4.5 Article

Overview of HOMEChem: House Observations of Microbial and Environmental Chemistry

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE-PROCESSES & IMPACTS
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 1280-1300

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c9em00228f

关键词

-

资金

  1. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation [G-2017-9944, G-2017-9692, G-2016-7049, G-2016-7050, G-2018-11062, G-2018-11031, G-2018-10128, G-2018-11366, G-2018-11035, G-2016-7173]
  2. CIRES Innovative Research Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The House Observations of Microbial and Environmental Chemistry (HOMEChem) study is a collaborative field investigation designed to probe how everyday activities influence the emissions, chemical transformations and removal of trace gases and particles in indoor air. Sequential and layered experiments in a research house included cooking, cleaning, variable occupancy, and window-opening. This paper describes the overall design of HOMEChem and presents preliminary case studies investigating the concentrations of reactive trace gases, aerosol particles, and surface films. Cooking was a large source of VOCs, CO2, NOx, and particles. By number, cooking particles were predominantly in the ultrafine mode. Organic aerosol dominated the submicron mass, and, while variable between meals and throughout the cooking process, was dominated by components of hydrocarbon character and low oxygen content, similar to cooking oil. Air exchange in the house ensured that cooking particles were present for only short periods. During unoccupied background intervals, particle concentrations were lower indoors than outdoors. The cooling coils of the house ventilation system induced cyclic changes in water soluble gases. Even during unoccupied periods, concentrations of many organic trace gases were higher indoors than outdoors, consistent with housing materials being potential sources of these compounds to the outdoor environment. Organic material accumulated on indoor surfaces, and exhibited chemical signatures similar to indoor organic aerosol.

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

4.5
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