Alen Celebrates 20 Years of Innovation and Leadership in Air Purification For Home, School and Work
'Alen began with one goal in mind. Make clean air simple, effective, and accessible, for people and pets,' said Warburg Lee, Founder and CEO of Alen. 'Since then, both outdoor and indoor air quality have worsened due to wildfires, increased allergens, and viruses, making our mission even more critical. We're a health and wellness company, not just an air purifier company, with a mandate to create healthy living and working environments. From our earliest models to our most recent advanced purifier models, our north star is that we remove 99.9 percent of airborne particulates while operating quietly in the background to protect what matters most.'
20 years of achievements include:
Growing from start-up to nationally recognized brand with over 50 team members, availability in all 50 states, serving more than 2 million customers worldwide, and developing the fifth generation of advanced air purifier systems with new products launching in October 2025.
Meeting critical third-party standards, including certifications from ENERGY STAR, Quiet Mark, SleepScore Labs, and the Asthma and Allergy Friendly Program. Products are tested to remove up to 99.9 percent of airborne particles down to 0.1 microns.
Sought-after by national retailers including Lowe's and Amazon to carry Alen products because they are a trusted brand for homes, schools, and businesses across the country.
Continued excellence in technology, developing proprietary technology, industry-first features, and responsive design with intelligent sensors and proprietary airID technology that detects and responds to real-time air quality changes, automatically adjusting to remove pollutants like dust, smoke, and chemicals for cleaner, healthier air.
Day-one pursuit of design to fit the aesthetics of modern living. Alen purifiers blend seamlessly into bedrooms, offices, classrooms, and large commercial spaces with multiple sizes, ultra-quiet performance, and customizable designer panels.
Alen's mission to improve indoor air became a national movement for wellness. Alen continues to lead with purpose, innovation, and a long-standing commitment to help people breathe better and live healthier.
Alen is preparing to introduce new models later this year, building on its reputation for premium air purification and breakthrough technology. These upcoming releases will reinforce its position as a leader in clean air solutions. Alen is poised to deliver greater impact across both retail and business-to-business markets, backed by ongoing innovation, supply chain strength, and strategic commercial partnerships.
To explore Alen's full range of air purification solutions, visit www.alen.com.
About Alen
Alen is an Austin-based innovator of high-performance air purifiers, committed to creating healthier indoor environments through advanced, scientifically validated technology. Alen's purifiers use True HEPA filters and are independently certified by Quiet Mark, the Asthma & Allergy Friendly® Certification Program, SleepScore Labs, and ENERGY STAR® for delivering best-in-class air purification, energy efficiency, ultra-quiet operation, and improved sleep quality. Alen's mission to enhance quality of life in homes, workplaces, and shared spaces is driven by the belief that wellness begins with pure air. Alen empowers individuals and families to lead healthier lives with cleaner, safer air and greater peace of mind through proprietary features like airID smart sensor technology and a commitment to lifetime reliability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
More Americans are driving to Canada than Canadians to the U.S., report finds
More American travellers drove to Canada in July than Canadians did to the United States, according to a new report by Statistics Canada. This is the first time such a reversal has taken place since before the COVID-19 pandemic. The dramatic decline of Canadians travelling to the U.S. was sparked last year, with U.S. President Donald Trump's heated rhetoric about Canada becoming the 51st state that led to an ongoing trade war and lingering tension between the two countries. The data for last month shows that 1.8 million American residents drove to Canada, compared to the 1.7 million Canadian residents who made a return trip from the U.S. by car. Canadian road trips to U.S. plunge for seventh month as boycott continues Both countries saw a decline at land border crossings last month. For Americans driving to Canada, there was a slight dip of 7.4 per cent compared to the same month last year. It was also the sixth consecutive month of year-over-year declines. However, the decline was much steeper for Canadians returning from the U.S. this July compared to the previous year, at nearly 37 per cent. Last month marked the seventh consecutive month of year-over-year declines, StatCan said. 