6 ms·

NASA found the 18 best plants for naturally filtering the air in your home

21 points by mrafiee 1y ago

Proofread0592 1y ago
1. Dwarf Date Palm 2. Boston Fern 3. Kimberly Queen Fern 4. Spider Plant 5. Chinese Evergreen 6. Bamboo Palm 7. Weeping Fig 8. Devil's Ivy 9. Flamingo Lily 10. Lilyturf 11. Broadleaf Lady Palm 12. Barberton Daisy 13. Cornstalk Dracena 14. English Ivy 15. Varigated Snake Plant 16. Red-Edged Dracaena 17. Peace Lily 18. Florist's Chrysanthemum
- 0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
  Needs to be ordered by pet safe and hardest to kill.
- bodhi_mind 1y ago
  Devils ivy, aka Pothos. I just got on a kick and bought 7 varieties. Not sure what attracted me to them but it’s nice to have some green in my life.
michaelbuckbee 1y ago
I've always found this more aspirational than helpful, as my back-of-the-napkin math puts the number of plants needed to make an impact on air quality at some ludicrous number.
- maerF0x0 1y ago
  please share the math... or the napkin.
  - greenavocado 1y ago
    The research: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930073077 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930073077
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
  - Selkirk 1y ago
    Not sure about other chemicals, but carbon seems particularly hopeless. Plants produce CO2 as they respirate and consume it as they photosynthesize. So rather than think in terms of number of plants, think in terms of the weight of the plants (not the dirt). Carbon sequestration is going to have to add net weight to the plants. A human produces 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day. So, how many pounds per day will your crop of carbon scrubbing plants have to increase by in order to sequester that carbon? How much green material by weight do you need to achieve that rate of growth?
    - ProllyInfamous 1y ago
      This represents a nuanced understanding of most plants' carbon fixation cycles — mass captures CO2 while simple existance does not — that is technically correct. In the application of having just a few indoor plants, I do think the air quality is fresher (just beyond CO2 levels; which indoors the effect is nil).
mbonnet 1y ago
Worth noting that you need hundreds of plants in a small room for any actually useful magnitude of effect.
- maerF0x0 1y ago
  Is there another tool that is more pragmatic? Like a hepa air filter device or something?
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    Is there another tool that is more pragmatic? Like a hepa air filter device or something? Activated carbon. These NASA plants absorb VOCs. Same as activated carbon. But you need a lot of it. Like several KGs of it in one air filter. The mainstream air filters you buy usually have 100-200g of it only. Need 5 - 25kg ideally.
  - ProllyInfamous 1y ago
    I just installed an ERV (Energy Recovery Vent) into my 1970-built bedroom — it has drastically increased the air quality (I have it set to exchange the entire house volume 8x per day). It is as quiet as the ceiling fan, nowhere near as loud as a dehumidifier (which pair well, together, for overall room/house comfort). I also leave the central HVAC fan `ON` 24/7. There is a HVAC cost because the ERV is only ~60-75% efficient (at recovering heat/humidity with external supply air exchange), depending on the cfm/setting... but it gets rid of every stink, and you smell the morning dew and approaching thunderstorms. As is recommended, I leave mine on 24/7 — it has a boost mode which can be activated with switches wired anywhere else (e.g. bathroom, for during showers)... I plan to use a wallswitch timer for this temporary airflow increase, because the 24/7 setting I've set is 70% efficient, and at MAX it drops to only 60% energy recover. The Panasonic unit I installed was ~$600, plus an additional $100 in venting. Took me about eight hours to DIY install (but I have decades of blue collar electric under my belt and am familiar with house). This would have probably been bid out ~$2500 if a company were doing it, on a simple install (i.e. <25ft ducting to non-roof penetration). I think either DIY or Pro expense would be worth it, particularly if your air is stale / litter box / subtropical humidity. Modern building codes require HRVs/ERVs in most new construction, so if your building is even just a couple decades older, ERVs are worth looking in to (HRV if you live in desert climates). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation#Fixed_plate_heat_exchanger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation#Fixe... [example] https://www.homedepot.com/p/Panasonic-WhisperComfort-60-20-50-CFM-Ceiling-Wall-Energy-Recovery-Ventilator-Bathroom-Exhaust-Fan-for-Balanced-Ventilation-FV-06VE1/331411540 https://www.homedepot.com/p/Panasonic-WhisperComfort-60-20-5... [see also] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_air_quality#Improvement_measures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_air_quality#Improvement...
boffinAudio 1y ago
I'm unsure about the Weeping Figs' inclusion in the list, although I do expect NASA has considered this - but, don't Weeping Figs contain lactose, which becomes air born when dried into a dust, and isn't anaphylactic shock a potential consequence of lactose dust inhalation? Or is it that the impact of Weeping Figs lactose content is minimal when compared to the benefits of the plant, overall - perhaps the lactose is why it is able to filter air so well, anyway? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8603279/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8603279/

