Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractDiscrimination of Two Cultivars of Alpinia Officinarum Hance Using an Electronic Nose and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Coupled with Chemometrics    Next AbstractComparison of ozone measurement methods in biomass burning smoke: an evaluation under field and laboratory conditions »

J Air Waste Manag Assoc


Title:Continuous determination of fine particulate matter mass in the Salt Lake City Environmental Monitoring project: a comparison of real-time and conventional TEOM monitor results
Author(s):Long RW; Eatough NL; Eatough DJ; Meyer MB; Wilson WE;
Address:"Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA"
Journal Title:J Air Waste Manag Assoc
Year:2005
Volume:55
Issue:12
Page Number:1839 - 1846
DOI:
ISSN/ISBN:1096-2247 (Print) 1096-2247 (Linking)
Abstract:"Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) mass was determined on a continuous basis at the Salt Lake City Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Monitoring for Public Awareness and Community Tracking monitoring site in Salt Lake City, UT, using three different monitoring techniques. Hourly averaged PM2.5 mass data were collected during two sampling periods (summer 2000 and winter 2002) using a real-time total ambient mass sampler (RAMS), sample equilibration system (SES)-tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM), and conventional TEOM monitor. This paper compares the results obtained from the various monitoring systems, which differ in their treatment of semivolatile material (SVM; particle-bound water, semivolatile ammonium nitrate, and semivolatile organic compounds). PM2.5 mass results obtained by the RAMS were consistently higher than those obtained by the SES-TEOM and conventional TEOM monitors because of the RAMS ability to measure semivolatile ammonium nitrate and semivolatile organic material but not particle-bound water. The SES-TEOM monitoring system was able to account for an average of 28% of the SVM, whereas the conventional TEOM monitor loses essentially all of the SVM from the single filter during sampling. Occasional mass readings by the various TEOM monitors that are higher than RAMS results may reflect particle-bound water, which, under some conditions, is measured by the TEOM but not the RAMS"
Keywords:Air Pollutants/*analysis Cities Dust/*analysis Environmental Monitoring/instrumentation/*methods Time Factors Utah Volatilization;
Notes:"MedlineLong, Russell W Eatough, Norman L Eatough, Delbert J Meyer, Michael B Wilson, William E eng Comparative Study Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. 2006/01/18 J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2005 Dec; 55(12):1839-46"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 19-12-2024