Others aim for 2%.

There are many systems currently on the market for air purification. Depending on the environment where they operate they have characteristics specific only for certain categories of contaminants and have filters that need to be changed and disposed of. The U-Earth system creates a pure air zone around it thanks to a unique biophysical phenomenon, has no usage or performance limits, proving to be the first, and the most powerful biological air purifier in the world.

 

Contaminants can be divided into two main categories:
1. contaminants that respond to ventilation (10% of contaminants including particulate matter of large dimensions and smoke)
2. contaminants that do not respond to ventilation (90% of contaminants including gas, ultra fine particulate matter and odours).

99% of the air purifiers rely on the phenomenon of ventilation to attract contaminants.
The other systems (ionizers, activated carbon, UV, HEPA, multistage) are efficient only for certain categories of contaminants but not for others.

 

This is the reason why news comes out every day in the media reporting the problem of air quality and nobody proposes a solution.

 

Many systems on the market claim to capture up to 99% of the contaminants that respond to ventilation.

 

So if 98% of the contaminants remain in the air because they are too fine-grained in reality, current systems capture 2% = they are not effective.

 

And so, where do the contaminants captured and trapped in the (expensive) filters end up?