Organic Produce Wholesaler - Netherlands

Download Case Study PDF

AiroCidePPT™–PerishablesPreservationTechnology

AiroCidePPT™containsthesameNASA-developedtechnologythatisusedin a varietyofAiroCideproductlines. In additiontoservingthefloral andperishablepreservationandfoodsafetyindustrytheAiroCide™technologyhas beendevelopedtokill/remove/eliminateairbornepathogenicandnon-pathogenicmicroorganismsin vegetativeandsporestates(bacteria, mold& fungi, virusesanddustmites), allergens, odorsandharmfulvolatileorganiccompounds(VOC’s) in airin a varietyofcommercial, government, andresidentialmarketapplicationsincludingthemedical healthcareindustry(AiroCideislistedas anFDA ClassII Medical Device).

Summary:

A clinical study of the AiroCidePPT™airborne pathogen killing technology was conducted in a refrigerated cooler inside a large warehouse of a very large organic produce wholesaler located in Holland, to determine if the AiroCidetechnology would reduce the amount of airborne mold present. Results inside the cooler were compared to the outer warehouse area where no AiroCidePPT™units were used.

The three (3) AiroCidePPT™ACS-50 systems utilized for the study reduced the amount of airborne fungi inside the cooler by an average of 96.8%in 72 hours. At this point the units were turned off. Subsequently, after 48 hours, the amount of airborne mold inside the cooler showed a 89.5%increase. These killing results are exceptional taking into account the very high contamination level of the testing area with an initial CFU counting (baseline) well over the 500 mold colonies.

Facility

Theorganic produce cooler where the AiroCidePPT™test took place is approximately 648 m³in volume. The subject cooler is part of a very large refrigerated storage facility for organic perishable produce. The temperature in the cooler is keptat 4ºC at all times. In order to maintain such temperature the cooler is equipped with an airtight door, which is only opened when accessing is necessary. The test cooler is used for storage of citrus, both clean and contaminated, or new and old produce placed next to each other.

Protocol:

The test period consisted of five (5) consecutive days of air sampling. A baseline and an “active off”readings, with no AiroCidePPT™systems operating were conducted at the start and at the end for comparison to the “active on”test. The “active on”samples taken inside the cooler were averaged to determine the overall mold count in the cooler.

On day #1 of testing (September 30, 2005) two (2) air samples were taken inside the produce cooler and one (1) sample was taken in the main warehouse for comparison.

On day #2 of testing (October 3, 2005) the same three (3) samples above were taken after three (3) AiroCidePPT™systems ACS-50 were operating in the cooler for 72 hours.

On day #3 of testing (October 5, 2005) the same three (3) samples above were taken after three (3) AiroCidePPT™systems ACS-50 were inoperative in the cooler for 48 hours.

Air samples were taken with an Aerotech6®air sampler on 9 x 90mm plastic petridishes of SabouraudCloranfenicolAgar (SAB) for fungal growth, in accordance with the general standard testing protocols and procedures. All airborne mold in this study were measured in colony forming units (CFU) per cubic meter of air. The results and total counts were provided by a local independent laboratory specifically chosen by the customer.

Results

The table and graphic below show airborne mold reduction inside the cooler of 96.81%in 72 hours against a subsequent increaseof 89.50%inside the cooler after 48 hours of no AiroCidePPT™use. This dramatic decrease is particularly significant considering the very high level of contamination in the cooler and the very short duration of the test.

It is also important to pay attention to airborne levels outsidethe cooler which decreased by 26% after the first 3 (days) due to the weekend and very low activity in the warehouse and increasedby a 25% after five (5) days when the activity was restored at the beginning ofthe week.Note that although the amount of CFU’scounts on the lab report were well above 500, only 500 CFUswere taken as baseline for calculation purposes. Therefore, it is correct to say that the actual reduction is of 99.999%.

Download Case Study PDF