Cargando…

Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke

Until recently, air quality impacts from wildfires were predominantly determined based on data from permanent stationary regulatory air pollution monitors. However, low-cost particulate matter (PM) sensors are now widely used by the public as a source of air quality information during wildfires, alt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Holder, Amara L., Mebust, Anna K., Maghran, Lauren A., McGown, Michael R., Stewart, Kathleen E., Vallano, Dena M., Elleman, Robert A., Baker, Kirk R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7506753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32854443
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20174796
_version_ 1783585086332993536
author Holder, Amara L.
Mebust, Anna K.
Maghran, Lauren A.
McGown, Michael R.
Stewart, Kathleen E.
Vallano, Dena M.
Elleman, Robert A.
Baker, Kirk R.
author_facet Holder, Amara L.
Mebust, Anna K.
Maghran, Lauren A.
McGown, Michael R.
Stewart, Kathleen E.
Vallano, Dena M.
Elleman, Robert A.
Baker, Kirk R.
author_sort Holder, Amara L.
collection PubMed
description Until recently, air quality impacts from wildfires were predominantly determined based on data from permanent stationary regulatory air pollution monitors. However, low-cost particulate matter (PM) sensors are now widely used by the public as a source of air quality information during wildfires, although their performance during smoke impacted conditions has not been thoroughly evaluated. We collocated three types of low-cost fine PM (PM(2.5)) sensors with reference instruments near multiple fires in the western and eastern United States (maximum hourly PM(2.5) = 295 µg/m(3)). Sensors were moderately to strongly correlated with reference instruments (hourly averaged r(2) = 0.52–0.95), but overpredicted PM(2.5) concentrations (normalized root mean square errors, NRMSE = 80–167%). We developed a correction equation for wildfire smoke that reduced the NRMSE to less than 27%. Correction equations were specific to each sensor package, demonstrating the impact of the physical configuration and the algorithm used to translate the size and count information into PM(2.5) concentrations. These results suggest the low-cost sensors can fill in the large spatial gaps in monitoring networks near wildfires with mean absolute errors of less than 10 µg/m(3) in the hourly PM(2.5) concentrations when using a sensor-specific smoke correction equation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7506753
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75067532020-09-26 Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke Holder, Amara L. Mebust, Anna K. Maghran, Lauren A. McGown, Michael R. Stewart, Kathleen E. Vallano, Dena M. Elleman, Robert A. Baker, Kirk R. Sensors (Basel) Article Until recently, air quality impacts from wildfires were predominantly determined based on data from permanent stationary regulatory air pollution monitors. However, low-cost particulate matter (PM) sensors are now widely used by the public as a source of air quality information during wildfires, although their performance during smoke impacted conditions has not been thoroughly evaluated. We collocated three types of low-cost fine PM (PM(2.5)) sensors with reference instruments near multiple fires in the western and eastern United States (maximum hourly PM(2.5) = 295 µg/m(3)). Sensors were moderately to strongly correlated with reference instruments (hourly averaged r(2) = 0.52–0.95), but overpredicted PM(2.5) concentrations (normalized root mean square errors, NRMSE = 80–167%). We developed a correction equation for wildfire smoke that reduced the NRMSE to less than 27%. Correction equations were specific to each sensor package, demonstrating the impact of the physical configuration and the algorithm used to translate the size and count information into PM(2.5) concentrations. These results suggest the low-cost sensors can fill in the large spatial gaps in monitoring networks near wildfires with mean absolute errors of less than 10 µg/m(3) in the hourly PM(2.5) concentrations when using a sensor-specific smoke correction equation. MDPI 2020-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7506753/ /pubmed/32854443 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20174796 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
Holder, Amara L.
Mebust, Anna K.
Maghran, Lauren A.
McGown, Michael R.
Stewart, Kathleen E.
Vallano, Dena M.
Elleman, Robert A.
Baker, Kirk R.
Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title_full Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title_fullStr Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title_full_unstemmed Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title_short Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Measuring Wildfire Smoke
title_sort field evaluation of low-cost particulate matter sensors for measuring wildfire smoke
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7506753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32854443
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20174796
work_keys_str_mv AT holderamaral fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT mebustannak fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT maghranlaurena fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT mcgownmichaelr fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT stewartkathleene fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT vallanodenam fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT ellemanroberta fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke
AT bakerkirkr fieldevaluationoflowcostparticulatemattersensorsformeasuringwildfiresmoke