ArticleApplied energy2021
Can decontamination and reuse of N95 respirators during COVID-19 pandemic provide energy, environmental, and economic benefits?
Article in Applied energy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Greening vision: balancing clinical excellence and ecological sustainability in eye health.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Global face mask pollution: threats to the environment and wildlife, and potential solutions.The Science of the total environment · 2023Review
- Energy and environmental sustainability of waste personal protective equipment (PPE) treatment under COVID-19.Renewable & sustainable energy reviews · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The widespread COVID-19 pandemic led to a shortage in the supply of N95 respirators in the United States until May 2021. In this study, we address the energy, environmental, and economic benefits of the decontamination-and-reuse of the N95 masks. Two popular decontamination methods, including dry heat and vapor hydrogen peroxide (VHP), are investigated in this study for their effective pathogen inactivation and favorable performance in preserving filtration efficiency and structural integrity of respirators. Two multiple reuse cases, under which the N95 masks are disinfected and used five times with the dry heat method and 20 times using the VHP method, are considered and compared with a single-use case. Compared to the single-use case, the dry heat-based multiple-use case reduces carbon footprint by 50% and cumulative energy demand (CED) by 17%, while the VHP-based case decreases carbon footprint by 67% and CED by 58%. The dry-heat-based and VHP-based multiple reuse cases also present environmental benefits in most of the other impact categories, primarily due to substituting new N95 respirators with decontaminated ones. Decontaminating and reusing respirators costs 77% and 89% less than the case of single-use and disposal. The sensitivity analysis results show that the geographical variation in the power grid and the times of respirator use are the most influential factors for carbon footprint and CED, respectively. The result also reaffirms the energy, environmental, and economic favorability of the decontamination and reuse of N95 respirators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.