4.2 Article

Investigation of PM2.5 and carbon dioxide levels in urban homes

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10962247.2015.1040138

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PM2.5 (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter <2.5 m) samples were collected in the indoor environments of 15 urban homes and their adjacent outdoor environments in Alexandria, Egypt, during the spring time. Indoor and outdoor carbon dioxide (CO2) levels were also measured concurrently. The results showed that indoor and outdoor PM2.5 concentrations in the 15 sites, with daily averages of 45.5 11.1 and 47.3 +/- 12.9 mu g/m(3), respectively, were significantly higher than the ambient 24-hr PM2.5 standard of 35 mu g/m(3) recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The indoor PM2.5 and CO2 levels were correlated with the corresponding outdoor levels, demonstrating that outdoor convection and infiltration could lead to direct transportation indoors. Ventilation rates were also measured in the selected residences and ranged from 1.6 to 4.5 hr(-1) with median value of 3.3 hr(-1). The indoor/outdoor (I/O) ratios of the monitored homes varied from 0.73 to 1.65 with average value of 0.99 +/- 0.26 for PM2.5, whereas those for CO2 ranged from 1.13 to 1.66 with average value of 1.41 +/- 0.15. Indoor sources and personal activities, including smoking and cooking, were found to significantly influence indoor levels.Implications: Few studies on indoor air quality were carried out in Egypt, and the scarce data resulted from such studies do not allow accurate assessment of the current situation to take necessary preventive actions. The current research investigates indoor levels of PM2.5 and CO2 in a number of homes located in the city of Alexandria as well as the potential contribution from both indoor and outdoor sources. The study draws attention of policymakers to the importance of the establishment of national indoor air quality standards to protect human health and control air pollution in different indoor environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据