Literature DB >> 29704807

Applications of low-cost sensing technologies for air quality monitoring and exposure assessment: How far have they gone?

Lidia Morawska1, Phong K Thai2, Xiaoting Liu2, Akwasi Asumadu-Sakyi2, Godwin Ayoko2, Alena Bartonova3, Andrea Bedini4, Fahe Chai5, Bryce Christensen2, Matthew Dunbabin6, Jian Gao5, Gayle S W Hagler7, Rohan Jayaratne2, Prashant Kumar8, Alexis K H Lau9, Peter K K Louie10, Mandana Mazaheri11, Zhi Ning12, Nunzio Motta13, Ben Mullins14, Md Mahmudur Rahman2, Zoran Ristovski2, Mahnaz Shafiei15, Dian Tjondronegoro16, Dane Westerdahl12, Ron Williams7.   

Abstract

Over the past decade, a range of sensor technologies became available on the market, enabling a revolutionary shift in air pollution monitoring and assessment. With their cost of up to three orders of magnitude lower than standard/reference instruments, many avenues for applications have opened up. In particular, broader participation in air quality discussion and utilisation of information on air pollution by communities has become possible. However, many questions have been also asked about the actual benefits of these technologies. To address this issue, we conducted a comprehensive literature search including both the scientific and grey literature. We focused upon two questions: (1) Are these technologies fit for the various purposes envisaged? and (2) How far have these technologies and their applications progressed to provide answers and solutions? Regarding the former, we concluded that there is no clear answer to the question, due to a lack of: sensor/monitor manufacturers' quantitative specifications of performance, consensus regarding recommended end-use and associated minimal performance targets of these technologies, and the ability of the prospective users to formulate the requirements for their applications, or conditions of the intended use. Numerous studies have assessed and reported sensor/monitor performance under a range of specific conditions, and in many cases the performance was concluded to be satisfactory. The specific use cases for sensors/monitors included outdoor in a stationary mode, outdoor in a mobile mode, indoor environments and personal monitoring. Under certain conditions of application, project goals, and monitoring environments, some sensors/monitors were fit for a specific purpose. Based on analysis of 17 large projects, which reached applied outcome stage, and typically conducted by consortia of organizations, we observed that a sizable fraction of them (~ 30%) were commercial and/or crowd-funded. This fact by itself signals a paradigm change in air quality monitoring, which previously had been primarily implemented by government organizations. An additional paradigm-shift indicator is the growing use of machine learning or other advanced data processing approaches to improve sensor/monitor agreement with reference monitors. There is still some way to go in enhancing application of the technologies for source apportionment, which is of particular necessity and urgency in developing countries. Also, there has been somewhat less progress in wide-scale monitoring of personal exposures. However, it can be argued that with a significant future expansion of monitoring networks, including indoor environments, there may be less need for wearable or portable sensors/monitors to assess personal exposure. Traditional personal monitoring would still be valuable where spatial variability of pollutants of interest is at a finer resolution than the monitoring network can resolve.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Air pollution sensing; Air sensor/monitor performance; Low cost sensor/monitor; Personal exposure monitoring; Sensor data utilisation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29704807      PMCID: PMC6145068          DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.04.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Int        ISSN: 0160-4120            Impact factor:   9.621


  41 in total

1.  Nanostructured Materials for Room-Temperature Gas Sensors.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; Xianghong Liu; Giovanni Neri; Nicola Pinna
Journal:  Adv Mater       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 30.849

Review 2.  The changing paradigm of air pollution monitoring.

Authors:  Emily G Snyder; Timothy H Watkins; Paul A Solomon; Eben D Thoma; Ronald W Williams; Gayle S W Hagler; David Shelow; David A Hindin; Vasu J Kilaru; Peter W Preuss
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Using a new, low-cost air quality sensor to quantify second-hand smoke (SHS) levels in homes.

Authors:  Sean Semple; Azmina Engku Ibrahim; Andrew Apsley; Markus Steiner; Stephen Turner
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 7.552

4.  Validating novel air pollution sensors to improve exposure estimates for epidemiological analyses and citizen science.

Authors:  Michael Jerrett; David Donaire-Gonzalez; Olalekan Popoola; Roderic Jones; Ronald C Cohen; Estela Almanza; Audrey de Nazelle; Iq Mead; Glòria Carrasco-Turigas; Tom Cole-Hunter; Margarita Triguero-Mas; Edmund Seto; Mark Nieuwenhuijsen
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 6.498

5.  An evaluation tool kit of air quality micro-sensing units.

Authors:  Barak Fishbain; Uri Lerner; Nuria Castell; Tom Cole-Hunter; Olalekan Popoola; David M Broday; Tania Martinez Iñiguez; Mark Nieuwenhuijsen; Milena Jovasevic-Stojanovic; Dusan Topalovic; Roderic L Jones; Karen S Galea; Yael Etzion; Fadi Kizel; Yaela N Golumbic; Ayelet Baram-Tsabari; Tamar Yacobi; Dana Drahler; Johanna A Robinson; David Kocman; Milena Horvat; Vlasta Svecova; Alexander Arpaci; Alena Bartonova
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 6.  Amperometric Gas Sensors as a Low Cost Emerging Technology Platform for Air Quality Monitoring Applications: A Review.

