Unfortunately, doubting these people’s stories is taboo online so I’m going to tread carefully. However, when only 1 unit out of 1800 apartments (presumably 2000-3000 total residents considering multi-bedroom units) is experiencing severe and dramatic symptoms, my first guess would not be the soil under the foundation. I would be looking for building materials or chemical spills in that specific apartment unit.
Also, I’m not suggesting that we discount this person’s story. Their symptoms are certainly very real in that they are suffering, but the selfie of the person wearing medical equipment in front of a mirror combined with measurements from consumer devices as evidence should be approached with caution. There is a relatively new phenomenon casually known as Munchausen by Internet where some patients are drawn to the increasing attention they can garner by sharing, and unfortunately exaggerating, their stories on the internet. These patients often post selfies of themselves wearing medical equipment, in doctor’s offices, or in hospital beds. More commonly, typical patients prefer not to be photographed with medical equipment or in medical facilities. Again, I’m not suggesting we disbelieve this person, but it’s important that we consider the bigger picture (1800 unit apartment complex, apparently only one case of severe symptoms?) before accepting a single person’s analysis of what is causing her issues.
Mistaken “sick building syndrome” diagnoses can actually be very detrimental to patients who mistake other illnesses as being caused by their buildings, as they hyperfocus on their presumed explanation to the exclusion of following more typical diagnostic work ups that would help them eliminate more common explanations for those symptoms.
Not to be indelicate, but the thing that reliably spikes my air monitor is passing gas. Would match up with the nausea and other symptoms. Not to mention the "earthquake" hallucination
That said, it's hard to argue with the measured heart rate. A 10 bpm drop then rise correlated with moving into and out of the apartment is pretty strong evidence of something. It just seems very unlikely it's from ground contamination.
Sure. 'Something'.
The kind of account this person provided is reminiscent of personal testimonials of individuals who live close to cellular towers. And so far, it is only her account. How do you know she's a credible, objective observer? How do you know she isn't experiencing psychosomatic symptoms? And now she's fixating on 500 gallons of something or other because of some passing reference in a report...Maybe there is something buried in there, so what? Who says that has anything to do with anything?
Also, this line struck me: "it’s an outbreak of new housing developments on toxic land and water with laissez-faire oversight". San Francisco and 'laissez-faire' don't really go together. You know, the city that will deny development license if the proposed building will cast an overly large shadow over a playground. Come on.
Is there something here? Who the heck knows, anything is possible. The fact that so many just want to take her word for it without an ounce of skepticism is a little disappointing.
If the VoC that's bothering her is heavier than air, it could be being blown upwards from the ground level and then settling back over the building and falling back down and finding its way back into her apartment somehow, like through the range hood, dryer exhaust, plumbing stacks, open windows, or just cracks due to poor craftsmanship.
If she was still at the site, I would recommend looking for what appears to be an exhaust vent of some kind that might be tied to the VOC barrier system and putting a sensor there and seeing if the readings correlate to the timeline of unusual readings in her home
Just like the placebo effect causes real, very significant healing effects, even a subconscious association with a place as ‘bad’ causes real, very significant detrimental effects that are externally measurable.
I'm _very_ aware of the placebo effect, very scientifically minded, etc. I have white coat syndrome and have had to do quite a few of those 24 hour blood pressure tests over the years to make sure I'm not developing the real thing.
I don't know enough about VOCs in this context, however, I do know radon problems fairly well and with radon gases released by radioactive decay underground find their way into peoples' basements.
From there, they don't stay in basements. If they did, the risk to humans would be more mild. Instead, the radon gases migrate upward in the building towards the attic exposing everyone in the living quarters along the way.
Attic design is critical to how the radon flows in a house. You could actually increase the amount of radon that flows into a house by having too much attic ventilation along the roof peak. The ideal way to minimize radon involves low-roofline ventilation of the attic combined with trying to seal the basement floor of cracks/holes/etc.
*If* VOCs travel like radon, it would actually make sense that the higher floors will be more affected.
Another thing that came to mind: there is a known effect with sound waves - where multiple different sources of sound may not be a problem source themselves (e.g. low level rumbling fans from large buildings) - but then where those sound waves intersect can cause a problem point that impacts biological life; it can be a single source of industrial noise pollution, multiple cases of whole towns getting sick because of it being traced back to the frequencies/vibrations given off by large fans - but what if some noises happen to triangulate to be a problem in your specific unit? It's not impossible.
