Indoor and Outdoor Particle Number and Mass Concentrations in Athens. Sources, Sinks and Variability of Aerosol Parameters

Abstract

The scope of this work was to characterize PM mass and number concentration at typical residential microenvironments in the centre of Athens and to examine the relative contribution of the indoor and outdoor sources. Three residential flats located in densely populated residential areas were studied, during a warm and cold period of 2002. PM 10 , PM 2 and black carbon (BC) mass concentrations, as well as ultrafine and accumulation mode particle number size distributions were recorded indoors and outdoors simultaneously. Outdoor concentrations of all size fractions were significant, and indicative of urban sites affected by heavy traffic. Indoor levels were generally lower than the corresponding outdoor ones. Nevertheless, elevated indoor concentrations were recorded, caused by increased ambient air penetration in the indoor microenvironments and/or indoor particle generation. The mean 24-hr indoor PM 10 concentration at all residences was 35.0 ± 10.7 μg/m 3 during the warm period and 31.8 ± 7.8 μg/m 3 during the cold period. The corresponding PM 2 concentration was 30.1 ± 11.1 μg/m 3 and 27.2 ± 3.6 μg/m 3 during warm and cold periods, respectively. Regression analysis of indoor and outdoor concentration data revealed that indoor BC may be considered mainly of outdoor origin. A large fraction of the outdoor-generated PM 2 and ultrafine and accumulation mode particles also seems to penetrate indoors, causing elevated indoor levels. Regarding indoor particle generation, cooking was the strongest contributor in residential microenvironments.

Assessment of Indoor-Outdoor Particulate Matter Air Pollution: A Review

“…In the month of June in two modern offices with mechanical ventilation, Chatoutsidou et al [53] report low indoor daily averaged PM 10 concentrations (<3.5 µg/m 3 ) while simultaneously-collected outdoor measures ranged between 11 µg/m 3 and 21 µg/m 3 . Higher outdoor than indoor concentrations are also reported by Diapouli et al [54] at three residences with air-conditioning in the Athens urban area. However, they found approximately ten times higher 24 h-averaged PM 10 indoor values (≈25-47 µg/m 3 ) compared to the results of Chatoutsidou et al [53].…”

“…The use of PM4 is found in Weichenthal et al [62] where the measure of indoor PM4 in relation to I-O measurements of ultrafine particles (UFP) is reported. More recently, Diapouli et al [54] monitored I-O mass and PN concentrations of UFP, black smoke, PM10, and PM2, the latter using a custom-made impactor (with a cut-off point at 2.1 μm and at 23 L/min). The use of PM1 is documented in three studies at schools and universities of Central Europe and in studies assessing multiple indicators (including TSP, PM10, and PM2.5) [51,[56][57][58]63,64].…”

“…The recurrence of the use non-typical PM classes (i.e., PM 5 , PM 4 , PM 1 ) is also found in many studies, frequently joint with the most-used indicators [49,50,54,57,62,71].…”

Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha as Biomarkers of Exposure to Indoor Pollutants Among Primary School Children in Klang Valley

“…It is believed that indoor fine particulate pollutant was mainly from outdoor sources, which efficiently penetrate the indoors ambient (Diapouli et al, 2011). Thus, another contributing factor which is also known to have effects on particulate matters inside building includes the outdoor sources (Nazaroff, 2013).…”

Ionization Impact on the Air Cleaning Efficiency in the Interior

“…[24] provided data on the concentrations of PM 10 , PM 5 , PM 2.5 , and PM 1 measured in an interior and exterior of a primary school in India. Some publications [25], [26], [27] presented the measurement of the concentration of dust particles during cooking and attempted to eliminate such particles by ionization. [28] presented an automatic device for a precise measurement of ion concentration in the atmosphere.…”