's own fan moves air through the filter. The filter is passive. It draws no power, and it has no power supply, electrode, lamp or reservoir. It generates no ozone and emits nothing into the air passing through it. The air leaving the filter has had nothing added to it. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How is NanoFlashing™ actually different from, and is it worth paying more than, an ordinary MERV-13 filter from a hardware store?

The difference the company publishes is a positive charge that it states does not fade, compared in testing with the same filter media without it; this site publishes no price.

The Air page states: “Government agencies tell people to use a MERV-13 filter, but that rating is measured on a clean, brand-new filter.” The NanoFlashing™ page states: “Conventional electrostatic charges fade in service, dragging performance down with them.” It also states: “NanoFlashing™ does not fade.” NanoFlashing™ is a permanent positive polarity engineered into filter media itself. It is a physical property of the filter. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, compared a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter of Aeropro media with C-POLAR against the same media without it, single-pass in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct: the initial fractional efficiency with C-POLAR was higher at every particle size from 22 to 604 nanometres, for example 83.6% against 57.8% at 52 nanometres, and slightly lower at 16.5 nanometres; it is an initial laboratory result on clean media, not a result over a service life or in a building. The filter is intended to destroy the viruses, bacteria and fungal spores it captures. It destroys them on direct contact with the positive electric charge, by physical means, and only while the organism is captured by the positive electric charge. The Terms of Use state that the Site “does not sell products, accept orders, quote binding prices, or process payments.” They also name separate online stores, shop.cpolartechnologies.com and shopusa.cpolartechnologies.com, that are not part of the Site; a store and every purchase from it are governed only by the terms presented there. Those two stores are C-POLAR's own. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 1, https://cpolar.tech/terms/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.