Cargando…

Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors

Air quality monitors using low-cost optical PM(2.5) sensors can track the dispersion of wildfire smoke; but quantitative hazard assessment requires a smoke-specific adjustment factor (AF). This study determined AFs for three professional-grade devices and four monitors with low-cost sensors based on...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Delp, William W., Singer, Brett C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7374346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32630124
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20133683
_version_ 1783561677542785024
author Delp, William W.
Singer, Brett C.
author_facet Delp, William W.
Singer, Brett C.
author_sort Delp, William W.
collection PubMed
description Air quality monitors using low-cost optical PM(2.5) sensors can track the dispersion of wildfire smoke; but quantitative hazard assessment requires a smoke-specific adjustment factor (AF). This study determined AFs for three professional-grade devices and four monitors with low-cost sensors based on measurements inside a well-ventilated lab impacted by the 2018 Camp Fire in California (USA). Using the Thermo TEOM-FDMS as reference, AFs of professional monitors were 0.85 for Grimm mini wide-range aerosol spectrometer, 0.25 for TSI DustTrak, and 0.53 for Thermo pDR1500; AFs for low-cost monitors were 0.59 for AirVisual Pro, 0.48 for PurpleAir Indoor, 0.46 for Air Quality Egg, and 0.60 for eLichens Indoor Air Quality Pro Station. We also compared public data from 53 PurpleAir PA-II monitors to 12 nearby regulatory monitoring stations impacted by Camp Fire smoke and devices near stations impacted by the Carr and Mendocino Complex Fires in California and the Pole Creek Fire in Utah. Camp Fire AFs varied by day and location, with median (interquartile) of 0.48 (0.44–0.53). Adjusted PA-II 4-h average data were generally within ±20% of PM(2.5) reported by the monitoring stations. Adjustment improved the accuracy of Air Quality Index (AQI) hazard level reporting, e.g., from 14% to 84% correct in Sacramento during the Camp Fire.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7374346
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73743462020-08-06 Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors Delp, William W. Singer, Brett C. Sensors (Basel) Article Air quality monitors using low-cost optical PM(2.5) sensors can track the dispersion of wildfire smoke; but quantitative hazard assessment requires a smoke-specific adjustment factor (AF). This study determined AFs for three professional-grade devices and four monitors with low-cost sensors based on measurements inside a well-ventilated lab impacted by the 2018 Camp Fire in California (USA). Using the Thermo TEOM-FDMS as reference, AFs of professional monitors were 0.85 for Grimm mini wide-range aerosol spectrometer, 0.25 for TSI DustTrak, and 0.53 for Thermo pDR1500; AFs for low-cost monitors were 0.59 for AirVisual Pro, 0.48 for PurpleAir Indoor, 0.46 for Air Quality Egg, and 0.60 for eLichens Indoor Air Quality Pro Station. We also compared public data from 53 PurpleAir PA-II monitors to 12 nearby regulatory monitoring stations impacted by Camp Fire smoke and devices near stations impacted by the Carr and Mendocino Complex Fires in California and the Pole Creek Fire in Utah. Camp Fire AFs varied by day and location, with median (interquartile) of 0.48 (0.44–0.53). Adjusted PA-II 4-h average data were generally within ±20% of PM(2.5) reported by the monitoring stations. Adjustment improved the accuracy of Air Quality Index (AQI) hazard level reporting, e.g., from 14% to 84% correct in Sacramento during the Camp Fire. MDPI 2020-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7374346/ /pubmed/32630124 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20133683 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Delp, William W.
Singer, Brett C.
Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title_full Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title_fullStr Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title_full_unstemmed Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title_short Wildfire Smoke Adjustment Factors for Low-Cost and Professional PM(2.5) Monitors with Optical Sensors
title_sort wildfire smoke adjustment factors for low-cost and professional pm(2.5) monitors with optical sensors
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7374346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32630124
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20133683
work_keys_str_mv AT delpwilliamw wildfiresmokeadjustmentfactorsforlowcostandprofessionalpm25monitorswithopticalsensors
AT singerbrettc wildfiresmokeadjustmentfactorsforlowcostandprofessionalpm25monitorswithopticalsensors