Personal exposure of Paris office workers to nitrogen dioxide and fine particles

Abstract

Aims: (1) To obtain an overall estimate of variability of personal exposure of Paris office workers to fine particles (PM 2.5 ) and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and to quantify their microenvironmental determinants. (2) To examine the role of potential determinants of indoor concentrations. Methods: Sixty two office workers in a Paris municipal administration (all non-smokers) were equipped with personal samplers: passive samplers for 48 hours for NO 2 (n = 62), and active pumps for 24 hours for PM 2.5 (n = 55). Simultaneous measurements were performed in homes and offices; the local air monitoring network provided ambient concentrations. A time activity diary was used to weight measured concentrations by time spent in each microenvironment in order to estimate exposure concentrations. ). Personal exposures to PM 2.5 and NO 2 were not significantly different from in-office concentrations. PM 2.5 and NO 2 personal exposures were not significantly correlated. In-home, in-office, in-transit, outdoor time weighted concentrations, and time spent in other indoor microenvironments explain respectively 86% and 78% of personal variations in PM 2.5 and NO 2 . In-home PM 2.5 concentration was primarily influenced by exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, and secondly by the ambient level (R 2 = 0.20). NO 2 in-home concentration was affected mostly by the ambient level and gas cooking time (R 2 = 0.14). Conclusion: While results show the major contribution of in-home and in-office concentrations to both NO 2 and PM 2.5 personal exposures, the identification of indoor level determinants was not very conclusive.

Performance Evaluation of Particulate Matter and Indoor Microclimate Monitors in University Classrooms under COVID-19 Restrictions

“…Other studies showed that the highest indoor PM10 levels were recorded in schools (33.0–97.2 μg m −3 ) compared to homes (10.8–37.7 μg m −3 ) and in schools, PM2.5 concentrations were considerably higher indoors (9.4–56.1 μg m −3 ) than outdoors (8.6–15.8 μg m −3 ) [ 37 ]. Our PM2.5 results (37, 30, 29, and 41 μg m −3 corresponding for each group) are consistent with the concentrations reported in the literature by [ 38 ], such as: indoor levels measured in Paris between 24.7 μg m −3 in homes and 34.5 μg m −3 in offices versus 24.3 μg m −3 and 28.3 μg m −3 , respectively, for adults and children in Amsterdam, 21.6 μg m −3 in Boston, 24 μg m −3 in Zurich, and 21.9 and 36.7 μg m −3 in Grenoble (for summer and winter, respectively). The reports regarding the submicrometric particles still needs to be further addressed and this study can contribute to the completion of the indoor air quality characterization.…”

Effet of Combined Nitrogen Dioxide and Carbon Nanoparticle Exposure on Lung Function During Ovalbumin Sensitization in Brown Norway Rat

“…In the United States, the national Ambient Air Quality Standard for NO 2 is 0.053 ppm (annual arithmetic mean concentration) [32] . Mean ambient indoor NO 2 concentrations of approximately 0.032 ppm have been reported in Europe [33] and up to 0.54 ppm in developing countries [34] . Although the animals in this study were exposed to NO 2 concentrations that were higher than the mean ambient indoor values reported in the literature, peak NO 2 concentrations can be substantially higher in the vicinity of an indoor source, and can exceed 4 ppm [35] .…”

Exposure to urban stressors and free testosterone plasma values

“…As it was in our study, assessment of exposure to air pollution is often based on Wxed stations measurements provided by the local air quality monitoring network (Mosqueron et al 2002).…”