Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Black Carbon Trends in California: Detection
Mostly Urban sites
Remote sites
2 Ramanathan et al, 2013: CARB 08-323
3
Monitoring Black Carbon (BC) Using Mobile Phones
3
Innova:ons § Low-‐cost § Works with any camera cellphone. § Real-‐>me repor>ng.
4
Why it Works: Filter color correlated to BC
4 1 Ramanathan et al. Atmospheric Environment 45(2011).
Absorp>on in λ = 620-‐740 nm
BC Loading μg/cm
2 r2 = 0.9
Collected in: California and India
5
Adjusts for Different Ligh>ng and Cameras
5
Filter
6
Ramanathan, N., Lukac, M., Ahmed, T., Kar, A., Siva, P., Honles, T., Leong, I., Rehman, I. H., Schauer, J., Ramanathan, V. A cellphone based system for large scale monitoring of black carbon. Atmospheric Environment 45(2011) 4481-4487.
India and California: Comparison with Thermal Optical
Average error within 25%
Validation Study 1
Cell ph
one BC
[μg/m
3 ]
Reference Instrument EC [μg/m3]
India
California
7
Comparison with 2 Thermal Optical Protocols (NIOSH, IMPROVE), Average error within 25%
Ramanathan, N., Khan, B., Leong, I., Lukac, M. Comparison Between Elemental Carbon Measured Using Thermal-Optical Analysis and Black Carbon Measurements Using a Novel Cellphone-Based System. American Geophysical Union 2011, San Francisco, CA.
Validation Study 2
Cell ph
one BC
[μg/m
3 ]
Thermal-‐Op>cal EC [μg/m3]
Collected in: EPA Laboratory
8 P. Siva et al. Unpublished.
Validation 3 (Blind Test)
11/Mar 14/Mar 17/Mar 20/Mar 23/Mar 26/Mar 29/Mar0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
BC c
once
ntra
tion µ
g m
-3
Aeth - BCJJ - ECOR - ECCellphone BC
Maldives, March 2012: Comparison with Aethalometer and 2 Thermal Optical Methods
m=0.7 R² = 0.98
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00
Dev22 [BC] ug/cm
2
Aethalometer [BC] ug/cm2
m=0.7 R² = 0.99
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
Dev22 [BC] ug/cm
2
Aethalometer [BC] ug/cm2 Aethalometer [BC] μg / cm2
Aethalometer [BC] μg / cm2
Cell Ph
one [BC] μg /
cm2
Los Angeles (Fall, 2012): Comparison with Aethalometer
Validation Study 4 (Blind Test)
Cell Ph
one [BC] μg /
cm2
10 S. Tripathi et al. To be submitted.
Validation Study 5 (Blind Test)
India: Comparison with Thermal Optical (NIOSH)
Average error within 20%
11 S. Tripathi et al. To be submitted.
Validation Study 6 (Blind Test)
India: Comparison with PASS
Different sites/sources/loca>ons: • Laboratory se^ng: Cookstoves • Kanpur, India: Highway Traffic, Power Plant, Biomass
Burning • Maldives: South Asian plume • California: Urban outdoors • Jagdishpur, India: Indoor biomass burning, outdoors Comparison with different methods: • Aethalometer • Thermal Op>cal (NIOSH, IMPROVE) • PASS
Valida>on Studies
13
Measuring Black Carbon in Rural Kitchens in India
Monitoring Cookstoves and Vaccines
15
Global Monitoring Networks
• Environmental Protec>on Agency • Indian Ins>tute of Technology, Kanpur • Scripps Ins>tute of Oceanography • University of Southern California, Global Health Ins>tute
• University of Wisconsin, Madison
Thanks to our collaborators
17
Contact Informa>on
17
Nithya Ramanathan [email protected] hkp://nexleaf.org
Funders: Na>onal Science Founda>on, Department of Energy, United Na>ons Environment Programme, Qualcomm
18
Conversion
18
Loading μg/cm2 Concentra>on μg/m3
Volume Air m3
Filter Size cm2
×
÷
19
Sampler
19
