Comparison of personal exposure to black carbon levels with fixed-site monitoring data and with dispersion modelling and the influence of activity patterns and environment

Abstract

Abstract Background Short-term studies of health effects from ambient air pollution usually rely on fixed site monitoring data or spatio-temporal models for exposure characterization, but the relation to personal exposure is often not known. Objective We aimed to explore this relation for black carbon (BC) in central Stockholm. Methods Families (n = 46) with an infant, one parent working and one parent on parental leave, carried battery-operated BC instruments for 7 days. Routine BC monitoring data were obtained from rural background (RB) and urban background (UB) sites. Outdoor levels of BC at home and work were estimated in 24 h periods by dispersion modelling based on hourly real-time meteorological data, and statistical meteorological data representing annual mean conditions. Global radiation, air pressure, precipitation, temperature, and wind speed data were obtained from the UB station. All families lived in the city centre, within 4 km of the UB station. Results The average level of 24 h personal BC was 425 (s.d. 181) ng/m3 for parents on leave, and 394 (s.d. 143) ng/m3 for working parents. The corresponding fixed-site monitoring observations were 148 (s.d. 139) at RB and 317 (s.d. 149) ng/m3 at UB. Modelled BC levels at home and at work were 493 (s.d. 228) and 331 (s.d. 173) ng/m3, respectively. UB, RB and air pressure explained only 21% of personal 24 h BC variability for parents on leave and 25% for working parents. Modelled home BC and observed air pressure explained 23% of personal BC, and adding modelled BC at work increased the explanation to 34% for the working parents. Impact Short-term studies of health effects from ambient air pollution usually rely on fixed site monitoring data or spatio-temporal models for exposure characterization, but the relation to actual personal exposure is often not known. In this study we showed that both routine monitoring and modelled data explained less than 35% of variability in personal black carbon exposure. Hence, short-term health effects studies based on fixed site monitoring or spatio-temporal modelling are likely to be underpowered and subject to bias.