Long-term evaluation of air sensor technology under ambient conditions in Denver, Colorado
Long-term evaluation of air sensor technology under ambient conditions in Denver, Colorado
复制标题
DOI：
10.5194/amt-11-4605-2018
复制
发表时间：
2018-08-08
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Garvey, Sam
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Feinberg, Stephen;Williams, Ron;Garvey, Sam
空气污染传感器在各种应用中迅速普及，其低价格点支持高密度网络、公民科学和个人消费者使用。这一新兴技术推动了在现实世界条件下的评估，包括不同的污染水平和环境条件。2015-2016年，在科罗拉多州丹佛市对低成本空气污染传感器进行了为期7个月的系统现场评估；选择该地点是为了在高海拔、凉爽和干燥的气候下评估传感器。一套微粒物质（PM）、臭氧（O-3）和二氧化氮（NO2）传感器一式三份，并与联邦等效方法（FEM）监测仪在城市监管站点进行配置。对传感器的数据完整性、与参考监测仪的相关性以及再现污染数据趋势的能力（如每日浓度值和风向模式）进行了评估。当数据记录器正常工作时，大多数传感器显示数据完整性高。传感器显示了一系列与参考仪器的相关性，从差到很高（例如，每小时平均PM Pearson与参考测量值的相关性从0.01到0.86不等）。一些传感器对实验室审核/测试的响应从采样活动之前到之后发生了变化，例如Aeroqual，其O-3响应斜率从大约1.2变化到0.6。一些PM传感器测量的风向和时间趋势与参考监测器测量的相似，而另一些则没有。这项研究显示传感器性能的结果与美国环保署和其他机构之前的研究结果不同，这可能是由于不同的地理位置、气象和气溶胶特性。这些结果表明，为了了解新兴的空气传感技术，有必要进行持续的现场测试。
Air pollution sensors are quickly proliferating for use in a wide variety of applications, with a low price point that supports use in high-density networks, citizen science, and individual consumer use. This emerging technology motivates the assessment under real-world conditions, including varying pollution levels and environmental conditions. A seven-month, systematic field evaluation of low-cost air pollution sensors was performed in Denver, Colorado, over 2015-2016; the location was chosen to evaluate the sensors in a high-altitude, cool, and dry climate. A suite of particulate matter (PM), ozone (O-3), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) sensors were deployed in triplicate and were collocated with federal equivalent method (FEM) monitors at an urban regulatory site. Sensors were evaluated for their data completeness, correlation with reference monitors, and ability to reproduce trends in pollution data, such as daily concentration values and wind-direction patterns. Most sensors showed high data completeness when data loggers were functioning properly. The sensors displayed a range of correlations with reference instruments, from poor to very high (e.g., hourly-average PM Pearson correlations with reference measurements varied from 0.01 to 0.86). Some sensors showed a change in response to laboratory audits/testing from before the sampling campaign to afterwards, such as Aeroqual, where the O-3 response slope changed from about 1.2 to 0.6. Some PM sensors measured wind-direction and time-of-day trends similar to those measured by reference monitors, while others did not. This study showed different results for sensor performance than previous studies performed by the U.S. EPA and others, which could be due to different geographic location, meteorology, and aerosol properties. These results imply that continued field testing is necessary to understand emerging air sensing technology.