"The efficacy of different approaches to reducing indoor virus levels is usually measured in terms of equivalent air changes per hour. In this study, far-UVC lamps produced the equivalent of 184 equivalent air exchanges per hour. This surpasses any other approach to disinfecting occupied indoor spaces, where five to 20 equivalent air changes per hour is the best that can be achieved practically."
For a better understanding, 184 exchanges per hour would mean one exchange per 19 to 20 seconds on average. For a room 5m wide, that would be a windspeed of 0.25m/s if one actually, physically exchanged the air in the room. That would be almost (or maybe already) perceptible.
It is better, because it doesn't create interesting chemistry. There are all sorts of products produced from normal pollutants and cleaning agents (sodium hypochlorite) with the extra energy from UV.
"The efficacy of different approaches to reducing indoor virus levels is usually measured in terms of equivalent air changes per hour. In this study, far-UVC lamps produced the equivalent of 184 equivalent air exchanges per hour. This surpasses any other approach to disinfecting occupied indoor spaces, where five to 20 equivalent air changes per hour is the best that can be achieved practically."
For a better understanding, 184 exchanges per hour would mean one exchange per 19 to 20 seconds on average. For a room 5m wide, that would be a windspeed of 0.25m/s if one actually, physically exchanged the air in the room. That would be almost (or maybe already) perceptible.