Advertisement

Indoor–Outdoor Relationships of Particle Number and Mass in European Cities

  • Gerard HoekEmail author
  • Otto Hänninen
  • Josef Cyrys
Chapter
Part of the The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry book series (HEC, volume 26)

Abstract

Human exposure to air pollutants is often characterized by measured or modeled outdoor concentrations. In Western societies, subjects spend about 90% of their time indoors, of which a large fraction in their own home. Hence indoor air quality is an important determinant of the true personal exposure for many components. Indoor air quality is affected both by infiltration of outdoor air in buildings and indoor sources such as smoking, gas cooking, and use of consumer products. In this chapter we separately describe the impact of indoor sources and outdoor air on indoor pollution. We first illustrate differences in outdoor and personal exposure using data on real-time particle number concentrations from a recent study in Augsburg, Germany. We then present a model of indoor PM concentrations, illustrating the factors that affect indoor air quality. We summarize empirical studies that have assessed indoor–outdoor relationships for particle mass, particle number, and specific components of particulate matter.

Outdoor air pollution significantly infiltrates in buildings. Combined with the large fraction of time that people typically spend indoors, a major fraction of human exposure to outdoor pollutants occurs indoors. Understanding the factors affecting infiltration is therefore important. Infiltration factors have been shown to vary substantially across seasons, individual homes and particle size and components. Important factors contributing to these variations include air exchange rate, characteristics of the building envelop (e.g., geometry of cracks), type of ventilation, and use of filtration. Penetration and decay losses are particle size dependent with the lowest losses for submicrometer particles and higher losses for ultrafine and especially coarse particles. The largest infiltration factors are consistently found for sulfate and black carbon. Volatilization and chemical decay may also result in losses of specific components, including nitrates and organic components. The large variability of PM2.5 infiltration factors reported may further be due to different composition of PM across locations. In locations with relatively high sulfate and EC contributions, higher infiltration factors can be anticipated than in locations with high nitrate and OC concentrations.

