MsGreenFinger GW(8 Ireland) I didn't base my post on scientific research. But I did look up articles about 'air purifying plants based on a NASA research' which are actually the most common house plants. (Palm, spider plant, Sans., english ivy, peace lily, boston fern etc) Maybe it does matter what kind of plant one has, how many, what size and how fast they grow. But I am sure, having a dozen large specimens in your home will make the air quality better, just as they make the life quality better. You also can read this interesting aticle: Can House Plants Solve IAQ Problems? The idea of common plants solving IAQ problems is attractive. Most people like having plants in their homes and offices and in the hotels, stores, and public buildings they visit. However, important questions exist as to whether plants can actually affect indoor air sufficiently to warrant their use as air cleaners. Can House Plants Solve IAQ Problems-2.pdf (PDF document 38Kb) This is from this article: To date, advocates have not reported the results from actual field tests. One field study was begun and failed, according to a strong advocate of the interiorscape approach to IAQ control. Stuart Snyder is the president of Aqua/Trends of Boca Raton, Florida, a firm that sells irrigation systems for interiorscapes. He offered his explanation as part of a 13-page letter to Robert Axelrad, Director of EPA's Indoor Air Division. Responding to what he calls EPA's criticism of the NASA work, Snyder wrote, “In many ways small systems are better able to isolate factors, and more clearly define mechanisms at work.... Larger environments are too subject to conflicting variables. Real life, field studies with their complex dynamics are also valuable, and should be implemented at later stages of research -- they are however, more difficult to accurately stage and evaluate” Snyder continued, “Scaled up studies must be made at some point. Associated Landscape Contractors of America have already attempted a controlled study in an office building. It failed as a study because of these difficulties.” The office-building study was done for over a year under realistic conditions and with as much control as can be achieved in a field study, There was no indication that the presence of plants had any measurable effect. HBI Inc., which conducted the study, reported virtually no effect of plants on the VOC concentrations. John R. Girman (Chief of the Analysis Branch at EPA's Indoor Air Division) has prepared a memo that details some shortcomings of the NASA study's claims for the efficacy of plants. The memo was included in correspondence between Axelrad and Snyder. Girman's memo responds to some of the technical issues presented by Snyder and other advocates of IAQ control with house plants. The memo's title is “Comment on the Use of Plants as a Means to Control Indoor Air Pollution,” (undated.) Girman analyzes the notion that NASA research shows plants are effective at removing indoor air pollutants at realistic concentrations and time frames. He calculates that at the most favorable conditions, it would take 680 plants in a typical house to achieve the same pollutant removal rate Wolverton and his colleagues reported they achieved in the test chamber. However, scale-up considerations are also important. It appears that the average chamber volume used in Wolverton's tests was 0.5 m3. This means the results must be appropriately scaled-up for use in a larger environment to allow for differences in volumetric loading (the number of plants per volume of space). This does not appear to have been done. The volume of a typical house in the U.S. is 340 m3 with a floor area of 139 m2 (1500 ft2). Thus, the recommendation that one plant be used per 100 ft2 implies the use of 15 plants in a typical house. [ALCA recommends 1 plant per 100 ft2. Wolverton recently told us he now recommends 2 or 3 plants/100 ft2, but he says “he is “just throwing a dart."] This would provide for 340 m3/15 plants or 23 m3 per plant, not 0.5 m3 per plant as in the chamber. This means that each plant would have to clean 46 times more volume than it did in the test chamber or, as would actually happen, it will clean the larger volume less effectively. To be more precise, each plant will have a pollutant removal rate which is only 1/46 of the rate it would have in the chamber, i.e., only 0.002 h-1. Thus, plants at the volumetric loading recommended would be expected to contribute relatively little to pollutant removal in any indoor environment with typical ventilation To achieve the same pollutant removal rate as realized in the test chamber, one would need to have the same volumetric loading, i.e., 680 plants in a typical house (340 m3 divided by 0.5 m3 per plant). This does not seem practical and this forms the basis for concern that adequate and realistic scale-up considerations are necessary before the use of plants can be recommended as a means to control IAQ. Similar concerns apply to the use of plants to control IAQ in office environments. It is hardly surprising that the attempt to validate the test chamber results by Associated Landscape Contractors of America did not provide measurable success ellenr22 - NJ - Zone 6b/7a(6b/7a) another option would be to not pollute the earth, the air. I agree with you but people need to vote for the right people in the elections to do that.

We were looking for houses like these, and were priced out of them too. Or lets say we didn't want to spend that kind of money (So Cal here) We decided to go with an older smaller cheaper house that we could add to, and that would have a layout not ideal but making sense and doable, for having our MIL with us. While I love the result it took us 2 years and in terms of price, we'd better pay right away for the house that fitted our needs. (maybe your area is totally different in terms of costs and labor, that I wouldn't know. Talking to builders where you live is an excellent idea) More than that, we ended up buying a condo for MIL (very very close to us) because for now she prefers her independence. We did live together during the remodel, or part of it. If I knew all that I'd just talk my very savvy husband into buying a house with a casita or something.. Would be same financially if not less, and I'd definitely be a healthier person than I am now. Back to you though-look into one store-y properties if you have them around where you live, with a wing of bedrooms/bathrooms, ranch-like..along the lines of what Virgil was talking about. That's our house's plan..MIL's room is right next to the hall bath. We use it as a guest room currently, but she also stayed here to recuperate after hospital, etc. The hall bath has a tub though(she's fine with tubs but if you need shower that's something to consider), it's the only room we didn't fully remodel, and only that room would be about 12K worth of labour only, without moving plumbing around, and not including finishes. I so get what you're going through..greatest luck to you.

Hi there, Are you working with an Architect to design the main home or with a large builder with standard floor plans from which to choose? If you have a design professional engaged they will be able to help you with this design. If not, I would recommend you do so. They can help you incorporate the aging in place / accessible design features A S mentioned above. I'd add to that list extra wide door ways, large bathrooms, extra supports in the walls for support bars in the bathroom (installed now or at least structure provided in case they need to be added in the future), material consideration (for example if you're concerned anyone using the space may be using or may need in the future a wheelchair or walker carpeting needs to be thought out, low pile selected, transitions provided as needed, ramps provided as needed, etc. Happy to provide more info if you'd like. Good luck with the project !

CEM TOSA, I appreciate your experience and knowledge. I’m sure your home will be beautiful. I will do the best I can with mine. We are not rushed at this time to build. If we proceed with building now, I do realize the prices/economy will not allow the size or everything I love. But to dream and plan is the most enjoyable thing to me. We will see in a year or two what will be then.