학술논문
Influence of ambient (outdoor) sources on residential indoor and personal PM2.5concentrations: Analyses of RIOPA data
Document Type
Article
Author
Meng, Qing Yu; Turpin, Barbara J; Korn, Leo; Weisel, Clifford P; Morandi, Maria; Colome, Steven; Zhang, Junfeng; Stock, Thomas; Spektor, Dalia; Winer, Arthur; Zhang, Lin; Lee, Jong Hoon; Giovanetti, Robert; Cui, William; Kwon, Jaymin; Alimokhtari, Shahnaz; Shendell, Derek; Jones, Jennifer; Farrar, Corice; Maberti, Silvia
Source
Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology; January 2005, Vol. 15 Issue: 1 p17-28, 12p
Subject
Language
ISSN
15590631; 1559064X
Abstract
The Relationship of Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air (RIOPA) study was designed to investigate residential indoor, outdoor and personal exposures to several classes of air pollutants, including volatile organic compounds, carbonyls and fine particles (PM2.5). Samples were collected from summer, 1999 to spring, 2001 in Houston (TX), Los Angeles (CA) and Elizabeth (NJ). Indoor, outdoor and personal PM2.5samples were collected at 212 nonsmoking residences, 162 of which were sampled twice. Some homes were chosen due to close proximity to ambient sources of one or more target analytes, while others were farther from sources. Median indoor, outdoor and personal PM2.5mass concentrations for these three sites were 14.4, 15.5 and 31.4 μg/m3, respectively. The contributions of ambient (outdoor) and nonambient sources to indoor and personal concentrations were quantified using a single compartment box model with measured air exchange rate and a random component superposition (RCS) statistical model. The median contribution of ambient sources to indoor PM2.5concentrations using the mass balance approach was estimated to be 56% for all study homes (63%, 52% and 33% for California, New Jersey and Texas study homes, respectively). Reasonable variations in model assumptions alter median ambient contributions by less than 20%. The mean of the distribution of ambient contributions across study homes agreed well for the mass balance and RCS models, but the distribution was somewhat broader when calculated using the mass balance model with measured air exchange rates.Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology (2005) 15, 17–28. doi:10.1038/sj.jea.7500378 Published online 12 May 2004