Some people experience high blood pressure because of anxiety in a clinical setting.
An entirely mental process.
The only way to see what going on is by doing another Phase II ESA study. But those are expensive and you will need the approval of the owner which will be unlikely.
But the fact that it's new construction, and that the readings peaked at 3am would lead me to expect it's high-VOC construction materials, and the VOC's are accumulating while people have their windows closed at night and/or the HVAC system circulates less. I also wonder if she by any chance purchased a new memory foam mattress and/or pillows when she moved -- some people (like me) are horribly affected by the VOC's in them, even after many months.
Building on a previous Superfund site could be an entirely separate and coincidental issue here.
My experience with VOC's has also taught me, don't stick around and try to fight it -- just leave ASAP!! (or toss your mattress no matter how much you paid for it). And the fact that her doctors never suggested VOC's could be the culprit seems astonishingly negligent to me. I'm so sorry she had to endure these symptoms for months and months without anyone suggesting, hey go stay at a friend's for a few nights and see if it gets better.
I don’t disagree with what you are saying overall but you reference this “1 out of 1,800” point at least three times in your comment. It’s important to keep in mind that it’s not necessarily relevant as any number of people in those 1,800 units may or may not be experiencing a variety of issues related to this.
The gp has to prove a counter factual now: no one else had symptoms.
They can’t do that. Do you know the history of all the move outs of that complex? Do you doubt the owner is highly litigious?
In addition, some people are just more sensitive. They act like a form of early warning system. Does living there give you an increased 10% of lifetime cancer? It would be hard to prove.
And a final note: doesn’t everyone deserve a safe place to live that isn’t poisoning them? The sheer amount of naysaying in these comments is disappointing and reveals a profound lack of understanding of the science and a severely over constrained mindset: if it cannot be proven immediately by an individual without a budget and no resources, then it cannot be true.
In my opinion, that makes it completely plausible that a problem relating to that tank could be so localized that it will only affect one tenant.
I'm not saying her problem was due to the 500 gallon tank. All I'm saying is that if it is, then it is not unbelievable that it affected only one (or a small number) of tenants.
> The Santa Clara Square project encompasses approximately 93 acres
The challenge with these stories is that they rely on vague details to create an appearance of plausibility. The fact that a tank containing some substance exists somewhere in a 93-acre property would not normally be credible cause to believe that someone’s symptoms in a 3rd story apartment are the result of the soil.
Again, to emphasize: I am not doubting that this person is suffering real symptoms. I think it’s a mistake to focus on the soil or mysterious tanks in unknown location as the cause to the exclusion of other possible causes.
So you're saying that real patients don't take selfies with equipment on? What an odd thing to say. Like why would that somehow prove the validity of her story?
They recently lost thier operating permit and need to relocate in a year or so - so this is a real thing and not just the collective imagination of a Facebook group of local homeowners.
However, people report crazy symptoms from "the smell". Migraines, hives, etc. Not being able to sleep, having to rewash clothes because they think the dryer air intake made them stink.
I think the vast, vast majority of these symptoms and effects are people outraged that their very expensive home has an odour, only detectable outside, that they don't like. The stress of not getting thier way immediately leads them to these other health issues in my opinion. And it takes thier argument up a notch (prove they don't have a headache).
Anyway, my opinion is not popular. :)
I don't like the smell either and I'm glad they are moving the facility but it was just a bad smell.
So your neighbors were completely inline with feeling the way the do.
BTW, I went to school next to a mushroom farm. A big warehouse with giant mounds of manure. And yeah we felt all of that too during the warmest times of the school year. The school administrator and most parents tried to convince the students it was all in their head.
so kinda like the fervent supporters (most news outlets included) of lockdowns, pervasive mask-wearing, and long-covid (as if post-infection complications are something new and unique)? or the opposite faction defiantly anti-mask and anti-vaccine?
people exaggerate and then fall into a hole of argumentative sunk cost, where they then view their own reputation being on the line, so they double-down rather than back down. in the moment, we don't realize that it's actually not that costly to concede to exaggeration, that a matter of degree almost never bolsters an argument.
the curious part is not that, but that we've yet to solve this collecctive dilemma (reason vs. dignity) that's seemingly been with us since the dawn of time. in a private conversation, it's possible to recognize the dilemma and redirect the conversation to a more productive line of reasoning by just asking questions and unraveling contradictions with the respondent. 'giving face' is somewhat related, but isn't necessarily concerned with veracity and reason, only dignity, especially for the (perceived) higher class person. i've always liked the 'wisdom of crowds' concept because it could be exactly this collective dignity-preserving redirection, but it defies power and expertise, so doesn't get enough merit and employment.
