High CO2 levels negatively affect wellbeing and productivity and strongly correlate with diseases spread, amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, measuring indoor CO2 levels is useful. Popular CO2 monitors include the IQAir AirVisual Pro and Kaiterra Laser Egg + CO2. But how accurate are these CO2 monitors? Smart Air conducted tests to find out.
CO2 Monitor Accuracy Tests
Our tests involved using 2 Laser Egg+ CO2 and 2 AirVisual Pro monitors to measure CO2 levels in our office over 7 days. At the time of writing, the Laser Egg+ CO2 retails at $199 while the AirVisual Pro retails at $269.
Kaiterra Laser Egg+ CO2
AirVisual Pro Air Quality Monitor
Results: AirVisual Pro and Kaiterra Laser Egg Monitors Measured CO2 Levels Nearly Identical
As seen in the graph below, the CO2 levels measured by the 4 CO2 monitors were nearly identical, bar a few anomalies (which we will go into later).
This consistency is a good indication that the four monitors were measuring accurate values of CO2. Because their measurements did not deviate significantly from each other, they were likely tied to the actual CO2 levels in the room.
The average difference in CO2 readings between the Laser Eggs and AirVisual Pro was extremely low, at 5.59 ppm. This is only 0.3% of a CO2 reading of 1600 ppm, which is typical in a crowded room. Thus, the LaserEgg is just as accurate as the AirVisualPro in measuring CO2.
It is unlikely a coincidence that the deviation between the two monitors was so small. This was more likely due to the fact that both are reliable indicators of true CO2 levels.
Monitors Behaved as Expected
Smart Air also altered the environment the monitors were placed in to observe whether they could detect changes in CO2 levels. The alterations were made in the afternoon on day 4, as highlighted by the red box below.
Below shows an enlarged view of the CO2 measurements on day 4.
12:30: SmartAir staff left the office for food. All monitors reflected a fall in CO2 levels during the lunch break. After the lunch break ended at 13:30, all staff returned to the office and CO2 started to rise again as expected.
15:30: The windows were opened. CO2 in the office was diluted by the fresh air and this was reflected by a decrease in CO2 shown by the monitors.
16:00: CO2 monitors brought outside. As expected, CO2 dropped before rising steadily again after the monitors were brought indoors at 16:30.
17:30: Smart Air staff exercised in the office. CO2 rose significantly due to the staff exhaling more CO2. Then, CO2 levels remained elevated before the work ended at 18:00 and staff left the office.
Both the LaserEgg and AirVisualPro monitors appropriately recorded the increases and decreases in CO2 as per change in the environment.
Data Anomalies Not Due to Monitor Error
Our tests recorded anomalous data at the circled points. Points C and D occurred right at the time Smart Air’s CEO Paddy moved the Laser Eggs from indoors to outdoors and vice-versa. This likely contributed to the significant increase in CO2 as he exhaled.
Therefore, the anomalies were likely due to external factors as opposed to instrument error.
Both the AirVisual Pro and Laser Egg also detect dangerous PM2.5 pollution. How accurate are they at detecting PM2.5? Luckily, we have the data. Check out the results in our rankings of the most accurate PM2.5 air quality monitors.
How I Protect Myself
Smart Air is a certified B Corp committed to combating the myths big companies use to inflate the price of clean air.
Smart Air provides open data and empirically backed, no-nonsense purifiers and masks, that remove the same particles as the big companies for a fraction of the cost. Only corporations benefit when clean air is a luxury.