Authors:  Ronan Baron; John Saffell
Journal:  ACS Sens       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 7.711

7.  Use of a dense monitoring network of low-cost instruments to observe local changes in the diurnal ozone cycles as marine air passes over a geographically isolated urban centre.

Authors:  L F Weissert; J A Salmond; G Miskell; M Alavi-Shoshtari; S K Grange; G S Henshaw; D E Williams
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-10-08       Impact factor: 7.963

8.  Development and Application of a Next Generation Air Sensor Network for the Hong Kong Marathon 2015 Air Quality Monitoring.

Authors:  Li Sun; Ka Chun Wong; Peng Wei; Sheng Ye; Hao Huang; Fenhuan Yang; Dane Westerdahl; Peter K K Louie; Connie W Y Luk; Zhi Ning
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 3.576

9.  Interpreting Mobile and Handheld Air Sensor Readings in Relation to Air Quality Standards and Health Effect Reference Values: Tackling the Challenges.

Authors:  George M Woodall; Mark D Hoover; Ronald Williams; Kristen Benedict; Martin Harper; Jhy-Charm Soo; Annie M Jarabek; Michael J Stewart; James S Brown; Janis E Hulla; Motria Caudill; Andrea L Clements; Amanda Kaufman; Alison J Parker; Martha Keating; David Balshaw; Kevin Garrahan; Laureen Burton; Sheila Batka; Vijay S Limaye; Pertti J Hakkinen; Bob Thompson
Journal:  Atmosphere (Basel)       Date:  2017-09-21       Impact factor: 2.686

10.  The Imperial County Community Air Monitoring Network: A Model for Community-based Environmental Monitoring for Public Health Action.

Authors:  Paul B English; Luis Olmedo; Ester Bejarano; Humberto Lugo; Eduardo Murillo; Edmund Seto; Michelle Wong; Galatea King; Alexa Wilkie; Dan Meltzer; Graeme Carvlin; Michael Jerrett; Amanda Northcross
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 9.031

View more
  67 in total

Review 1.  A Review of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors from the Developers' Perspectives.

Authors:  Brigida Alfano; Luigi Barretta; Antonio Del Giudice; Saverio De Vito; Girolamo Di Francia; Elena Esposito; Fabrizio Formisano; Ettore Massera; Maria Lucia Miglietta; Tiziana Polichetti
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-29       Impact factor: 3.576

2.  Mapping urban air quality using mobile sampling with low-cost sensors and machine learning in Seoul, South Korea.

Authors:  Chris C Lim; Ho Kim; M J Ruzmyn Vilcassim; George D Thurston; Terry Gordon; Lung-Chi Chen; Kiyoung Lee; Michael Heimbinder; Sun-Young Kim
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2019-07-27       Impact factor: 9.621

3.  Statistical field calibration of a low-cost PM2.5 monitoring network in Baltimore.

Authors:  Abhirup Datta; Arkajyoti Saha; Misti Levy Zamora; Colby Buehler; Lei Hao; Fulizi Xiong; Drew R Gentner; Kirsten Koehler
Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 4.798

Review 4.  Interactions between environmental pollutants and genetic susceptibility in asthma risk.

Authors:  Hanna Johansson; Tesfaye B Mersha; Eric B Brandt; Gurjit K Khurana Hershey
Journal:  Curr Opin Immunol       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 7.486

5.  Use of low-cost PM monitors and a multi-wavelength aethalometer to characterize PM2.5 in the Yakama Nation Reservation.

Authors:  Orly Stampfer; Elena Austin; Terry Ganuelas; Tremain Fiander; Edmund Seto; Catherine Karr
Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 4.798

6.  Contribution of low-cost sensor measurements to the prediction of PM2.5 levels: A case study in Imperial County, California, USA.

Authors:  Jianzhao Bi; Jennifer Stowell; Edmund Y W Seto; Paul B English; Mohammad Z Al-Hamdan; Patrick L Kinney; Frank R Freedman; Yang Liu
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 6.498

7.  The use of personal and indoor air pollution monitors in reproductive epidemiology studies.

Authors:  Audrey J Gaskins; Jaime E Hart
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.980

8.  Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Multicomponent Gas Using Sensor Array.

Authors:  Shurui Fan; Zirui Li; Kewen Xia; Dongxia Hao
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 9.  Wildfire and prescribed burning impacts on air quality in the United States.

Authors:  Daniel A Jaffe; Susan M O'Neill; Narasimhan K Larkin; Amara L Holder; David L Peterson; Jessica E Halofsky; Ana G Rappold
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 2.235

10.  Development of an in-home, real-time air pollutant sensor platform and implications for community use.

Authors:  Sara E Gillooly; Yulun Zhou; Jose Vallarino; MyDzung T Chu; Drew R Michanowicz; Jonathan I Levy; Gary Adamkiewicz
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 8.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.