'In 2024, Canadian-resident trips to the United States totalled 39 million, representing 75 per cent of all Canadian-resident travel abroad,' according to another StatCan report published earlier this summer about travel to the U.S. 'However, recent data on foreign travel suggest that Canadians' travel sentiment toward their southern neighbour has been shifting in early 2025.' Although the data reflects a 'notable change in travel patterns,' StatCan said it is 'unclear whether the change is temporary or part of a more permanent shift.' As for air travel, the number of non-resident visitors who flew to Canada increased in July. There were 1.4 million of them — up by just over 3 per cent since the same time last year. While the bump was largely due to residents who came from overseas (up 5.6 per cent this year), American travellers were also up by just under 1 per cent. The highest number of U.S.-resident arrivals by air was 31,600 Americans on July 3, before the Independence Day long weekend in the U.S. Meanwhile, the number of Canadians returning home from abroad by air last month was down by 5.3 per cent compared to the previous year. In particular, Canadians flying back from the U.S. also decreased by nearly 26 per cent since the same time last year. Canadian permanent residents will now have to pay 'visa integrity fee' to enter U.S. Here's what it is An American sent to Canada was shocked by how furious Canadians are at the U.S. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
USA Today
10 minutes ago
- USA Today
Kroger settles with C&S Wholesale after failed $25 billion Albertsons merger
Kroger announced Aug. 11 that it has settled litigation with C&S Wholesale Grocers, which sued the Cincinnati-based supermarket giant in the wake of a failed $25 billion merger with Albertsons. The Keene, New Hampshire-based supplier and retailer was set to acquire nearly 600 divested stores from Kroger and Albertsons upon completion of the deal. C&S Wholesale claimed Kroger owed it a $125 million termination fee in the event the merger was called off. Kroger said all claims were resolved. Terms of the settlement were confidential. 'We are pleased to resolve the claims from C&S, and we look forward to a friendly relationship with them going forward,' said Interim CEO Ron Sargent, in a statement. Would-be acquirer of stores was part of merger's failure C&S Wholesale was seen as part of the reason for the merger's failure. While the company supplies thousands of grocery stores nationwide, its retail operations were modest: a couple dozen stores. In the successful antitrust cases against the merger, regulators argued C&S Wholesale would not be a strong enough competitor to a super-sized Kroger. C&S Wholesale executives also faced several awkward questions during antitrust hearings when it was revealed they had mocked their own company's retail investments. Litigation against Kroger in the aftermath of the abandoned merger is not over: The Boise, Idaho-based retailer announced it was also suing Kroger the same day it pulled out of the deal for allegedly botching regulatory approval. Albertsons' lawsuit is also seeking to collect a breakup fee worth $600 million. Details of Kroger CEO's abrupt exit sought in two lawsuits In that case, Albertsons is seeking the reason that Kroger's long-serving CEO Rodney McMullen resigned in March following an ethics investigation. Kroger has offered few details of McMullen's exit, saying only that "certain personal conduct" by McMullen was 'inconsistent' with its ethics policy. Albertsons argues that Kroger's ethical conduct, while McMullen was at the helm, is relevant to how it pursued its efforts to win merger approval. McMullen's departure has also come up in another lawsuit against Kroger. Grammy-nominated singer Jewel has sued the grocer for allegedly cutting her out of the Kroger Wellness Festival, which she helped organize in its early years. In that case, a judge has ordered McMullen to explain the details of his resignation, which may later be revealed in court records.
