Has it been tested in a real building?
Last reviewed: .
Has it been tested in a real building?
The laboratory testing concerns the material and the filter, and the Validation page also reports measurements in four buildings where NanoFlashing™ was installed.
At a public hospital in Vancouver, over twelve months from July 2023 to July 2024, two identical towers were compared, one on conventional medical grade filters and one on NanoFlashing™. At a financial landmark in London, over six months from March 2024 to September 2024; at a major international airport in the United States, over one month in August 2025; and at a public university in Melbourne, over one month in October 2024, measurements were made before and after the air handling unit filters were changed to NanoFlashing™. The Validation page says these were independently measured with MicronView's 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System. These are measurements taken at working sites, not laboratory tests. Each is one building over one period, and it is not a result for another building. The company publishes no monitoring method and no acceptance threshold. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The label for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter states: “Results in a building depend on the system, the airflow, and how well the filter fits its track.”
Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.
Reviewed on .
Sources
- C-POLAR — Validation
- C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3
- NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label