Articles | Volume 14, issue 5
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-3657-2021
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-3657-2021
Research article
 | 
20 May 2021
Research article |  | 20 May 2021

A field intercomparison of three passive air samplers for gaseous mercury in ambient air

Attilio Naccarato, Antonella Tassone, Maria Martino, Sacha Moretti, Antonella Macagnano, Emiliano Zampetti, Paolo Papa, Joshua Avossa, Nicola Pirrone, Michelle Nerentorp, John Munthe, Ingvar Wängberg, Geoff W. Stupple, Carl P. J. Mitchell, Adam R. Martin, Alexandra Steffen, Diana Babi, Eric M. Prestbo, Francesca Sprovieri, and Frank Wania

Viewed

Total article views: 2,139 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
1,429 670 40 2,139 236 28 40
  • HTML: 1,429
  • PDF: 670
  • XML: 40
  • Total: 2,139
  • Supplement: 236
  • BibTeX: 28
  • EndNote: 40
Views and downloads (calculated since 29 Dec 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 29 Dec 2020)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 2,139 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 2,084 with geography defined and 55 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 22 Sep 2023
Download
Short summary
Mercury monitoring in support of the Minamata Convention requires effective and reliable analytical tools. Passive sampling is a promising approach for creating a sustainable long-term network for atmospheric mercury with improved spatial resolution and global coverage. In this study the analytical performance of three passive air samplers (CNR-PAS, IVL-PAS, and MerPAS) was assessed over extended deployment periods and the accuracy of concentrations was judged by comparison with active sampling.