Low-Cost Air Quality Sensors: One-Year Field Comparative Measurement of Different Gas Sensors and Particle Counters with Reference Monitors at Tušimice Observatory

Abstract

With attention increasing regarding the level of air pollution in different metropolitan and industrial areas worldwide, interest in expanding the monitoring networks by low-cost air quality sensors is also increasing. Although the role of these small and affordable sensors is rather supplementary, determination of the measurement uncertainty is one of the main questions of their applicability because there is no certificate for quality assurance of these non-reference technologies. This paper presents the results of almost one-year field testing measurements, when the data from different low-cost sensors (for SO2, NO2, O3, and CO: Cairclip, Envea, FR; for PM1, PM2.5, and PM10: PMS7003, Plantower, CHN, and OPC-N2, Alphasense, UK) were compared with co-located reference monitors used within the Czech national ambient air quality monitoring network. The results showed that in addition to the given reduced measurement accuracy of the sensors, the data quality depends on the early detection of defective units and changes caused by the effect of meteorological conditions (effect of air temperature and humidity on gas sensors and effect of air humidity with condensation conditions on particle counters), or by the interference of different pollutants (especially in gas sensors). Comparative measurement is necessary prior to each sensor’s field applications.

Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Indoor Air Monitoring during COVID-19 Lockdown

“…Comparison to the reference aerosol spectrometer (Grimm 1.108) showed that low-cost sensors, including PMS5003 used in this study, showed different performance than declared by the manufactures and provided a proper response in a limited range of bins [ 26 ]. On the other hand, the PMS series sensor showed a higher measurement quality than the Alphasense OPC-N2 (the previous model of the one used in our study) [ 27 ]. Contrary to this, Susan et al demonstrated that OPC-N2 sized particles identically and in good agreement with the reference, earlier mentioned, Grimm 1.108 aerosol monitor [ 28 ].…”

Academically Produced Air Pollution Sensors for Personal Exposure Assessment: The Canarin Project

“…Custom PCBs can be rapidly designed to interface modules, sensor modules and other essential hardware together. All in all, this approach would enable rapid integration and real-world testing of the latest air pollution sensing modules as they hit the market [ 12 ]. The concept we just described goes beyond solving the burden of the lack of contextual data.…”

“…It was, therefore, selected and used extensively by the POLLUSCOPE project. Several Canarin II have also been deployed in the Johannine Library of Coimbra to monitor the impact of PM on its ecosystem, where the bat population has an essential role in the preservation of the library by eating the bookworms during the night [ 12 ]. These Canarin II are still acquiring data continuously to this date.…”

“…In the field of air quality sensors, commercial devices and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) low-cost sensors have been benchmarked by the scientific community [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ] and multiple methodologies and tools have been developed for validation [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Such sensors have been considered for crowdsensing applications [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ].…”

Inline Infrared Chemical Identification of Particulate Matter

“…Many PM sensors and detectors were developed during the last few decades to quantify the amount and size of PM that people are exposed to. These sensors range from very small and low cost [ 5 , 6 , 7 ] to large and bulky [ 8 ]. These sensors and detectors classify PM in sizes such as PM1, PM2.5, and PM10, where the number indicates the maximum size in micrometers.…”