Articles | Volume 12, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6385-2019
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-6385-2019
Research article
 | 
04 Dec 2019
Research article |  | 04 Dec 2019

A low-cost monitor for measurement of fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth – Part 2: Citizen-science pilot campaign in northern Colorado

Bonne Ford, Jeffrey R. Pierce, Eric Wendt, Marilee Long, Shantanu Jathar, John Mehaffy, Jessica Tryner, Casey Quinn, Lizette van Zyl, Christian L'Orange, Daniel Miller-Lionberg, and John Volckens

Related authors

A cloud screening algorithm for ground-based sun photometry using all-sky images and deep transfer learning
Eric A. Wendt, Bonne Ford, and John Volckens
Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2022-217,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-2022-217, 2022
Publication in AMT not foreseen
Short summary
Technical note: Investigating sub-city gradients of air quality: lessons learned with low-cost PM2.5 and AOD monitors and machine learning
Michael Cheeseman, Bonne Ford, Zoey Rosen, Eric Wendt, Alex DesRosiers, Aaron J. Hill, Christian L'Orange, Casey Quinn, Marilee Long, Shantanu H. Jathar, John Volckens, and Jeffrey R. Pierce
Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-751,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2021-751, 2021
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary
A low-cost monitor for simultaneous measurement of fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth – Part 3: Automation and design improvements
Eric A. Wendt, Casey Quinn, Christian L'Orange, Daniel D. Miller-Lionberg, Bonne Ford, Jeffrey R. Pierce, John Mehaffy, Michael Cheeseman, Shantanu H. Jathar, David H. Hagan, Zoey Rosen, Marilee Long, and John Volckens
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 6023–6038, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6023-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-6023-2021, 2021
Short summary
A low-cost monitor for simultaneous measurement of fine particulate matter and aerosol optical depth – Part 1: Specifications and testing
Eric A. Wendt, Casey W. Quinn, Daniel D. Miller-Lionberg, Jessica Tryner, Christian L'Orange, Bonne Ford, Azer P. Yalin, Jeffrey R. Pierce, Shantanu Jathar, and John Volckens
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 5431–5441, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5431-2019,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-5431-2019, 2019
Short summary
Status update: is smoke on your mind? Using social media to assess smoke exposure
Bonne Ford, Moira Burke, William Lassman, Gabriele Pfister, and Jeffrey R. Pierce
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 17, 7541–7554, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7541-2017,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-7541-2017, 2017
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Aerosols | Technique: In Situ Measurement | Topic: Validation and Intercomparisons
Comparison of the LEO and CPMA-SP2 techniques for black-carbon mixing-state measurements
Arash Naseri, Joel C. Corbin, and Jason S. Olfert
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3719–3738, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3719-2024, 2024
Short summary
Aerosol trace element solubility determined using ultrapure water batch leaching: an intercomparison study of four different leaching protocols
Rui Li, Prema Piyusha Panda, Yizhu Chen, Zhenming Zhu, Fu Wang, Yujiao Zhu, He Meng, Yan Ren, Ashwini Kumar, and Mingjin Tang
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 3147–3156, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-3147-2024, 2024
Short summary
Field comparison of dual- and single-spot Aethalometers: equivalent black carbon, light absorption, Ångström exponent and secondary brown carbon estimations
Liangbin Wu, Cheng Wu, Tao Deng, Dui Wu, Mei Li, Yong Jie Li, and Zhen Zhou
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2917–2936, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2917-2024, 2024
Short summary
Comparison of the imaginary parts of the atmospheric refractive index structure parameter and aerosol flux based on different measurement methods
Renmin Yuan, Hongsheng Zhang, Jiajia Hua, Hao Liu, Peizhe Wu, Xingyu Zhu, and Jianning Sun
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 17, 2089–2102, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-17-2089-2024, 2024
Short summary
Classification accuracy and compatibility across devices of a new Rapid-E+ flow cytometer
Branko Sikoparija, Predrag Matavulj, Isidora Simovic, Predrag Radisic, Sanja Brdar, Vladan Minic, Danijela Tesendic, Evgeny Kadantsev, Julia Palamarchuk, and Mikhail Sofiev
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-187,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-187, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

2015 TIGER/Line Shapefiles: (machinereadable data files)/prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau, available at: https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files/time-series/geo/carto-boundary-file.2015.html (last access: 10 October 2019), 2015. 
Ahmed, T., Dutkiewicz, V. A., Shareef, A., Tuncel, G., Tuncel, S., and Husain, L.: Measurement of black carbon (BC) by an optical method and a thermal-optical method: Intercomparison for four sites, Atmos. Environ., 43, 6305–6311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.09.031, 2009. 
Amante, C. and Eakins, B. W.: ETOPO1 1 Arc-Minute Global Relief Model: Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis, NOAA Technical Memorandum NESDIS NGDC-24, National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA, https://doi.org/10.7289/V5C8276M, 2009. 
Brauer, M., Amann, M., Burnett, R. T., Cohen, A., Dentener, F., Ezzati, M., Henderson, S. B., Krzyzanowski, M., Martin, R. V., Van Dingenen, R., van Donkelaar, A., and Thurston, G. D.: Exposure Assessment for Estimation of the Global Burden of Disease Attributable to Outdoor Air Pollution, Environ. Sci. Technol., 46, 652–660, https://doi.org/10.1021/es2025752, 2012. 
Short summary
This study demonstrates the use of a low-cost sensor in a citizen-science network, Citizen-Enabled Aerosol Measurements for Satellites (CEAMS), to measure air quality in participants’ backyards. The pilot network was conducted in the fall and winter of 2017 in northern Colorado. Measurements of aerosols taken by the citizens are also compared to standard air quality instruments.