Comparison of different PM2.5 monitors in Ontario’s research network
NICHOLAS KARELLAS (1), Andy Ng (1), Jerzy Desbosz (1)
(1) Ontario Ministry of the Environment
Abstract Number: 239
Preference: Poster Presentation
Last modified: April 30, 2010
Working Group: Instrumentation and Methods
PM$_(2.5) data were acquired at Ontario’s research network sites using different analyzers: a Thermo Series 1400ab continuous particulate TEOM (tapered element oscillating microbalance) monitor with sample equilibration system (SES) measures PM$_(2.5) in real time; TEOM with filter dynamics measurement system (FDMS) provides running hourly average PM$_(2.5) concentrations every six minutes; a Met One BAM-1020 (beta attenuation monitor) continuous PM monitoring system uses beta ray attenuation to calculate hourly PM$_(2.5) data; a Thermo model 5030 SHARP (synchronized hybrid ambient real-time particulate) monitor combines light scattering photometry and beta radiation attenuation to give real-time continuous PM$_(2.5) measurements; and a GRIMM model 180 environmental dust monitor uses laser light scattering technology to provide real-time measurements. Laboratory bench-testing was performed after purchasing each monitor, followed by installation, based on available space, in selected Ontario research sites (Windsor, Hamilton, Toronto, Ottawa) between 2005 and 2009. PM$_(2.5) data of each monitor were compared with federal reference method (FRM) data. Inter-comparison of data was performed to determine differences among the monitors as well as data variability in terms of season. Disagreement in measurements was greatest with GRIMM and TEOM-SES particularly at lower ambient air temperatures. Good agreement was observed between data acquired by TEOM-FDMS, BAM, and SHARP. Preliminary analysis of data show that TEOM-SES and GRIMM were significantly lower compared with the other three monitors. Recent results from this on-going study will be presented.