Her taking a photo wearing medical equipment is extremely important. It would be normal to include it in the story. Also, people post their lives on social media as part of their journey. Being extremely sick would certainly be part of her journey.
Why is a photo of her wearing medical equipment extremely important? All the photo is documenting is that she wore medical equipment for some reason at some point in her life.
This is very much https://www.gwern.net/Littlewood
In addition, this woman has, at least, a full arm sleeve tattoo.
Tattoo inks are NOT FDA certified and the health side effects are unstudied and unknown.
Yeah, most people don't have a reaction, but it's highly probable that some do and she may simply be one of the unlucky ones.
There is poison that kills you and then there’s poison that makes your life 1% worse. Most people don’t notice or can’t get a deterministic diagnosis, a small number of people are disproportionally effected.
This is where we are in many places medically. The big problems are easy, the small problems are hard.
AMD, Hitachi, Applied Materials
Again, not doubting her story. I very much think her problem needs to be addressed. But, it's not just an "evil rental company" problem, these huge tech companies directly across the street from this waste had to have known about this too.
Also in the area is the "MEW plume". When I asked realtors about it while looking for real estate in the area they all claimed to know nothing about it - despite being locals and there being land development rules requiring that top soil be carted away to be treated.
So many people/orgs are tacitly working together to ignore the problem since no one wants to be inconvenienced or left holding the bag.
There are of course drawbacks with consumer devices compared to medical equipment, but there are also a lot of medical issues that come and go, possibly with time of day effects or specific triggers. Using only a few brief snapshots that come from official doctor visits to draw any conclusion is a huge drawback of much of modern medicine, and biomedical research is slowly trending towards addressing this.
If one is careful in buying high quality consumer devices and doing some sanity checks with their data collection process I feel it can already be informative. It can be a great screener and guide people towards what type of specialist they should see.
For some tests there are "take home" medical versions that can get a more official (albeit still much briefer than personal equipment) dataset. However it can often be difficult to get a doctor to order based on vague symptoms, and it is non-ideal for patients to go on such a fishing expedition through official channels, especially the way medical billing/insurance works in the US.
I get there is concern about patients reading into the data too much, and yes there will be some people with psychiatric problems that could be enabled. But I think the benefits far outweigh the costs. In addition to early detection of issues in healthy people, it would also have a lot of upside for people with inexplicable chronic illness.
Yes people like that are vulnerable and will cling to things, but guess what - giving them a shitty label like Fibromyalgia only drives them to alternative medicine scams and toxic internet forums. It's human nature to look for alternatives when something has failed, and so why not at least channel that in to something potentially productive? In some cases they might even find a real diagnosis, but in general it could lead to actual research on these very poorly defined diseases.
I don't know anything about sick building syndrome so can't really comment on that, but assuming the person didn't lie that would be remarkably coincidental timing with the move in and move out dates. Perhaps the toxin they identified is irrelevant, but there sure does seem to be something odd going on while they lived in that apartment.
They also are clinically fine again now, so even if it was some weird psychological thing, moving out of the building fixed the problem and therefore the data lead her to the right "treatment".
I guess my point is that maybe you're right that this wasn't sick building syndrome, and maybe that makes this article a net negative, because it could lead others to look for that where it isn't. But another takeaway from the article is just the more abstract story about investigating your problems so that you're more equipped to handle them. There can be non-medical/low risk interventions or mitigating strategies, and even in this instance it did also drive her towards relevant doctors (although it's impossible to say whether she sought out legitimate doctors since there is probably a higher ratio of quacks specializing in environmental toxins)
> I reached out to environmental attorneys. It quickly became an issue that my lease agreement included litigation and class action waivers.
This bullshit needs to stop.
I would guess that the real issue is that it would be difficult to prove that the leasing company was aware of the issues, or even that the environmental issues are the cause of this person’s problems.
The topic of what has come to be known as “sick building syndrome” is a thorny legal issue because many times it’s not easy to prove that the building is causing the person’s problem. Most commonly, the issue is that the building is only triggering issues for a single person, while others in the same building are fine. It’s also difficult to separate out the psychosomatic complaints from people who believe their issues are from the building when they might actually be from something else. Doubting these patients publicly is very taboo, but medically it’s actually not uncommon for this to happen.
