Cargando…
A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission
Indoor air cleaning interventions such as bipolar air ionizers have increased lately due to rampant air pollution and the COVID-19 pandemic. Hitherto, the bipolar air ionizer efficacy against particulate pollutants and byproduct ozone emission has not been fully understood and remained a critical co...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Nature Singapore
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10249570/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41810-023-00182-9 |
_version_ | 1785055588360650752 |
---|---|
author | Gupta, Nishant Agarwal, Ashok Kumar Singhal, Rajeev Jindal, Sanjay Kumar |
author_facet | Gupta, Nishant Agarwal, Ashok Kumar Singhal, Rajeev Jindal, Sanjay Kumar |
author_sort | Gupta, Nishant |
collection | PubMed |
description | Indoor air cleaning interventions such as bipolar air ionizers have increased lately due to rampant air pollution and the COVID-19 pandemic. Hitherto, the bipolar air ionizer efficacy against particulate pollutants and byproduct ozone emission has not been fully understood and remained a critical concern. Currently, available diverse and complex methods are insufficient to determine commercially available bipolar air ionizer reliability. The National and International market of bipolar air ionizers is proliferating, while safety standards and information are comparatively limited, in such cases, any misleading information by manufacturers could be detrimental to consumers. To focus on those gaps, the present study comprised five different types of commercially available bipolar air ionizers labeled as BAI 1, BAI2, BAI3, BAI4, and BAI5, which were examined against the most concerned indoor particulate pollutants and potential byproduct ozone. Seven days of consecutive experiments were performed in five acrylic boxes, each box assembled with a testing bipolar ionizer model, calibrated air quality monitor, and particulate pollutant source (incense sticks). Two runs/day for each individual bipolar ionizer were performed for up to seven consecutive days. Overall performance was procured from the daily cumulative arithmetic average. All tested bipolar air ionizers models showed notable, up to 80% particulate matter (PM(2.5) and PM(10)) removal efficiencies. The highest particulate matter removal was associated with bipolar air ionizers model 4 (PM(10) 79.7%, PM(2.5) 80.4%) and the minimum with BAI model 5 (PM(10) 72.2%, PM(2.5) 72.3%). Abnormal ozone emission was not observed with any bipolar air ionizer conduction in this study. Almost negligible elevation in background temperature (0.4 °C) and relative humidity (0.6%) were also observed. In conclusion, bipolar air ionizers could be byproduct ozone-free, indoor particulate matter removal, and low maintenance indoor air cleaning option. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10249570 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Nature Singapore |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102495702023-06-12 A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission Gupta, Nishant Agarwal, Ashok Kumar Singhal, Rajeev Jindal, Sanjay Kumar Aerosol Sci Eng Original Paper Indoor air cleaning interventions such as bipolar air ionizers have increased lately due to rampant air pollution and the COVID-19 pandemic. Hitherto, the bipolar air ionizer efficacy against particulate pollutants and byproduct ozone emission has not been fully understood and remained a critical concern. Currently, available diverse and complex methods are insufficient to determine commercially available bipolar air ionizer reliability. The National and International market of bipolar air ionizers is proliferating, while safety standards and information are comparatively limited, in such cases, any misleading information by manufacturers could be detrimental to consumers. To focus on those gaps, the present study comprised five different types of commercially available bipolar air ionizers labeled as BAI 1, BAI2, BAI3, BAI4, and BAI5, which were examined against the most concerned indoor particulate pollutants and potential byproduct ozone. Seven days of consecutive experiments were performed in five acrylic boxes, each box assembled with a testing bipolar ionizer model, calibrated air quality monitor, and particulate pollutant source (incense sticks). Two runs/day for each individual bipolar ionizer were performed for up to seven consecutive days. Overall performance was procured from the daily cumulative arithmetic average. All tested bipolar air ionizers models showed notable, up to 80% particulate matter (PM(2.5) and PM(10)) removal efficiencies. The highest particulate matter removal was associated with bipolar air ionizers model 4 (PM(10) 79.7%, PM(2.5) 80.4%) and the minimum with BAI model 5 (PM(10) 72.2%, PM(2.5) 72.3%). Abnormal ozone emission was not observed with any bipolar air ionizer conduction in this study. Almost negligible elevation in background temperature (0.4 °C) and relative humidity (0.6%) were also observed. In conclusion, bipolar air ionizers could be byproduct ozone-free, indoor particulate matter removal, and low maintenance indoor air cleaning option. Springer Nature Singapore 2023-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10249570/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41810-023-00182-9 Text en © The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Institute of Earth Environment, Chinese Academy Sciences 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Gupta, Nishant Agarwal, Ashok Kumar Singhal, Rajeev Jindal, Sanjay Kumar A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title | A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title_full | A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title_short | A Comparative Assessment of the Some Commercially Available Portable Bipolar Air Ionizers Particulate Pollutants (PM(2.5), PM(10)) Removal Efficacies and Potential Byproduct Ozone Emission |
title_sort | comparative assessment of the some commercially available portable bipolar air ionizers particulate pollutants (pm(2.5), pm(10)) removal efficacies and potential byproduct ozone emission |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10249570/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41810-023-00182-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guptanishant acomparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT agarwalashokkumar acomparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT singhalrajeev acomparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT jindalsanjaykumar acomparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT guptanishant comparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT agarwalashokkumar comparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT singhalrajeev comparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission AT jindalsanjaykumar comparativeassessmentofthesomecommerciallyavailableportablebipolarairionizersparticulatepollutantspm25pm10removalefficaciesandpotentialbyproductozoneemission |