Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems
Abstract To evaluate the difference in hazardous air pollutants in PM2.5 between reference method (National Institute of Environmental Analysis; NIEA A205) and high-volume air sampler (European standard:EN14907 and Japan method), we set up a sampling station on the campus of National Yang-Ming Chiao...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2022-08-01
|
| Series: | Aerosol and Air Quality Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.220116 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1825197543443660800 |
|---|---|
| author | Shih Yu Pan Hung Wei Chen Shih Chieh Hsu Charles C.-K. Chou Yu Chi Lin Yuan Wu Chen Kai Hsien Chi |
| author_facet | Shih Yu Pan Hung Wei Chen Shih Chieh Hsu Charles C.-K. Chou Yu Chi Lin Yuan Wu Chen Kai Hsien Chi |
| author_sort | Shih Yu Pan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract To evaluate the difference in hazardous air pollutants in PM2.5 between reference method (National Institute of Environmental Analysis; NIEA A205) and high-volume air sampler (European standard:EN14907 and Japan method), we set up a sampling station on the campus of National Yang-Ming Chiao Tung University, northern Taiwan, during 2014–2015. Both vapor and solid phases of dioxins were collected using high-volume samplers, according to EN14907 and Japan method. The flow rate was set at 500 L min−1 and 1000 L min−1, respectively. To compare the difference with the high-volume air sampler, we simultaneously used the reference air sampler based on Taiwan NIEA A205.11C, at the flow rate of 16.7 L min−1 (BGI PQ200-FRM). The mass concentrations of PM2.5 measured with NIEA A205, EN14907, and Japan method were 20.2 ± 8.79, 25.4 ± 10.5 and 28.6 ± 13.9 µg m−3, respectively. The difference of the mass concentration of PM2.5 obtained from two different methods was lower than 3.9%. Moreover, the concentrations of PCDD/F between solid and vapor phases were 56.9–1,090 and 38.6–67.1 fg m−3 via EN14907 and 51.1–1,150 and 18.4–81.8 fg m−3 via Japan method, respectively. Obviously, there is no significant difference between these two samplers. Compared to the method of NIEA, high volume air sampling method not only provided equivalently good quality data but offer a higher sample quantity for analyzing the trace level chemical component of hazardous air pollutants and the toxicity in different areas. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dfb42b1d0a78420c8917a0ff23dac39e |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1680-8584 2071-1409 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-08-01 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Aerosol and Air Quality Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-dfb42b1d0a78420c8917a0ff23dac39e2025-02-09T12:18:30ZengSpringerAerosol and Air Quality Research1680-85842071-14092022-08-0122911110.4209/aaqr.220116Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling SystemsShih Yu Pan0Hung Wei Chen1Shih Chieh Hsu2Charles C.-K. Chou3Yu Chi Lin4Yuan Wu Chen5Kai Hsien Chi6Institute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung UniversityInstitute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung UniversityResearch Center for Environmental Changes, Academia SinicaResearch Center for Environmental Changes, Academia SinicaSchool of Applied Meteorology, Nanjing University of Information Science & TechnologyEnvironment Analysis Laboratory, Environment Protection AdministrationInstitute of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung UniversityAbstract To evaluate the difference in hazardous air pollutants in PM2.5 between reference method (National Institute of Environmental Analysis; NIEA A205) and high-volume air sampler (European standard:EN14907 and Japan method), we set up a sampling station on the campus of National Yang-Ming Chiao Tung University, northern Taiwan, during 2014–2015. Both vapor and solid phases of dioxins were collected using high-volume samplers, according to EN14907 and Japan method. The flow rate was set at 500 L min−1 and 1000 L min−1, respectively. To compare the difference with the high-volume air sampler, we simultaneously used the reference air sampler based on Taiwan NIEA A205.11C, at the flow rate of 16.7 L min−1 (BGI PQ200-FRM). The mass concentrations of PM2.5 measured with NIEA A205, EN14907, and Japan method were 20.2 ± 8.79, 25.4 ± 10.5 and 28.6 ± 13.9 µg m−3, respectively. The difference of the mass concentration of PM2.5 obtained from two different methods was lower than 3.9%. Moreover, the concentrations of PCDD/F between solid and vapor phases were 56.9–1,090 and 38.6–67.1 fg m−3 via EN14907 and 51.1–1,150 and 18.4–81.8 fg m−3 via Japan method, respectively. Obviously, there is no significant difference between these two samplers. Compared to the method of NIEA, high volume air sampling method not only provided equivalently good quality data but offer a higher sample quantity for analyzing the trace level chemical component of hazardous air pollutants and the toxicity in different areas.https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.220116COVID-19East ChinaAir pollutionRemote sensingAnthropogenic activities |
| spellingShingle | Shih Yu Pan Hung Wei Chen Shih Chieh Hsu Charles C.-K. Chou Yu Chi Lin Yuan Wu Chen Kai Hsien Chi Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems Aerosol and Air Quality Research COVID-19 East China Air pollution Remote sensing Anthropogenic activities |
| title | Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems |
| title_full | Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems |
| title_fullStr | Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems |
| title_short | Assessment of Atmospheric PM2.5 and PCDD/Fs Collected by Different High-volume Ambient Air Sampling Systems |
| title_sort | assessment of atmospheric pm2 5 and pcdd fs collected by different high volume ambient air sampling systems |
| topic | COVID-19 East China Air pollution Remote sensing Anthropogenic activities |
| url | https://doi.org/10.4209/aaqr.220116 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shihyupan assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT hungweichen assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT shihchiehhsu assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT charlesckchou assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT yuchilin assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT yuanwuchen assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems AT kaihsienchi assessmentofatmosphericpm25andpcddfscollectedbydifferenthighvolumeambientairsamplingsystems |