21 points by mrafiee 1y ago

1. Dwarf Date Palm 2. Boston Fern 3. Kimberly Queen Fern 4. Spider Plant 5. Chinese Evergreen 6. Bamboo Palm 7. Weeping Fig 8. Devil's Ivy 9. Flamingo Lily 10. Lilyturf 11. Broadleaf Lady Palm 12. Barberton Daisy 13. Cornstalk Dracena 14. English Ivy 15. Varigated Snake Plant 16. Red-Edged Dracaena 17. Peace Lily 18. Florist's Chrysanthemum

0cf8612b2e1e 1y ago
Needs to be ordered by pet safe and hardest to kill.
bodhi_mind 1y ago
Devils ivy, aka Pothos. I just got on a kick and bought 7 varieties. Not sure what attracted me to them but it’s nice to have some green in my life.

michaelbuckbee 1y ago

I've always found this more aspirational than helpful, as my back-of-the-napkin math puts the number of plants needed to make an impact on air quality at some ludicrous number.

maerF0x0 1y ago
please share the math... or the napkin.
- greenavocado 1y ago
  The research: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930073077 https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930073077
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
- Selkirk 1y ago
  Not sure about other chemicals, but carbon seems particularly hopeless. Plants produce CO2 as they respirate and consume it as they photosynthesize. So rather than think in terms of number of plants, think in terms of the weight of the plants (not the dirt). Carbon sequestration is going to have to add net weight to the plants. A human produces 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day. So, how many pounds per day will your crop of carbon scrubbing plants have to increase by in order to sequester that carbon? How much green material by weight do you need to achieve that rate of growth?
  - ProllyInfamous 1y ago
    This represents a nuanced understanding of most plants' carbon fixation cycles — mass captures CO2 while simple existance does not — that is technically correct. In the application of having just a few indoor plants, I do think the air quality is fresher (just beyond CO2 levels; which indoors the effect is nil).

mbonnet 1y ago

Worth noting that you need hundreds of plants in a small room for any actually useful magnitude of effect.

maerF0x0 1y ago
Is there another tool that is more pragmatic? Like a hepa air filter device or something?
- aurareturn 1y ago
  Is there another tool that is more pragmatic? Like a hepa air filter device or something? Activated carbon. These NASA plants absorb VOCs. Same as activated carbon. But you need a lot of it. Like several KGs of it in one air filter. The mainstream air filters you buy usually have 100-200g of it only. Need 5 - 25kg ideally.
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago
  I just installed an ERV (Energy Recovery Vent) into my 1970-built bedroom — it has drastically increased the air quality (I have it set to exchange the entire house volume 8x per day). It is as quiet as the ceiling fan, nowhere near as loud as a dehumidifier (which pair well, together, for overall room/house comfort). I also leave the central HVAC fan `ON` 24/7. There is a HVAC cost because the ERV is only ~60-75% efficient (at recovering heat/humidity with external supply air exchange), depending on the cfm/setting... but it gets rid of every stink, and you smell the morning dew and approaching thunderstorms. As is recommended, I leave mine on 24/7 — it has a boost mode which can be activated with switches wired anywhere else (e.g. bathroom, for during showers)... I plan to use a wallswitch timer for this temporary airflow increase, because the 24/7 setting I've set is 70% efficient, and at MAX it drops to only 60% energy recover. The Panasonic unit I installed was ~$600, plus an additional $100 in venting. Took me about eight hours to DIY install (but I have decades of blue collar electric under my belt and am familiar with house). This would have probably been bid out ~$2500 if a company were doing it, on a simple install (i.e. <25ft ducting to non-roof penetration). I think either DIY or Pro expense would be worth it, particularly if your air is stale / litter box / subtropical humidity. Modern building codes require HRVs/ERVs in most new construction, so if your building is even just a couple decades older, ERVs are worth looking in to (HRV if you live in desert climates). [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation#Fixed_plate_heat_exchanger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_recovery_ventilation#Fixe... [example] https://www.homedepot.com/p/Panasonic-WhisperComfort-60-20-50-CFM-Ceiling-Wall-Energy-Recovery-Ventilator-Bathroom-Exhaust-Fan-for-Balanced-Ventilation-FV-06VE1/331411540 https://www.homedepot.com/p/Panasonic-WhisperComfort-60-20-5... [see also] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_air_quality#Improvement_measures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoor_air_quality#Improvement...

boffinAudio 1y ago

I'm unsure about the Weeping Figs' inclusion in the list, although I do expect NASA has considered this - but, don't Weeping Figs contain lactose, which becomes air born when dried into a dust, and isn't anaphylactic shock a potential consequence of lactose dust inhalation? Or is it that the impact of Weeping Figs lactose content is minimal when compared to the benefits of the plant, overall - perhaps the lactose is why it is able to filter air so well, anyway? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8603279/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8603279/