School education during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic - Which concept is safe, feasible and environmentally sound?

Abstract

The future belongs to children and they need education to shape the future with foresight and intention. Children therefore have the right to education, according to Article 29 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. However, professional education is not everything, because children must also experience their strengths and weaknesses together and educate each other to be responsible and considerate people, so that they become socially valuable personalities. Only in this way can they shape the future in a peaceful and humane way. Therefore, attending school is essential. However, children also have the right to protection and care by their parents and the state, because the welfare of the child must also be given priority in accordance with Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The question is therefore how schooling in community schools can be realized during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic without exposing children to an unnecessary risk of infection. It is not only about the children, because if the children are at risk, then so are their parents and grandparents and ultimately society as a whole. There are numerous concepts that promise safety in schools during the pandemic. When selecting concepts, the costs must of course be weighed against the benefits. People rightly expect an efficient use of resources. This means that either the set goal is achieved with the least possible resources or that the available resources are used to achieve the greatest possible approximation to the goal. In addition to the financial resources, however, the long-term consequences for the state, the economy, the population and the environment under the pressure of the pandemic must also be taken into account. Social cohesion and democracy must not be jeopardized either. Various protection concepts are currently under discussion. Often the advantages are overstated and the disadvantages concealed. Furthermore, some arguments are based on assumptions that are not true. The aim of this study is to provide a comparative assessment of the main protection concepts and to demonstrate, with the help of experimental analyses, the extent to which the protection concepts are effective. We will show that a comparatively high level of safety against infection in classrooms can be technically ensured without exposing children to masks. At the same time, the protection concept makes economic sense and the burden on the environment is comparatively low, so that infection prevention and climate protection do not have to be weighed against each other, because infection prevention and climate protection are political and social goals that have to be achieved together.

Testing mobile air purifiers in a school classroom: Reducing the airborne transmission risk for SARS-CoV-2

“…When just a single purifier is installed, the positioning should ideally be at a central place in the room (Kähler et al 2020). If several purifiers are installed, the instruments should be distributed evenly in the room.…”

The perspective of fluid flow behavior of respiratory droplets and aerosols through the facemasks in context of SARS-CoV-2

“…To mitigate this discontinuous supply chain system, scientists have put much effort into exploring alternative fabrics with sufficient filtering capacity that are readily available and affordable. Kähler and Hain 92 performed a detailed analysis of the efficacy of facemasks to prevent virus spread. In the first step, the transmission of droplets released by the mouth when breathing, speaking, and coughing was characterized.…”

Aerosol transmission of COVID-19 and infection risk in indoor environments

“…It was estimated that an air filtering system with a capacity up to 1,500 m 3 /hour can effectively reduce the aerosol concentration throughout a room of 80 m 2 in a short period of time, although this calculation did not account for continuous emissions of particles. 76…”