I think it's specifically problematic that these terms are being put into all sorts of legal documents (lease agreements, employment agreements, etc.) as standard boilerplate.
What you stated is correct, but it almost doesn't matter when the terms end up achieving the goals of the more powerful party, which is to discourage litigation, even in cases where it might be warranted.
You shouldn't be allowed to pretend, in a legal document, that your counterparty isn't allowed to sue you for wrongdoing. That's basically fraud.
Environmental pollution and human poisoning are hardly allowed on consent basis.
How can that be legal?
I mean a legal system which allows people to trick and force people into not being able to protect themself if they are scammed is completely broken IMHO.
Was the writer actually tricked, as in did someone misrepresent the contents of the lease agreement?
I didn't notice an allegation along those lines in the article.
That could be fraud if the contract was miss-represented in some way, although some contracts say you are agreeing to only what is written and no verbal discussions are part of the agreement.
It then becomes a fairly important legal concept that when you sign an agreement, that you understand and knowingly enter into the terms outlined into that agreement.
As a way overly simplistic example, if I sell a widget for $100, some of that price might be to cover potential litigation and the like. However, if I find a customer who's willing to take the risk and agree to not sue me for some problem with the product, that agreement might be worth $75 to me. If all my competitors start selling competing widgets with a template that waives that right to litigate, I might have to follow along, because enough customers don't want to buy the $100 widgets and realize the price difference is a protection for them.
Consumers could presumably band together and elect lawmakers that pass a minimum standard that no one can enter into a contract that doesn't allow disputes to be resolved via the courts, but then you don't get to complain when widgets get more expensive, or that there are other terms in the contract that aren't agreeable.
If it wasn't a concept that when you enter into an agreement and sign those terms, that you actually understand and agree to those terms, I can't even predict what the chaos would look like.
People believe in their own exceptionalism and have a strange perspective on freedom. That’s the toolbox that companies use to divide and conquer. It was particularly hilarious back a few years ago when major tech companies were colluding to suppress salaries and blacklist employees through “no poaching” agreements.
The reaction to this sort of complaint is “just move somewhere else” or “that may be a problem for some ditz like you, but I am a 10x genius”.
Of course, there is always the possibility that her unit was somehow special, but it's incredibly unlikely. Statements like "how would they know I was looking into it" and " and "why would they offer me to break the lease with no penalty" further strengthen the mental health angle.
This isn't to make fun or diminish the author's concerns. It's just that one root cause is much much more likely and really should be investigated first. I hope she has someone caring in her life to look into that angle.
Edit: happy to burn some karma on this in case this helps someone get help for a loved one. Mental health issues are excruciatingly hard to deal with and I have first hand experience. It sucks when you realize that to help someone you have to go against their wishes.
This one seems pretty clear cut. The landlord wishing that she would go away is a conspiracy? She talked about this for weeks and is surprised someone thought she may have looked at the environmental reports? And lastly, everyone in the neighboring units is totally fine.
And by the way, I am not saying "she is crazy". I am saying "look into both possibilities". I am happy to see that the comment at the top with the most votes is saying the exact same thing.
I ended up caulking the entire apartment with clear caulk and sealing any air gaps. Because the hi-rise was pressurized like most hi-rises, I concluded somehow this was drawing up smells from grease traps etc. Of course I could never prove it.
My conclusion is that most of these buildings are so cheaply and poorly made that I will never again rent a unit like this. Too bad I spent 30k on the lease and hardly ever stayed there. So the woman's experience seems pretty plausible to me.
I would be cautious of taking actions like these as it can have some pretty bad knock on effects. I'm on the board of my condo corporation for a high rise in Canada and we have seen topics like this come up from time to time.
To help control odour between units, the air handling system in our building is designed to draw air into the hallways, from the hallways to the units, to outside. The idea of routing airflow like this is to try and prevent smell transfer between units, but the airflow also has a purpose to help control moisture buildup, which IIRC gets worse if there is no airflow, and can lead to mold. So we discourage blocking the airflow from the way the building was designed, and property management has advised us in other buildings this had been observed to lead to severe moisture problems.
And we have had issue pop up with trash smell and the like. Where that's happened to us is two causes, there is a sort of air damper on the garbage chute, and it's gotten jammed on us IIRC. The other is our garbage room opens to take the bins out, and if the doors are left open for an extended period and the wind hits the building right it can draw air through the garbage room and through the chute. This can also occur when folks leave their trash blocking the chute door open allowing more air to flow between the chute and hallways.
