Comparison of two different passive air samplers (PUF-PAS versus SIP-PAS) to determine time-integrated average air concentration of volatile hydrophobic organic pollutants

Abstract

Despite remarkable achievements with r some chemicals, a field-measurement technique has not been advanced for volatile hydrophobic organic chemicals (HOCs) that are the subjects of international concern. This study assesses the applicability of passive air sampling (PAS) by comparing PUF-PAS and its modified SIP-PAS which was made by impregnating XAD-4 powder into PUF, overviewing the principles of PAS, screening sensitive parameters, and determining the uncertainty range of PAS-derived concentration. The PAS air sampling rate determined in this study, corrected by a co-deployed low-volume active air sampler (LAS) for neutral PFCs as model chemicals, was ∼1.2 m3 day−1. Our assessment shows that the improved sorption capacity in a SIP lengthens PAS deployment duration by expanding the linear uptake range and then enlarges the effective air sampling volume and detection frequency of chemicals at trace level. Consequently, volatile chemicals can be collected during sufficiently long times without reaching equilibrium when using SIP, while this is not possible for PUF. The most sensitive parameter to influence PAS-derived CA was an air-side mass transfer coefficient (kA), implying the necessity of spiking depuration chemicals (DCs) because this parameter is strongly related with meteorological conditions. Uncertainty in partition coefficients (KPSM-A or KOA) influences PAS-derived CA to a greater extent with regard to lower KPSM-A chemicals. Also, the PAS-derived CA has an uncertainty range of a half level to a 3-fold higher level of the calculated one. This work is expected to establish solid grounds for the improvement of field measurement technique of HOCs.