Literature DB >> 33746555

Deliberating Performance Targets: Follow-on workshop discussing PM10, NO2, CO, and SO2 air sensor targets.

R M Duvall1, G S W Hagler1, A L Clements1, K Benedict2, K Barkjohn3, V Kilaru1, T Hanley2, N Watkins2, A Kaufman2, A Kamal4, S Reece5, P Fransioli6, M Gerboles7, G Gillerman8, R Habre9, M Hannigan10, Z Ning11, V Papapostolou12, R Pope13, P J E Quintana14, J Lam Snyder15.   

Abstract

The use of air sensor technology is increasing worldwide for a variety of applications, however, with significant variability in data quality. The United States Environmental Protection Agency held a workshop in July 2019 to deliberate possible performance targets for air sensors measuring particles with aerodynamic diameters of 10 μm or less (PM10), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). These performance targets were discussed from the perspective of non-regulatory applications and with the sensors operating primarily in a stationary mode in outdoor environments. Attendees included representatives from multiple levels of government organizations, sensor developers, environmental nonprofits, international organizations, and academia. The workshop addressed the current lack of sensor technology requirements, discussed fit-for-purpose data quality needs, and debated transparency issues. This paper highlights the purpose and key outcomes of the workshop. While more information on performance and applications of sensors is available than in past years, the performance metrics, or parameters used to describe data quality, vary among the studies reports and there is a need for more clear and consistent approaches for evaluating sensor performance. Organizations worldwide are increasingly considering, or are in the process of developing, sensor performance targets and testing protocols. Workshop participants suggested that these new guidelines are highly desirable, would help improve data quality, and would give users more confidence in their data. Given the wide variety of uses for sensors and user backgrounds, as well as varied sensor design features (e.g., communication approaches, data tools, processing/adjustment algorithms and calibration procedures), the need for transparency was a key workshop theme. Suggestions for increasing transparency included documenting and sharing testing and performance data, detailing best practices, and sharing data processing and correction approaches.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Air sensors; CO; NO2; PM10; Performance targets; SO2

Year:  2021        PMID: 33746555      PMCID: PMC7970457          DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.118099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atmos Environ (1994)        ISSN: 1352-2310            Impact factor:   4.798


  11 in total

1.  The rise of low-cost sensing for managing air pollution in cities.

Authors:  Prashant Kumar; Lidia Morawska; Claudio Martani; George Biskos; Marina Neophytou; Silvana Di Sabatino; Margaret Bell; Leslie Norford; Rex Britter
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 9.621

2.  Toward a Unified Terminology of Processing Levels for Low-Cost Air-Quality Sensors.

Authors:  Philipp Schneider; Alena Bartonova; Nuria Castell; Franck R Dauge; Michel Gerboles; Gayle S W Hagler; Christoph Hüglin; Roderic L Jones; Sean Khan; Alastair C Lewis; Bas Mijling; Michael Müller; Michele Penza; Laurent Spinelle; Brian Stacey; Matthias Vogt; Joost Wesseling; Ronald W Williams
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Mapping urban air quality in near real-time using observations from low-cost sensors and model information.

Authors:  Philipp Schneider; Nuria Castell; Matthias Vogt; Franck R Dauge; William A Lahoz; Alena Bartonova
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 9.621

Review 4.  Applications of low-cost sensing technologies for air quality monitoring and exposure assessment: How far have they gone?

Authors:  Lidia Morawska; Phong K Thai; Xiaoting Liu; Akwasi Asumadu-Sakyi; Godwin Ayoko; Alena Bartonova; Andrea Bedini; Fahe Chai; Bryce Christensen; Matthew Dunbabin; Jian Gao; Gayle S W Hagler; Rohan Jayaratne; Prashant Kumar; Alexis K H Lau; Peter K K Louie; Mandana Mazaheri; Zhi Ning; Nunzio Motta; Ben Mullins; Md Mahmudur Rahman; Zoran Ristovski; Mahnaz Shafiei; Dian Tjondronegoro; Dane Westerdahl; Ron Williams
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 9.621

5.  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

6.  Assessing the Utility of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors over a 12-Week Period in the Cuyama Valley of California.

Authors:  Anondo Mukherjee; Levi G Stanton; Ashley R Graham; Paul T Roberts
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2017-08-05       Impact factor: 3.576

7.  Development of Low-Cost Air Quality Stations for Next Generation Monitoring Networks: Calibration and Validation of PM2.5 and PM10 Sensors.

Authors:  Alice Cavaliere; Federico Carotenuto; Filippo Di Gennaro; Beniamino Gioli; Giovanni Gualtieri; Francesca Martelli; Alessandro Matese; Piero Toscano; Carolina Vagnoli; Alessandro Zaldei
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 3.576

8.  Long-term evaluation of air sensor technology under ambient conditions in Denver, Colorado.

Authors:  Stephen Feinberg; Ron Williams; Gayle S W Hagler; Joshua Rickard; Ryan Brown; Daniel Garver; Greg Harshfield; Phillip Stauffer; Erick Mattson; Robert Judge; Sam Garvey
Journal:  Atmos Meas Tech       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Analysing the performance of low-cost air quality sensors, their drivers, relative benefits and calibration in cities-a case study in Sheffield.

Authors:  Said Munir; Martin Mayfield; Daniel Coca; Stephen A Jubb; Ogo Osammor
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 2.513

10.  On the Security and Data Integrity of Low-Cost Sensor Networks for Air Quality Monitoring.

Authors:  Lan Luo; Yue Zhang; Bryan Pearson; Zhen Ling; Haofei Yu; Xinwen Fu
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-12-16       Impact factor: 3.576

View more
  1 in total

1.  Development and Application of a United States wide correction for PM2.5 data collected with the PurpleAir sensor.

Authors:  Karoline K Barkjohn; Brett Gantt; Andrea L Clements
Journal:  Atmos Meas Tech       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 4.184

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.