Published in

American Chemical Society, Environmental Science and Technology, p. 130725075115008

DOI: 10.1021/es401532q

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Simulating and Explaining Passive Air Sampling Rates for Semivolatile Compounds on Polyurethane Foam Passive Samplers

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
  • Must obtain written permission from Editor
  • Must not violate ACS ethical Guidelines
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Passive air samplers (PAS) including polyurethane foam (PUF) are widely deployed as an inexpensive and practical way to sample semi-volatile pollutants. However, concentration estimates from PAS rely on constant empirical mass transfer rates, which add unquantified uncertainties to concentrations. Here we present a method for modeling hourly sampling rates for semi-volatile compounds from hourly meteorology using first-principle chemistry, physics, and fluid dynamics, calibrated from depuration experiments. This approach quantifies and explains observed effects of meteorology on variability in compound-specific sampling rates and analyte concentrations; simulates nonlinear PUF uptake; and recovers synthetic hourly concentrations at a reference temperature. Sampling rates are evaluated for polychlorinated biphenyl congeners at a network of Harner model samplers in Chicago, Illinois during 2008, finding simulated average sampling rates within analytical uncertainty of those determined from loss of depuration compounds, and confirming quasi-linear uptake. Results indicate hourly, daily and interannual variability in sampling rates, sensitivity to temporal resolution in meteorology, and predictable volatility-based relationships between congeners. We quantify importance of each simulated process to sampling rates and mass transfer and assess uncertainty contributed by advection, molecular diffusion, volatilization, and flow regime within the PAS, finding PAS chamber temperature contributes the greatest variability to total process uncertainty (7.3%).