Stuff like that can be hard to figure out, because if the garbage room is left open every day, it doesn't always happen due to the wind or possibly other factors.
The third one we get sometimes is smoking smells, which is usually caused by a smoker not wanting to use their balcony in winter, so instead they go into the stairwells. We traced one of those across more than 20 floors once. It can be difficult to trace those ones, so it comes with a lot of sending broadcast messages and work to trace down.
I get not all property managers are super helpful, but if they get a few reports from different individuals and can link it to some action like having the garbage room open can hopefully have them solve the real problem.
So, you get a datapoint that’s better, but what do you do with it?
Indoor VOCs can be caused by numerous common sources. Some of these would be common in a new development:
- Paints/Coatings
- Flooring
- Furniture
- Cleaners & Disinfectants
Even though she states "I also noticed the tVOCs seemed to rise and fall at different times of the day when I was having the worst symptoms", this can be affected by things such as the rise and fall of the temperature in the indoor space, or even whether something as seemingly benign as candles are lit.
I have no say in this either way, as it would require testing of other similar units and finding out if there are any specific VOC sources in her individual unit (did a room get painted recently)?
When dealing with indoor VOC levels, it can get tricky.
She got sick when she moved in? What new furniture did she buy?
That's a good point. The article dwells on the remediations done to the site that admittedly may not be effective, but didn't mention furniture in the unit. It could be her couch or a cleaner she's using.
Such a site would need to be either hosted offshore, or have deep pockets to protect against defamation lawsuits and other litigation. It would also need to have a great process for removing false positives and false negatives. What process would that be, though? It would have to involve actual testing by trusted agencies, I think.
I can contribute if you or someone can help navigate the documents.
These agencies should not be concerned with anything other than facts and any attempt to interfere with them (as in balancing business friendliness with facts) should be considered a serious crime against the safety of the population.
All of these actions can be considered crimes against the safety of populations.
Just from this year:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/chinese-of...
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/06/08/8724198...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/europe/europe-russia-vaccines...
https://www.bbc.com/news/55800921
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-52088167
They can’t be trusted to just stick to the facts.
A new Erin Brockovich, it seems. I can't help but recall axiom that if your focus is looking for trouble, you're certain to find it.
The story would have more credibility if there were more illnesses, then it wouldn't smack of resume padding.
I can write something about it if there's any interest.
(https://www.airgradient.com/blog/2020/08/25/the-airgradient-...)
The linked DIY instructions give you a basic board with PM 2.5 particles, temp, humidity, and CO2. It is built on a Wemos D1 mini.
The founder (Achim) is very helpful.
If you wanted to use these plans to get started (including the software to power the Wemos), then buy whatever additional sensors you might like to add, it should be fairly simple.
That would be great.
https://sigrok.org/ can log data from basic CO2 monitors, maybe it could be extended to support the sensors you mentioned.
What I found surprised but pleased me: The CO2 levels at my desk are quite low, spike at night when HVAC is off (when the building is empty), but generally during daytime are about the same as being at home with windows open in a suburban area.
Granted, it's been more than a year since I've sat at my desk... But still, it was nice to know.
I can't speak to how well it is calibrated since you would need other devices to compare with.
I feel like the author is really jumping the gun here in identifying the source of pollutants by not seeking to consider the fact that new apartments are loaded with freshly off-gassing materials.
The other thing that should have been mentioned is more about their vitals prior to moving in. How confident was she in her baseline because it could be a preexisting condition that became very exacerbated.
Edit: But that said, my opinion of the Irvine company is extremely low. I’d not be the least bit surprised if they willfully cut every corner they could. Either with remediation or materials in the apartment. And pollutants do pool overnight but near freeways they are typically the worst in the dawn hours. There would be less air exchange in the apartment, leading to a buildup from an external or internal source.
Building are complex structures with numerous pathways and extensive air flow channels that harmful chemicals could pass through or get blown.
Often, airflow equipment is in the basement or first floor, blowing air throughout a building.
The best way to handle this is to 1) stop the pseudo-scientific babble, and 2) perform scientific measurements of the air quality by qualified professionals. From the article, it looks like she is doing her best to quantify her health issues and to get scientific help. What’s wrong with that?
