Outdoor Versus Indoor Contributions to Indoor Particulate Matter (PM) Determined by Mass Balance Methods

This study compares an indoor-outdoor air-exchange mass balance model (IO model) with a chemical mass balance (CMB) model. The models were used to determine the contribution of outdoor sources and indoor resuspension activities to indoor particulate matter (PM) concentrations. Simultaneous indoor an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (1995) 2004-09, Vol.54 (9), p.1188-1196
Main Authors: Kopperud, Royal J., Ferro, Andrea R., Hildemann, Lynn M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Air Movements
Air Pollutants - analysis
Air Pollution, Indoor - analysis
Airborne particulates
Applied sciences
Environmental engineering
Environmental Monitoring
Exact sciences and technology
Indoor air quality
Mass balance models
Models, Theoretical
Outdoor air quality
Particle Size
Pollution
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compares an indoor-outdoor air-exchange mass balance model (IO model) with a chemical mass balance (CMB) model. The models were used to determine the contribution of outdoor sources and indoor resuspension activities to indoor particulate matter (PM) concentrations. Simultaneous indoor and outdoor measurements of PM concentration, chemical composition, and air-exchange rate were made for five consecutive days at a single-family residence using particle counters, neph-elometers, and filter samples of integrated PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) and PM with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 5 μm (PM 5 ). Chemical compositions were determined by inductively coupled plasma mass-spectrometry. During three high-activity days, prescribed activities, such as cleaning and walking, were conducted over a period of 4-6 hr. For the remaining two days, indoor activities were minimal. Indoor sources accounted for 60-89% of the PM 2.5 and more than 90% of the PM 5 for the high-activity days. For the minimal-activity days, indoor sources accounted for 27-47% of PM 2.5 and 44-60% of the PM 5 . Good agreement was found between the two mass balance methods. Indoor PM 2.5 originating outdoors averaged 53% of outdoor concentrations.
ISSN:1096-2247
2162-2906
DOI:10.1080/10473289.2004.10470983