Comparison of real-time instruments used to monitor airborne particulate matter.

Measurements collected using five real-time continuous airborne particle monitors were compared to measurements made using reference filter-based samplers at Bakersfield, CA, between December 2, 1998, and January 31, 1999. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the suitability of each instrument for use in a real-time continuous monitoring network designed to measure the mass of airborne particles with an aerodynamic diam less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) under wintertime conditions in the southern San Joaquin Valley. Measurements of airborne particulate mass made with a beta attenuation monitor (BAM), an integrating nephelometer, and a continuous aerosol mass monitor (CAMM) were found to correlate well with reference measurements made with a filter-based sampler. A Dusttrak aerosol sampler overestimated airborne particle concentrations by a factor of approximately 3 throughout the study. Measurements of airborne particulate matter made with a tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) were found to be lower than the reference filter-based measurements by an amount approximately equal to the concentration of NH4NO3 observed to be present in the airborne particles. The performance of the Dusttrak sampler and the integrating nephelometer was affected by the size distribution of airborne particulate matter. The performance of the BAM, the integrating nephelometer, the CAMM, the Dusttrak sampler, and the TEOM was not strongly affected by temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, or wind direction within the range of conditions encountered in the current study. Based on instrument performance, the BAM, the integrating nephelometer, and the CAMM appear to be suitable candidates for deployment in a real-time continuous PM2.5 monitoring network in central California for the range of winter conditions and aerosol composition encountered during the study.

Ozone emissions from a "personal air purifier".

Ozone emissions were measured above a "personal air purifier" (PAP) designed to be worn on a lapel, shirt pocket, or neck strap. The device is being marketed as a negative ion generator that purifies the air. However, it also produces ozone within the person's immediate breathing zone. In order to assess worst-case potential human exposure to ozone at the mouth and nose, we measured ozone concentrations in separate tests at 1, 3, 5, and 6 in. above each of two PAPs in a closed office. One PAP was new, and one had been used slightly for 3 months. Temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure, room ozone concentration, and outdoor ozone concentration also were measured concurrently during the tests. Average ozone levels measured directly above the individual PAPs ranged from 65-71 ppb at 6 in. above the device to 268-389 ppb at 1 in. above the device. Ozone emission rates from the PAPs were estimated to be 1.7-1.9 microg/minute. When house dust was sprinkled on the top grid of the PAPs, one showed an initial peak of 522 ppb ozone at 1 in., and then returned to the 200-400 ppb range. Room ozone levels increased by only 0-5 ppb during the tests. Even when two PAPs were left operating over a weekend, room ozone levels did not noticeably increase beyond background room ozone levels. These results indicate that this "PAP," even without significant background ozone, can potentially elevate the user's exposures to ozone levels greater than the health-based air quality standards for outdoor air in California (0.09 ppm, 1-hour average) and the United States (0.08 ppm, 8-hour average).