Evaluation of a portable nephelometer against the Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance method for monitoring PM2.5

Karagulian, Federico; Belis, Claudio A.; Lagler, Friedrich; Maurizio, Barbiere; Gerboles, Michel

doi:10.1039/c2em30099k

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several previous studies provided a correction factor for SIDEPAK monitors: 0.77 in Northern California, U.S.A. (ambient air), 0.43 or 0.52 in Italy (ambient air in urban or rural areas) and 0.42 in Italy (indoor-outdoor mixed environment) [24][25][26], which were comparable to our results (0.36). Our correction factor (0.36) for PDR-1500 was smaller than results reported by Wang et al (2016) [27] (0.71 compared to PDR-1500 using its own filtering method) but very similar to the values obtained by Ramachandran et al (2000) (0.33) and Wallace et al (2011) (0.38), who conducted their studies on atmospheric environments [28,29].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inexpensive (<$300) real-time particulate matter monitors (IRMs), using laser as a light source, have been introduced for use with a Wi-Fi function enabling networking with a smartphone. However, the information of measurement error of these inexpensive but convenient IRMs are still limited. Using ESCORTAIR (ESCORT, Seoul, Korea) and PurpleAir (PA) (PurpleAir U.S.A.), we evaluated the performance of these two devices compared with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Federal Equivalent Monitoring (FEM) devices, that is, GRIMM180 (GRIMM Aerosol, Germany) for the indoor measurement of pork panfrying or secondhand tobacco smoking (SHS) and Beta-ray attenuation monitor (BAM) (MetOne, Grants Pass, OR) for outdoor measurement at the national particulate matter (PM2.5) monitoring site near an urban traffic hotspot in Daejeon, South Korea, respectively. The PM2.5 concentrations measured by ESCORTAIR and PA were strongly correlated to FEM (r = 0.97 and 0.97 from indoor pan frying; 0.92 and 0.86 from indoor SHS; 0.85 and 0.88 from outdoor urban traffic hotspot). The two IRMs showed that PM2.5 mass concentrations were increased with increased outdoor relative humidity (RH) levels. However, after applying correction factors for RH, the Median (Interquartile range) of difference compared to FEM was (14.5 (6.1~23.5) %) for PA and 16.3 (8.5–28.0) % for ESCORTAIR, supporting their usage in the home or near urban hotspots.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2). Nephelometers are known to have different sensitivities to different types/sources of particulate matter due to the refractive index of specific sources (Karagulian et al, 2012; Liu et al, 2002; Xue et al, 2009). The nephelometer response may be corrected through division by the ratio of the gravimetric net filter weight, which averages the nephelometer reading over the duration of sample collection, and allows one to correct the nephelometer response for the average type of material collected onto the filter.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal exposures to fine particulate matter and black carbon in households cooking with biomass fuels in rural Ghana

Vliet

Asante

Jack

et al. 2013

Environmental Research

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To examine cooking practices and 24-h personal and kitchen area exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and black carbon in cooks using biomass in Ghana. Methods Researchers administered a detailed survey to 421 households. In a sub-sample of 36 households, researchers collected 24-h integrated PM2.5 samples (personal and kitchen area); in addition, the primary cook was monitored for real-time PM2.5. All filters were also analyzed for black carbon using a multi-wavelength reflectance method. Predictors of PM2.5 exposure were analyzed, including cooking behaviors, fuel, stove and kitchen type, weather, demographic factors and other smoke sources. Results The majority of households cooked outdoors (55%; 231/417), used biomass (wood or charcoal) as their primary fuel (99%; 412/413), and cooked on traditional fires (77%, 323/421). In the sub-sample of 29 households with complete, valid exposure monitoring data, the 24-h integrated concentrations of PM2.5 were substantially higher in the kitchen sample (mean 446.8 μg/m3) than in the personal air sample (mean 128.5 μg/m3). Black carbon concentrations followed the same pattern such that concentrations were higher in the kitchen sample (14.5 μg/m3) than in the personal air sample (8.8 μg/m3). Spikes in real-time personal concentrations of PM2.5 accounted for the majority of exposure; the most polluted 5%, or 72 min, of the 24-h monitoring period accounted for 75% of all exposure. Two variables that had some predictive power for personal PM2.5 exposures were primary fuel type and ethnicity, while reported kerosene lantern use was associated with increased personal and kitchen area concentrations of black carbon. Conclusion Personal concentrations of PM2.5 exhibited considerable inter-subject variability across kitchen types (enclosed, semi-enclosed, outdoor), and can be elevated even in outdoor cooking settings. Furthermore, personal concentrations of PM2.5 were not associated with kitchen type and were not predicted by kitchen area samples; rather they were driven by spikes in PM2.5 concentrations during cooking. Personal exposures were more enriched with black carbon when compared to kitchen area samples, underscoring the need to explore other sources of incomplete combustion such as roadway emissions, charcoal production and kerosene use.

show abstract

“…Instead, a great part of the available information is found in "grey" literature, mainly in the form of reports. A substantial quantity of presented results come from research institutes having a LCS testing program in place, e.g., the Air Quality Sensor Performance Evaluation Center (AQ-SPEC) [19], the European Union Joint Research Centre (EU JRC) [9,20,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28], and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) [14,[29][30][31][32].…”

Section: Origin Of Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the Performance of Low-Cost Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing number of companies have started commercializing low-cost sensors (LCS) that are said to be able to monitor air pollution in outdoor air. The benefit of the use of LCS is the increased spatial coverage when monitoring air quality in cities and remote locations. Today, there are hundreds of LCS commercially available on the market with costs ranging from several hundred to several thousand euro. At the same time, the scientific literature currently reports independent evaluation of the performance of LCS against reference measurements for about 110 LCS. These studies report that LCS are unstable and often affected by atmospheric conditions—cross-sensitivities from interfering compounds that may change LCS performance depending on site location. In this work, quantitative data regarding the performance of LCS against reference measurement are presented. This information was gathered from published reports and relevant testing laboratories. Other information was drawn from peer-reviewed journals that tested different types of LCS in research studies. Relevant metrics about the comparison of LCS systems against reference systems highlighted the most cost-effective LCS that could be used to monitor air quality pollutants with a good level of agreement represented by a coefficient of determination R2 > 0.75 and slope close to 1.0. This review highlights the possibility to have versatile LCS able to operate with multiple pollutants and preferably with transparent LCS data treatment.

show abstract

Evaluation of a portable nephelometer against the Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance method for monitoring PM2.5

Cited by 14 publications

References 33 publications

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

Evaluation of Performance of Inexpensive Laser Based PM2.5 Sensor Monitors for Typical Indoor and Outdoor Hotspots of South Korea

Personal exposures to fine particulate matter and black carbon in households cooking with biomass fuels in rural Ghana

Review of the Performance of Low-Cost Sensors for Air Quality Monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About