Keywords

Indoor air Infiltration Outdoor Particle size Particles Penetration Ultrafine 

References

  1. 1.
    Brunekreef B, Holgate S (2002) Air pollution and health. Lancet 360:1233–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    World Health Organization (2006) Systematic review of air pollution, a global updateGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Seaton A, MacNee W, Donaldson K, Godden D (1995) Particulate air pollution and acute health effects. Lancet 345:176–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pekkanen J, Kulmala M (2004) Exposure assessment of ultrafine particles in epidemiologic time-series studies. Scand J Work Environ Health 30(Suppl 2):9–18Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sioutas C, Delfino RJ, Singh M (2005) Exposure assessment for atmospheric ultrafine particles (UFPs) and implications in epidemiological research. Environ Health Perspect 113:947–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dockery DW, Spengler JD (1981) Personal exposure to respirable particulates and sulfates. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 31:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilson W, Mage DT, Grant LD (2000) Estimating separately personal exposure to ambient and nonambient particulate matter for epidemiology and risk assessment: why and how. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 50:1167–1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hänninen OO, Lebret E, Ilacqua V, Katsouyanni K, Künzli N, Srám RJ, Jantunen MJ (2004) Infiltration of ambient PM2.5 and levels of indoor generated non-ETS PM2.5 in residences of four European cities. Atmos Environ 38(37):6411–6423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hänninen O, Hoek G, Mallone S, Chellini E, Katsouyanni K, Kuenzli N, Gariazzo C, Cattani G, Marconi A, Molnár P, Bellander T, Jantunen M (2011) Seasonal patterns in ventilation and PM infiltration in European cities: review, modelling and meta-analysis of available studies from different climatological zones. Air Qual Atmos Health 4(3–4):221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu D-L, Nazaroff W (2001) Modeling pollutant penetration across building envelopes. Atmos Environ 35:4451–4462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen C, Zhao B (2011) Review of relationship between indoor and outdoor particles: I/O ratio, infiltration factor and penetration factor. Atmos Environ 45(2):275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lai A, Nazaroff W (2000) Modeling indoor particle deposition from turbulent flow onto smooth surfaces. J Aerosol Sci 31:463–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoek G, Kos G, Harrison R, de Hartog J, Meliefste K, ten Brink H, Katsouyanni K, Karakatsani A, Lianou M, Kotronarou A, Kavouras I, Pekkanen J, Vallius M, Kulmala M, Puustinen A, Thomas S, Meddings C, Ayres J, van Wijnen J, Hameri K (2008) Indoor-outdoor relationships of particle number and mass in four European cities. Atmos Environ 42(1):156–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wichmann J, Lind T, Nilsson MA-M, Bellander T (2010) PM 2.5, soot and NO 2 indoor-outdoor relationships at homes, pre-schools and schools in Stockholm, Sweden. Atmos Environ 44(36):4536–4544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meng QY, Spector D, Colome S, Turpin B (2009) Determinants of indoor and personal exposure to PM2.5 of indoor and outdoor origin during the RIOPA study. Atmos Environ 43(36):5750–5758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Long CM, Suh HH, Koutrakis P (2000) Characterization of indoor particle sources using continuous mass and size monitors. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 507:1236–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Long CM, Suh HH, Catalano PJ, Koutrakis P (2001) Using time- and size-resolved particulate data to quantify indoor penetration and deposition behavior. Environ Sci Technol 3510:2089–2099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sarnat SE, Coull BA, Ruiz PA, Koutrakis P, Suh HH (2006) The influences of ambient particle composition and size on particle infiltration in Los Angeles, CA, residences. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 56(2):186–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kearney J, Wallace L, MacNeill M, Xu X, VanRyswyk K, You H, Kulka R, Wheeler AJ (2011) Residential indoor and outdoor ultrafine particles in Windsor, Ontario. Atmos Environ 45:7583–7593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abt E, S H, Allen G, Koutrakis P (2000) Characterization of indoor particle sources: a study conducted in the metropolitan Boston area. Environ Health Perspect 108:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Abt E, Suh HH, Catalano P, Koutrakis P (2000) Relative contribution of outdoor and indoor particle sources to indoor concentrations. Environ Sci Technol 34:3579–3587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koponen IK, Asmi A, Keronen P, Puhto K, Kulmala M (2001) Indoor air measurement campaign in Helsinki, Finland 1999 – the effect of outdoor air pollution on indoor air. Atmos Environ 35:1465–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cyrys J, Pitz M et al (2004) Relationship between indoor and outdoor levels of fine particle mass, particle number concentrations and black smoke under different ventilation conditions. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 144:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kuhn T, Krudysz M, Zhu Y, Fine PM, Hinds WC, Froines J, Sioutas C (2005) Volatility of indoor and outdoor ultrafine particulate matter near a freeway. J Aerosol Sci 36(3):291–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhu Y, Hinds WC, Krudysz M, Kuhn T, Froines J, Sioutas C (2005) Penetration of freeway ultrafine particles into indoor environments. J Aerosol Sci 36(3):303–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Molnár P, Bellander T, Sällsten G, Boman J (2007) Indoor and outdoor concentrations of PM2.5 trace elements at homes, preschools and schools in Stockholm, Sweden. J Environ Monit 9(4):348–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sarnat JA, Long CM, Koutrakis P, Coull BA, Schwartz J, Suh HH (2002) Using sulfur as a tracer of outdoor fine particulate matter. Environ Sci Technol 36:5305–5314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Brunekreef B, Janssen NA, de Hartog JJ, Oldenwening M, Meliefste K, Hoek G, Lanki T, Timonen KL, Vallius M, Pekkanen J, Van Grieken R (2005) Personal, indoor, and outdoor exposures to PM2.5 and its components for groups of cardiovascular patients in Amsterdam and Helsinki. Research Reports Health Effects Institute 127Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Polidori A, Cheung KL, Arhami M, Delfino RJ, Schauer JJ, Sioutas C (2009) Relationships between size-fractionated indoor and outdoor trace elements at four retirement communities in southern California. Atmos Chem Phys 9(14):4521–4536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Suh HH, Koutrakis P, Spengler JD (1994) The relationship between airborne acidity and ammonia in indoor environments. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 4(1):1–22Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lunden MM, Revzan KL, Fischer ML, Thatcher TL, Littlejohn D, Hering SV, Brown NJ (2003) The transformation of outdoor ammonium nitrate aerosols in the indoor environment. Atmos Environ 37(39–40):5633–5644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gotschi T, Oglesby L, Mathys P, Monn C, Manalis N, Koistinen K, Jantunen M, Hanninen O, Polanska L, Kunzli N (2002) Comparison of black smoke and PM2.5 levels in indoor and outdoor environments of four European cities. Environ Sci Technol 36(6):1191–1197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lunden MM, Kirchstetter TW, Thatcher TL, Hering SV, Brown NJ (2008) Factors affecting the indoor concentrations of carbonaceous aerosols of outdoor origin. Atmos Environ 42(22):5660–5671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pegas PN, Nunes T, Alves CA, Silva JR, Vieira SLA, Caseiro A, Pio CA (2012) Indoor and outdoor characterisation of organic and inorganic compounds in city centre and suburban elementary schools of Aveiro, Portugal. Atmos Environ 55:80–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Choi H, Perera F, Pac A, Wang L, Flak E, Mroz E, Jacek R, Chai-Onn T, Jedrychowski W, Masters E, Camann D, Spengler J (2008) Estimating individual-level exposure to airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons throughout the gestational period based on personal, indoor, and outdoor monitoring. Environ Health Perspect 116(11):1509–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IRAS, Institute for Risk Assessment SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Unit of Environmental EpidemiologyTHL-National Public Health InstituteKuopioFinland
  3. 3.HMGU Institute of Epidemiology IINeuherbergGermany

Personalised recommendations