Beyond Compliance: What the Education Estates Sustainability Conference Revealed About Air Quality in Education
Recently, I had the privilege of chairing a panel session on air quality, ventilation, and environmental conditions at the Education Estates Sustainability and SEND Conference.
The event itself was a strong indicator of how far the conversation has evolved. The level of engagement, from speakers and audience alike, reflected a sector that is no longer asking whether indoor environmental quality matters, but how to meaningfully improve it.
Our panel brought together Professor Dejan Mumovic and Professor Anna Mavrogianni from UCL, Vince Ruane of RCDC, and Adam Taylor of ARM Environments, spanning research, innovation, and operational delivery. What followed was not a theoretical discussion, but a grounded exploration of performance, accountability, and practicality.
Several clear themes emerged.
Environmental Conditions Are Educational Conditions
We often separate buildings from education outcomes, but in reality they’re deeply intertwined.
Indoor environmental quality directly affects concentration, fatigue, behaviour, and cognitive performance. Pupils working in thermally unstable or poorly ventilated spaces struggle to sustain attention, irritability increases, behaviour management becomes harder, and the cognitive load required simply to remain comfortable reduces the capacity available for learning.
Staff are affected too. Teaching is cognitively demanding, emotionally intensive work. Thermal discomfort and poor air quality contribute to headaches, fatigue, and reduced clarity of thought. Over time, this influences wellbeing, productivity, and potentially sickness absence.
Attendance remains one of the most pressing challenges across the education system, with illness still a significant contributor to pupil absence nationally. Staff sickness absence also remains elevated compared to historic norms. While buildings are not the sole cause, ventilation and environmental control are among the few system-wide variables that estates teams can actively influence.
Healthy learning environments are not a luxury; they are infrastructure for performance.
Innovation Is Not the Same as Complexity
Vince Ruane’s contribution focused on an important practical question: are our schools actually ventilated in the way we assume they are?
There is often a gap between design intent and real-world operation, and many education buildings still rely heavily on manual window opening for ventilation. That approach can work, but only if windows are opened consistently, at the right times, and in conditions where external noise, pollution, or security concerns do not discourage it.
Vince’s presentation challenged the sector to think about intelligent, responsive solutions that protect environmental conditions in real time. The principle is straightforward: rather than relying entirely on human behaviour, can systems adapt automatically to maintain internal comfort and air quality, while also managing heat loss and noise intrusion?
The discussion also highlighted something important: innovation doesn’t necessarily mean adding layers of complexity. It means closing the gap between predicted performance and actual performance.
In education settings, where budgets are constrained and facilities teams are often stretched, the most effective solutions are those that are simple, intuitive, robust, and aligned with operational reality.
Net Zero and Health Cannot Compete
The education estate sits at the centre of two major policy drivers: decarbonisation and environmental health.
The UK’s legally binding commitment under the Climate Change Act 2008 requires deep reductions in building emissions. Meanwhile, the Environment Act 2021 reinforces the need to improve air quality and protect public health.
These agendas must be integrated.
Improving airtightness alters ventilation pathways. Changing heating systems affects internal temperature stability. Climate change increases overheating risk. If energy efficiency measures are implemented without equal attention to indoor environmental performance, unintended consequences can follow.
Net zero buildings that undermine learning are not successful buildings. But equally, ventilation strategies that ignore energy demand are not sustainable.
Integration is the only viable route forward.
The Limits of CO₂
Perhaps the most thought-provoking audience contributions centred on monitoring.
Many schools now have environmental sensors. Dashboards are increasingly common. CO₂ data is more visible than ever. But several attendees raised the same issue: what happens after we collect the data?
CO₂ is a useful proxy for ventilation adequacy. It indicates occupancy density and air change effectiveness. But it doesn’t tell us if harmful pollutants are present, or what those pollutants are.
Particulate matter – particularly PM2.5 – carries clear health implications. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) originate from cleaning regimes, furnishings, building materials, and occupant activity. These compounds vary widely in composition and risk profile. They can also have a greater impact on younger age groups, who learn and play closer to the floor where particulates often concentrate.
A classroom may show acceptable CO₂ readings while still containing elevated particulates or chemical emissions.
The next stage for the sector is moving beyond single-parameter monitoring. We need a more nuanced understanding of what is actually in the air, and clearer guidance on how to respond when issues are identified.
Data alone does not improve performance. Interpretation and action do.
The CHILI Study: Strengthening the Evidence Base
A particularly encouraging development shared during the session was the ongoing CHILI study – Children’s Health in Living Indoor Environments – led by UCL.
The research is examining a broader range of environmental parameters, linking indoor conditions to health and cognitive outcomes. By building a national picture of indoor air quality and thermal performance across different school types, the study aims to inform better design and retrofit strategies.
Importantly, schools interested in contributing to the research or gaining deeper insight into their environmental performance are encouraged to contact the CHILI Hub directly. Expanding participation will help strengthen the evidence base and ensure that findings reflect the diversity of the education estate.
Collaboration between research and practice will be critical as expectations rise.
The Operational Gap
Adam Taylor’s contribution brought the discussion firmly back to delivery.
Design intent is only one part of performance. Commissioning, calibration, controls, and maintenance ultimately determine whether systems deliver healthy environments.
It is one thing to specify high-performance ventilation equipment. It is another to ensure sensors remain calibrated, that staff understand control interfaces, that overrides are not left permanently engaged – and, occasionally, that protective cellophane wrapping has actually been removed from ventilation units before ceilings are closed and systems are signed off as commissioned.
The laughter in the room at that final point was telling.
Performance gaps are often not technological failures; they’re process failures. If we want better indoor environments, we must prioritise maintainability, clarity, and accountability as much as innovation.
Moving Forward
The session demonstrated that the sector is ready for a more mature conversation about indoor environmental quality.
- We need integrated net zero and ventilation strategies.
- We need broader pollutant monitoring beyond CO₂ alone.
- We need systems that work in real buildings, not just in specifications.
- We need to treat environmental conditions as central to educational performance.
If we measured comfort and air quality with the same seriousness as attainment data, estates strategy would look very different.
The appetite for that shift is clearly growing.
The challenge now is turning insight into sustained action.
Contact me for more: james@warnefordconsulting.com
