Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
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 difference in infiltration between components and particle sizes documents
that indoor air quality differs from outdoor air quality, even in the absence of indoor
sources. This may result in measurement error in exposure estimates that exclu-
sively focus on outdoor concentrations. Furthermore heterogeneity in the size of
estimated health effects may occur in epidemiological studies using exposure
estimates based upon outdoor concentrations performed in different locations that
differ in factors affecting infiltration.
The large variability of PM
2.5
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.
References
1. Brunekreef B, Holgate S (2002) Air pollution and health. Lancet 360:1233-1242
2. World Health Organization (2006) Systematic review of air pollution, a global update
3. Seaton A, MacNee W, Donaldson K, Godden D (1995) Particulate air pollution and acute
health effects. Lancet 345:176-178
4. Pekkanen J, Kulmala M (2004) Exposure assessment of ultrafine particles in epidemiologic
time-series studies. Scand J Work Environ Health 30(Suppl 2):9-18
5. Sioutas C, Delfino RJ, Singh M (2005) Exposure assessment for atmospheric ultrafine particles
(UFPs) and implications in epidemiological research. Environ Health Perspect 113:947-955
6. Dockery DW, Spengler JD (1981) Personal exposure to respirable particulates and sulfates.
J Air Pollut Control Assoc 31:153-159
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 50:1167-1183
8. H¨nninen OO, Lebret E, Ilacqua V, Katsouyanni K, K¨nzli N, Sr
´
m RJ, Jantunen MJ (2004)
Infiltration of ambient PM
2.5
and levels of indoor generated non-ETS PM
2.5
in residences of
four European cities. Atmos Environ 38(37):6411-6423
9. H
¨
nninen O, Hoek G, Mallone S, Chellini E, Katsouyanni K, Kuenzli N, Gariazzo C, Cattani G,
Marconi A, Moln
´
r 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):221-233
10. Liu D-L, Nazaroff W (2001) Modeling pollutant penetration across building envelopes. Atmos
Environ 35:4451-4462
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):275-288
12. Lai A, Nazaroff W (2000) Modeling indoor particle deposition from turbulent flow onto
smooth surfaces. J Aerosol Sci 31:463-476
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):156-169
