Combining sensor-based measurement and modeling of PM2.5 and black carbon in assessing exposure to indoor aerosols

Comparing PM2.5, respirable dust, and total dust fractions using real-time and gravimetric samples in an exposure chamber study

Using an exposure chamber, we investigate the precision of the DustTrak DRX monitor by comparing its results to those obtained from taking traditional gravimetric samples of two stone minerals commonly used in asphalt and lactose powder. We also discuss the possibility of using real-time monitors such as DustTrak DRX for occupational exposure monitoring purposes. The results are based on 19 days of experiment, each day with measurements collected over 4 h. Compared to the gravimetric samples, the DustTrak DRX overestimated the PM_2.5 and respirable dust concentrations, while it underestimated the total dust concentration by a factor of nearly two. However, the ratios, being done for more than one material, between the DustTrak DRX and the gravimetric sample readings varied daily and across the different exposure materials. Real-time sensors have the potential to excel at identifying exposure sources, evaluating the measured control efficiency, visualizing variations in exposure to motivate workers, and contributing to the identification of measures to be implemented to reduce exposure. For total dust, a correction factor of at least two should be used to bring its readings up to those for the corresponding gravimetric samples. Also, if the DustTrak DRX is used in the initial profiling of occupational exposure, the exposure could be considered acceptable if the readings are well below the occupational exposure limit (OELs) after correction. If the DustTrak DRX readings, after correction, is close to, or above, the accepted exposure concentrations, more thorough approaches would be required to validate the exposure.

Exposure to Air Pollution in Rural Malawi: Impact of Cooking Methods on Blood Pressure and Peak Expiratory Flow

We made static and personal PM2.5 measurements with a miniature monitor (RTI MicroPEM) to characterise the exposure of women cooking with wood and charcoal in indoor and outdoor locations in rural Malawi, together with measurements of blood pressure and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR). Mean PM2.5 concentrations of 1338 and 31 µg/m3 were observed 1 m from cookstove locations during cooking with wood and charcoal, respectively. Similarly, mean personal PM2.5 exposures of 706 and 94 µg/m3 were observed during cooking with wood and charcoal, respectively. Personal exposures to PM2.5 in indoor locations were 3.3 and 1.7 times greater than exposures observed in equivalent outdoor locations for wood and charcoal, respectively. Prior to the measured exposure, six out of eight participants had PEFR observations below 80% of their expected (age and height) standardised PEFR. We observed reductions in PEFR for participants cooking with wood in indoor locations. Five out of eight participants reported breathing difficulties, coughing, and eye irritation when cooking with wood but reported that symptoms were less severe when cooking with charcoal. In conclusion, we observed that exposure to PM2.5 was substantially reduced by cooking outdoor with charcoal. As both wood and charcoal fuels are associated with negative environmental and health impacts, the adoption of high-efficiency cookstoves and less polluting sources of energy will be highly beneficial. Cooking outside whenever possible, and minimising the time spent in close proximity to stoves, may be simple interventions that could reduce the risks of exacerbation and progression of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in Malawi.