I think it’s commendable that the author is trying to quantify her health issues, but I also don’t think she makes a very strong case that the cause is toxic waste in the ground as opposed to some other issue.
It is irresponsible in my opinion for her to write an article titled “I thought I was dying: My apartment was built on toxic waste” without more concrete evidence. If she is wrong, this could cause undue panic and suffering for other residents in the area, as well as monetary damages to the building’s owner.
Of course there is also the possibility that she is right, too. But given the severity of her symptoms, and the number of residents in the complex, I would expect to see more people showing up at local hospitals with similar issues. I think the correct course of action for a person in this situation would basically be to report the issue to local health authorities and the building’s management, and move out as soon as possible.
I sent the article to a friend who’s a hydrogeologist and environmental remediation consultant. Basically, the guy that cleanup companies send to assess these sites, take samples, and make remediation plans. His hot take:
“Based on the info in the article alone I’d be very surprised if soil or groundwater VOCs were getting into her unit in concentrations high enough to cause acute health effects. Sounds like there’s a vapor venting system installed which in my experience alleviates all indoor air concerns. It could be that it exhausts near her window or something and concentrates in her apartment, but that would be a design/architectural issue more than an environmental issue per se. My initial suspicion would be that she bought cheap furniture or there’s cheap carpets or something that are offgassing VOCs.”
A quick read from a single expert isn’t enough to draw conclusions, but I do wish the paper had bothered to seek that kind of input before publishing.
Whatever the cause of this person’s symptoms may be, inadequate environmental remediation is a very real problem that deserves our concern. I wish the comments in this thread focused more on that. Instead the primary debate is whether a single person with apparently serious symptoms but no expertise, resources, or authority made the right technical call after being ignored by the people with all the expertise, resources, and authority. IMO that is the real story here: a person bought (a) furnishing for (b) a condo on a plot of (c) remediated land, experienced a health crisis, and the relevant parties (that she’s paying rent and taxes to!) all seem to have ghosted her instead of investigating which of those 3 things was the problem. After an experience like that, how could you blame her for doing her best to collect evidence and draw her own conclusions?
Even if the cause she identified is wrong, it’s not imagined. This isn’t “cancer from cell towers” or “migraines from wind turbines”. You just won’t read an article from the victims of industrial pollution in Bayview/Hunter’s Point.
That's weird, though "copper" could just be from the pipes, and it's probably unrelated to VOCs. The complex should be on city water, and all the pipes are new.
That sounds awfully like the way that ordinary houses are constructed, especially anywhere with (naturally occurring!) radium in or under the soil. When one builds a house with a slab foundation, one first builds a capillary break (a bunch of rocks with no fines, perhaps — this is an air-permeable layer), then applies a vapor barrier (polyethylene sheets), then pours the slab directly on the vapor barrier. The only thing special about sub slab venting is a pipe from the capillary break to the roof that may or may not be fan assisted. The goal isn’t so much to remove gas from under the slab as to reduce the pressure under the slab below the pressure above the slab such that gas doesn’t intrude.
All of this except the pipe is done regardless of soil gas concerns — water vapor coming through the slab destroys floor coverings.
I know basically nothing about commercial construction, and I could easily believe that vapor barriers are optional under parking lots.
Given that the VOCs in question are easily measurable in real time with a cheap sensor, it could be interesting to measure the VOCs at the lowest level of the parking lot over time. Some parking lots have CO (or CO2?) sensors that control exhaust fans. If there is less car activity at 3am, the fans could turn off, and that could have any number of effects.
(Also, the author doesn’t seem to have tried to distinguish between gasses coming from the building and gasses coming from under or outside the building. There is no actual evidence I saw in the article that the problem is a problem with the site. Heck, a building air intake being contaminated by gasses from the parking lot could introduce a fair amount of CO and NOx even if the levels were too low to set off a CO alarm. Builders mess up the airflow in buildings all the time.
Sadly, NOx sensors do not appear to be available at comparable prices to tVOC and CO sensors.
When you’re sick, a lot of times your home is your safe place. You go home and crawl in bed and try to feel better. Imagine your safe place to feel better is causing you to become even sicker.
https://www.cpmlegal.com/news-Hunters-Point-Shipyard-homeown...
[1] https://gispub.epa.gov/arcgis/rest/services/OEI/FRS_INTEREST...
Any Bay Area native will tell you living near the Bay is a bad idea. Unfortunately this is where the poor typically live.
