Assessment of indoor and outdoor PM species at schools and residences in a high-altitude Ecuadorian urban center.
Assessment of indoor and outdoor PM species at schools and residences in a high-altitude Ecuadorian urban center.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.envpol.2016.04.085
复制
发表时间：
2016-07
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Li WW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Raysoni AU;Armijos RX;Weigel MM;Montoya T;Eschanique P;Racines M;Li WW
2010 年，在厄瓜多尔基多 Z1（北部）、Z2（中部）和 Z3（东南）地区的三个低收入社区开展了一项空气监测活动，评估儿童在学校和住宅的室内和室外环境暴露情况。基多是一个拥有 220 万居民的主要城市中心，位于一个狭窄的山区盆地，海拔 2850 米。 Z1 区位于基多北部，历史上曾经历过采石场排放和交通流量中等的情况。 Z2 区受到交通繁忙的影响，而 Z3 区交通密度较低。在 12 个月的时间里，每个月在学校（每个区域一个）和住宅（Z1=47、Z2=45 和 Z3=41）每周平均收集 PM 样本。三个区域的室内 PM2.5 浓度范围为 10.6±4.9 μg/m3（Z1 学校）至 29.0±30.5 μg/m3（Z1 住宅），室外 PM2.5 浓度范围为 10.9±3.2 μg/m3（Z1 学校）至 14.3±10.1 μg/m3（Z2 住宅）。 Z2 学校记录了室内和室外微环境 PM10-2.5 的最低值，分别为 5.7±2.8 μg/m3 和 7.9±2.2 μg/m3。室外学校 PM 浓度与相应的室内值表现出更强的关联性，使其成为自然通风的基多公立学校室内暴露的有力替代指标。学校和住宅区 PM 粒径分数与中央环境监测 (CAM) 站点的各种污染物和气象参数之间的相关性分析表明存在不同程度的时间关系。 Z2 学校及其相应 CAM 站点的室外 PM2.5 观察到强正相关性 (r=0.77)，表明存在与交通相关的排放。使用发散系数 (COD) 分析评估 CAM 网络和采样点之间 PM2.5 浓度的空间异质性。当 CAM 站点与室外测量值配对时，COD 值较低 (< 0.2)，而当 CAM 与室内值进行比较时，COD 值较高 (> 0.2)，这表明基多的 CAM 网络可能并不代表实际的室内暴露。
An air monitoring campaign to assess children’s environmental exposures in schools and residences, both indoors and outdoors, was conducted in 2010 in three low-income neighborhoods in Z1(north), Z2(central), and Z3(southeast) zones of Quito, Ecuador - a major urban center of 2.2 million inhabitants situated 2850 meters above sea level in a narrow mountainous basin. Z1 zone, located in northern Quito, historically experienced emissions from quarries and moderate traffic. Z2 zone was influenced by heavy traffic in contrast to Z3 zone which experienced low traffic densities. Weekly averages of PM samples were collected at schools (one in each zone) and residences (Z1=47, Z2=45, and Z3=41) every month, over a twelve-month period at the three zones. Indoor PM2.5 concentrations ranged from 10.6±4.9 μg/m3 (Z1 school) to 29.0±30.5 μg/m3 (Z1 residences) and outdoor PM2.5 concentrations varied from 10.9±3.2 μg/m3 (Z1 school) to 14.3±10.1 μg/m3 (Z2 residences), across the three zones. The lowest values for PM10–2.5 for indoor and outdoor microenvironments were recorded at Z2 school, 5.7±2.8 μg/m3 and 7.9±2.2 μg/m3, respectively. Outdoor school PM concentrations exhibited stronger associations with corresponding indoor values making them robust proxies for indoor exposures in naturally ventilated Quito public schools. Correlation analysis between the school and residential PM size fractions and the various pollutant and meteorological parameters from central ambient monitoring (CAM) sites suggested varying degrees of temporal relationship. Strong positive correlation was observed for outdoor PM2.5 at Z2 school and its corresponding CAM site (r=0.77) suggesting common traffic related emissions. Spatial heterogeneity in PM2.5 concentrations between CAM network and sampled sites was assessed using Coefficient of Divergence (COD) analysis. COD values were lower when CAM sites were paired with outdoor measurements (< 0.2) and higher when CAM and indoor values were compared (> 0.2), suggesting that CAM network in Quito may not represent actual indoor exposures.