Field- and model-based calibration of polyurethane foam passive air samplers in different climate regions highlights differences in sampler uptake performance. (1st October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bohlin-Nizzetto, Pernilla; Melymuk, Lisa; White, Kevin B.; Kalina, Jiří; Madadi, Vincent O.; Adu-Kumi, Sam; Prokeš, Roman; Přibylová, Petra; Klánová, Jana
• Is Part Of: Atmospheric environment. Volume 238(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-10-01
• Subjects: Passive air sampling -- Polyurethane foam -- Sampling rates -- Persistent organic pollutants -- Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Air -- Pollution -- Periodicals; Air -- Pollution -- Meteorological aspects -- Periodicals; 551.51
• DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117742
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1352-2310

Abstract

Abstract: Polyurethane foam (PUF) passive air samplers (PAS) are widely used for measurements of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and other semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) in large-scale monitoring networks as well as in case studies around the globe. Calibration of PUF-PAS is performed by field-based calibration studies or passive sampler uptake models. Both are typically performed and/or validated in temperate zones, however the sampling rates are more widely applied, including in tropical and polar zones. Here, we present field-based calibration results for MONET PUF-PAS from a subtropical and tropical site (Nairobi, Kenya and Accra, Ghana) based on side-by-side deployment of PUF-PAS and active air samplers (AAS), as well as model PAS uptake from available passive sampler uptake models. By comparing these results with a similar calibration from a temperate site (Brno, Czech Republic), we show that higher ambient temperatures result in higher effective sampling rates for intermediate molecular weight SVOCs (logKOA of 7–11) as a result of lower particle-bound fractions, and in lower sample volumes for lighter SVOCs (logKOA <7) as a result of a shorter time to equilibrium. This highlights the importance of adjusting passive sampling rates according to site-specific air temperatures. Model-based calibrations provided sampling volumes in agreement with the field-based calibration except for high KOA compounds, but the source of the discrepancy appears to be the model parameterization of the specific PUF-PAS sampler type rather than temperature-induced differences. Overall, the results suggest that while careful consideration should be taken when extrapolating calibration information from temperate to tropical zones, field or model-based calibrations are appropriate, and greater attention should be given to ensuring passive sampler models are correctly parameterized for the sampling configuration used. Highlights: Uptake performance of PUF-PAS differ in subtropical/tropical and temperate climate zones. Temperature differences affect particle-bound fractions and thus sampling rates for PUF-PAS. Higher temperatures shorten the time to equilibrium for low KOA compounds. PAS calibration models must be correctly parameterized for specific sampler configurations.