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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |