|Air purifiers vary in performance, including toxic gas removal (deodorization) efficiency and noise level|
Air purifiers vary in performance, including toxic gas removal (deodorization) efficiency and noise level
- Filter replacement cost and electricity rate should also be considered in making a product choice -
The demand for air purifiers is increasing as fine dust advisories are issued frequently and consumers are becoming more concerned about indoor air quality.
Accordingly, the Korea Consumer Agency (President Lee, Hee-sook) conducted test and inspection on the coverage area (fine dust removal capacity), toxic gas removal (deodorization) efficiency, noise, and safety of nine different air purifiers* from the nine most popular brands among consumers in order to provide consumers with objective quality comparison information.
*Samsung Electronics (AX40R3030WMD), Youmi (AC-M4-AA), AKSND (FP-J40K-W), Dayou Winia (EPA10C0XEW), Winix (AZSE430-IWK), Coway (AP-1019E), Cuckoo Homesys (AC-12XP20FH), LG Electronics (AS122VDS), SK Magic (ACL-120Z0SKGR)
The result of a test on the toxic gas removal (deodorization) efficiency and noise showed that there were differences among the products tested. In addition, the highest filter replacement cost was 3.1 times the lowest one, and the highest annual electricity rate was 1.9 times the lowest. And all of the tested products were found to have no faults in safety, including electric shocks and electric leakages, and harmful substances in filters*, etc.
*The test was conducted in collaboration with the Ministry of Environment.
□ All of the tested products were found to meet the standard for the coverage area of an airpurifier(fine dust removal capacity).
As a result of the test on the 0.3㎛-sized fine dust removal capacity based on the coverage area* indicated on the products, all of the tested products were found to meet the standard (more than 90% of the indicated level). And the coverage area varied from 28.8㎡ to 42.5㎡ among the tested products.
The room area which an air purifier will cover must be indicated on the product so that consumers can choose an air purifier with the coverage capacity that is right for his/her home and needs. (Regulations for Operation of Efficiency Management Machinery, Equipment, or Materials under Article 15 of the ‘Energy Use Rationalization Act’)
□ Four products were evaluated to have relatively good toxic gas removal(deodorization) efficiencies.
As a result of the test on the toxic gas (formaldehyde, toluene, ammonia, acetaldehyde, and acetic acid) removal efficiencies of the products, four of the tested products* were evaluated as relatively‘good.’
*Samsung (AX40R3030WMD), Xiaomi (AC-M4-AA), Coway (AP-1019E), LG (AS122VDS)
□ Seven products were rated relatively good in noise level testing.
At maximum wind volume, seven products* produced relatively low levels of noise, and were therefore rated ‘good’in the noise testing.
*Samsung (AX40R3030WMD), Sharp (FP-J40K-W), Winia (EPA10C0XEW), Winix (AZSE430-IWK), Coway (AP-1019E), Cuckoo (AC-12XP20FH), LG (AS122VDS)
□ All of the tested products were found to meet relevant safety and labeling standards.
(Safety) As as result of the test on electrical safety, including protection against electric shocks and eletric leakages, and ozone production, all of the tested products were found to meet the requirements of the relevant standards* for the products.
*Household and Similar Electrical Appliances - Safety - Part 2-65: Particular requirements for air cleaning appliances (Electrical Appliances and Consumer Products Safety Control Act)
(Labelling) As a result of checking the labels for energy consumption, energy efficiency rating, etc., all of the products tested were found to meet the requirements of the relevant standards*.
*Household and similar Electrical Appliances - Safety - Part 2-65: Particular requirements for air cleaning appliances (‘Electrical Appliances and Consumer Products Safety Control Act’), Regulation for Operation of Efficiency Management Machinery, Equipment, or Materials (‘Energy Use Rationalization Act’), Labelling Standards for the Broadcasting Communication Equipment Conformity Assessment and Methods (‘Radio Waves Act’)
□ No hazardous chemical substances were detected in all of the filters of the tested products.
As a result of the analysis of hazardous chemical substances (CMIT, MIT, OIT)* in air purifier filters conducted in collaboration with the Ministry of Environment, those substances were not detected in all of the tested products.
*The Ministry of Environment will designate CMIT, MIT and OIT as substances prohibited under the Safety Control Act of Household Chemicals and Biocidal Products so that the chemical substances cannot be used to disinfect, sterilize, and preserve air purifier filters.
The most expensive filter replacement cost was 3.1 times the cheapest one, and the highest electricity cost was 1.9 times the lowest.
(Filter replacement cost) When replaced after one year of use, Winia (EPA10C0XEW)’s filter replacement cost was the cheapest at 35,000 won, and Xiaomi (AC-M4-AA)’s filters, which have the shortest filter replacement cycles*, were the most expensive at 110,000 won when replaced twice a year.
*Filter replacement cycles are determined autonomously by businesses. In the case of Sharp (FP-J40K-W), its user manual indicates that filters should be replaced every 10 years, and the cost for filter replacement is 90,000 won.
(Electricity cost*) As for the annual electricity cost, Cuckoo (AC-12XP20FH) ranked the cheapest at 9,000 won, and Samsung (AX40R3030WMD) was the most expensive at 17,000 won.
*Based on 7.2 hours/day and 160 won per kWh (Regulation for Operation of Efficiency Management Machinery, Equipment, or Materials)
Going forward, the KCA will help consumers make informed choices by providing safety and quality comparison information about products that are closely related to consumers’ everyday life.
|Next||CDSC finds that LG Electronics is liable to “pay 100,000 won to each petitioner for compensation” in the review of a clothes dryer-related collective dispute.|
|Prev||2019 consumer orientation level of the Korean service market scored 77.6 points in consumer evaluation, which slightly decreased compared to 2017.|