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
How Trump's tariffs could actually work
Economists prefer free trade because it is the best policy for global welfare. But what the debate around tariffs often fails to recognize is that there is an economic rationale for U.S. tariffs of 15 to 20 percent. Large countries like the U.S. have market power, which means U.S. demand affects global prices. Tariffs depress U.S. demand, pushing global prices down. As a result of tariffs, the U.S. imports goods at lower prices and also obtains revenue in the process. Most economists estimate that the optimal tariff for the U.S. is between 15 and 20 percent but could be as high as 60 percent. The major problem with imposing high tariffs is that if our trade partners retaliate with similarly high tariffs on imports from the U.S., the U.S. will be worse off. So, the U.S. wants a tariff if it can act alone, but cooperation on low tariffs is the best policy for all — and better for the U.S. — if the alternative is a trade war. To get a sense of the magnitudes, a recent study estimates that 19 percent tariffs could expand U.S. income by roughly 2 percent and boost employment if other countries don't retaliate. However, the effects on income and employment become negative when other countries also impose tariffs. The basic intuition for the tariff is that foreign sellers want access to the huge U.S. market and are willing to pay a fee for that access. Consider a German auto firm, say BMW, that sells lots of cars in the U.S. If the U.S. places a tariff on German cars, Americans will shift to buying more GMs and fewer BMWs. But the U.S. consumer is hard to replace, so BMW will lower the pre-tariff price of its cars to maintain competitiveness. U.S. consumers face somewhat higher prices on BMWs with the tariff, but the tariff revenue that the U.S. government collects more than compensates for the consumer loss, so the U.S. as a country is better off. Put differently, because the U.S. is large, some of the tariff is paid by BMW. The ability to pressure BMW and other German producers to lower prices only works because of the extraordinary buying power of the U.S. consumer. If, for example, a small country, say Ghana, puts a tariff on BMWs, it would negligibly affect total sales, so this effect would be absent. This market power is similar to the leverage that companies like Amazon and Walmart have to push down the prices of their suppliers because they control such a large share of the market. The problem with using market size to push down import prices is that the U.S. is not the only large country. If other large markets, like the European Union and China, also raise tariffs then everyone is worse off. In a trade war, U.S. exporters will also have a hard time selling abroad, while U.S. consumers will have fewer varieties to choose from and face higher prices. The biggest risk Trump took when he reversed decades of low, predictable tariffs was starting a trade war with tariffs spiraling out of control around the world. Given the recent news of U.S. bilateral trade deals with the United Kingdom, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, Korea and the EU, as well as a preliminary accord with China, the gamble may have paid off. One after another, our most important trade partners are accepting significantly higher U.S. tariffs without raising their own tariffs on imports from the U.S. Moreover, in addition to accepting higher tariffs on their exports to the U.S., Europe, Japan and Korea are committing to increased investment in the United States. Why are countries caving? The large market is part of it, but the gaping U.S. trade deficit with these markets also matters. It gives the U.S. additional leverage since American consumers are needed to buy foreign goods to a greater extent than American businesses need foreigners to buy U.S. goods. The U.S. military might also factor in, as many of the countries making deals depend on the U.S. for security. The unpredictability introduced may already be depressing investment and hiring, as investors and firms have no idea what policy will be tomorrow. Similarly, companies that rely heavily on imported parts and components may be unable to survive in the U.S., leading to job loss in import-dependent industries. Already high, U.S. inequality could get worse if care is not taken since low-income families spend more of their income on goods, making them more vulnerable to price increases. There are also major global threats. The bullying that was part of achieving these trade deals could lead to backlash against the U.S. and its brand with real consequences of sustained loss of U.S. leadership and power in all global matters. The unpredictability introduced may depress investment, as investors have no idea what policy will be tomorrow. Domestic political blowback in our trade partners against the U.S. could ultimately create pressure for higher tariffs on imports from the U.S., resulting in a trade war. Variable U.S. tariffs across trade partners — already ranging from 15 to 55 percent — will create trade diversion and administrative costs. Countries could look to other markets and make deals that exclude the U.S., reducing our global leverage. And the list goes on. But if the U.S. government moves on from these trade wins, facilitating a return to predictable policy, and shows more openness to global cooperation in other critical areas, Trump's trade policy could boost U.S. income without major damage to our global standing or global investment. Perhaps this is the hope that has been driving the stock market up. The risks are many and great. But given the (surprisingly) flexible response abroad to date, the policy is not guaranteed to fail as many assumed. One big bullet may have been dodged. .
