Evaluating the Performance of Low-Cost Air Quality Monitors in Dallas, Texas

被引:21
|
作者
Khreis, Haneen [1 ,2 ]
Johnson, Jeremy [1 ]
Jack, Katherine [3 ]
Dadashova, Bahar [1 ]
Park, Eun Sug [1 ]
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ Syst, Texas A&M Transportat Inst TTI, Bryan, TX 77807 USA
[2] Texas A&M Univ Syst, Ctr Adv Res Transportat Emiss Energy & Hlth CARTE, Bryan, TX 77807 USA
[3] Nature Conservancy, Texas Chapter, San Antonio, TX 78215 USA
关键词
low-cost sensors; air pollution; criteria air pollutants; co-location; meteorological factors; air quality index; PARTICULATE MATTER; FIELD CALIBRATION; AVAILABLE SENSORS; POLLUTION; VARIABILITY; CLUSTER; PART;
D O I
10.3390/ijerph19031647
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The emergence of low-cost air quality sensors may improve our ability to capture variations in urban air pollution and provide actionable information for public health. Despite the increasing popularity of low-cost sensors, there remain some gaps in the understanding of their performance under real-world conditions, as well as compared to regulatory monitors with high accuracy, but also high cost and maintenance requirements. In this paper, we report on the performance and the linear calibration of readings from 12 commercial low-cost sensors co-located at a regulatory air quality monitoring site in Dallas, Texas, for 18 continuous measurement months. Commercial AQY1 sensors were used, and their reported readings of O-3, NO2, PM2.5, and PM10 were assessed against a regulatory monitor. We assessed how well the raw and calibrated AQY1 readings matched the regulatory monitor and whether meteorology impacted performance. We found that each sensor's response was different. Overall, the sensors performed best for O-3 (R-2 = 0.36-0.97) and worst for NO2 (0.00-0.58), showing a potential impact of meteorological factors, with an effect of temperature on O-3 and relative humidity on PM. Calibration seemed to improve the accuracy, but not in all cases or for all performance metrics (e.g., precision versus bias), and it was limited to a linear calibration in this study. Our data showed that it is critical for users to regularly calibrate low-cost sensors and monitor data once they are installed, as sensors may not be operating properly, which may result in the loss of large amounts of data. We also recommend that co-location should be as exact as possible, minimizing the distance between sensors and regulatory monitors, and that the sampling orientation is similar. There were important deviations between the AQY1 and regulatory monitors' readings, which in small part depended on meteorology, hindering the ability of the low-costs sensors to present air quality accurately. However, categorizing air pollution levels, using for example the Air Quality Index framework, rather than reporting absolute readings, may be a more suitable approach. In addition, more sophisticated calibration methods, including accounting for individual sensor performance, may further improve performance. This work adds to the literature by assessing the performance of low-cost sensors over one of the longest durations reported to date.
引用
收藏
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Laboratory assessment of low-cost PM monitors
    Manikonda, Abhisek
    Zikova, Nadezda
    Hopke, Philip K.
    Ferro, Andrea R.
    JOURNAL OF AEROSOL SCIENCE, 2016, 102 : 29 - 40
  • [22] Machine learning techniques to improve the field performance of low-cost air quality sensors
    Bush, Tony
    Papaioannou, Nick
    Leach, Felix
    Pope, Francis D.
    Singh, Ajit
    Thomas, G. Neil
    Stacey, Brian
    Bartington, Suzanne
    ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, 2022, 15 (10) : 3261 - 3278
  • [23] Evaluation of field calibration methods and performance of AQMesh, a low-cost air quality monitor
    Wahlborg, Dan
    Bjorling, Mikael
    Mattsson, Magnus
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT, 2021, 193 (05)
  • [24] Evaluation of field calibration methods and performance of AQMesh, a low-cost air quality monitor
    Dan Wahlborg
    Mikael Björling
    Magnus Mattsson
    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2021, 193
  • [25] Investigating a Low-Cost Dryer Designed for Low-Cost PM Sensors Measuring Ambient Air Quality
    Samad, Abdul
    Melchor Mimiaga, Freddy Ernesto
    Laquai, Bernd
    Vogt, Ulrich
    SENSORS, 2021, 21 (03) : 1 - 18
  • [26] Assessment of PM2.5 concentrations, transport, and mitigation in indoor environments using low-cost air quality monitors and a portable air cleaner
    Sankhyan, Sumit
    Witteman, Julia K.
    Coyan, Steven
    Patel, Sameer
    Vance, Marina E.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE-ATMOSPHERES, 2022, 2 (04): : 647 - 658
  • [27] Kitchen Area Air Quality Measurements in Northern Ghana: Evaluating the Performance of a Low-Cost Particulate Sensor within a Household Energy Study
    Coffey, Evan R.
    Pfotenhauer, David
    Mukherjee, Anondo
    Agao, Desmond
    Moro, Ali
    Dalaba, Maxwell
    Begay, Taylor
    Banacos, Natalie
    Oduro, Abraham
    Dickinson, Katherine L.
    Hannigan, Michael P.
    ATMOSPHERE, 2019, 10 (07)
  • [28] Low-cost Air Quality System for Urban Area Monitoring
    Firculescu, Adrian-Cosmin
    Tudose, Dan Stefan
    2015 20TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTROL SYSTEMS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2015, : 240 - 247
  • [29] Internet of Things based Low-Cost Air Quality Surveillance
    Jeaunita, T. C. Jermin
    Sarasvathi, V
    Saritha
    2019 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS, SIGNAL PROCESSING AND NETWORKING (WISPNET 2019): ADVANCING WIRELESS AND MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES FOR 2020 INFORMATION SOCIETY, 2019, : 26 - 30
  • [30] Combining low-cost, surface-based aerosol monitors with size-resolved satellite data for air quality applications
    deSouza, Priyanka
    Kahn, Ralph A.
    Limbacher, James A.
    Marais, Eloise A.
    Duarte, Fabio
    Ratti, Carlo
    ATMOSPHERIC MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, 2020, 13 (10) : 5319 - 5334