ALBERT

Description: A comparison exercise on thermal-optical elemental carbon/organic carbon (ECOC) analyzers was carried out among 17 European laboratories. Contrary to previous comparison exercises, the 17 participants made use of an identical instrument set-up, after correcting for temperature offsets with the application of a recently developed temperature calibration kit (Sunset Laboratory Inc, OR, US). Five filter samples and two sucrose solutions were analyzed with both the EUSAAR2 and NIOSH870 thermal protocols. z Scores were calculated for total carbon (TC) and nine outliers and three stragglers were identified. Three outliers and eight stragglers were found for EC. Overall, the participants provided results within the warning levels with the exception of two laboratories that showed poor performance, the causes of which were identified and corrected through the course of the comparison exercise. The TC repeatability and reproducibility relative standard deviations were 11.4 and 14.6% for EUSAAR2 and 9.2 and 11.7% for NIOSH870; the standard deviations for EC were 15.3 and 19.5% for EUSAAR2 and 19.9 and 25.5% for NIOSH870. TC was in good agreement between the two protocols, TCNIOSH870 = 0.98 · TCEUSAAR2 (R2 = 1.00, normalized means). Transmittance (TOT) calculated EC for NIOSH870 was found to be 20% lower than for EUSAAR2, ECNIOSH870 = 0.80 · ECEUSAAR2 (R2 = 0.96, normalized means). The thermograms and laser signal values were compared and similar peak patterns were observed per sample and protocol for most participants. Notable deviations of plotted values indicated absence or inaccurate application of the temperature calibration procedure and/or pre-oxidation during the inert phase of the analysis. Low or no pyrolytic organic carbon (POC), as reported by a few participants, is suggested as an indicator of pre-oxidation. A sample-specific pre-oxidation effect was observed for filter G, for all participants and both thermal protocols, indicating the presence of oxygen donors on the suspended particulate matter. POC (TOT) levels were lower for NIOSH870 than for EUSAAR2, which is related to the heating profile differences of the two thermal protocols.

Description: The monosaccharide anhydrides (MAs) levoglucosan, galactosan and mannosan are products of incomplete combustion and pyrolysis of cellulose and hemicelluloses, and are found to be major constituents of biomass burning aerosol particles. Hence, ambient aerosol particle concentrations of levoglucosan are commonly used to study the influence of residential wood burning, agricultural waste burning and wild fire emissions on ambient air quality. A European-wide intercomparison on the analysis of the three monosaccharide anhydrides was conducted based on ambient aerosol quartz fiber filter samples collected at a Norwegian urban background site during winter. Thus, the samples' content of MAs is representative for biomass burning particles originating from residential wood burning. The purpose of the intercomparison was to examine the comparability of the great diversity of analytical methods used for analysis of levoglucosan, mannosan and galactosan in ambient aerosol filter samples. Thirteen laboratories participated, of which three applied High-Performance Anion-Exchange Chromatography (HPAEC), four used High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) or Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UPLC), and six resorted to Gas Chromatography (GC). The analytical methods used were of such diversity that they should be considered as thirteen different analytical methods. All of the thirteen laboratories reported levels of levoglucosan, whereas nine reported data for mannosan and/or galactosan. Eight of the thirteen laboratories reported levels for all three isomers. The accuracy for levoglucosan, presented as the mean percentage error (PE) for each participating laboratory, varied from −63 to 23%; however, for 62% of the laboratories the mean PE was within ±10%, and for 85% the mean PE was within ±20%. For mannosan, the corresponding range was −60 to 69%, but as for levoglucosan, the range was substantially smaller for a subselection of the laboratories; i.e., for 33% of the laboratories the mean PE was within ±10%. For galactosan, the mean PE for the participating laboratories ranged from −84 to 593%, and as for mannosan 33% of the laboratories reported a mean PE within ±10%. The variability of the various analytical methods, as defined by their minimum and maximum PE value, was typically better for levoglucosan than for mannosan and galactosan, ranging from 3.2 to 41% for levoglucosan, from 10 to 67% for mannosan, and from 6 to 364% for galactosan. For the levoglucosan to mannosan ratio, which may be used to assess the relative importance of softwood vs. hardwood burning, the variability only ranged from 3.5 to 24%. To our knowledge, this is the first major intercomparison on analytical methods used to quantify monosaccharide anhydrides in ambient aerosol filter samples conducted and reported in the scientific literature. The results show that for levoglucosan the accuracy is only slightly lower than that reported for analysis of SO42− on filter samples, a constituent that has been analyzed by numerous laboratories for several decades, typically by ion chromatography, and which is considered a fairly easy constituent to measure. Hence, the results obtained for levoglucosan with respect to accuracy are encouraging and suggest that levels of levoglucosan, and to a lesser extent mannosan and galactosan, obtained by most of the analytical methods currently used to quantify monosaccharide anhydrides in ambient aerosol filter samples, are comparable. Finally, the various analytical methods used in the current study should be tested for other aerosol matrices and concentrations as well, the most obvious being summertime aerosol samples affected by wild fires and/or agricultural fires.

Description: Along with some research networking programmes, the European Directive 2008/50/CE requires chemical speciation of fine aerosol (PM2.5), including elemental (EC) and organic carbon (OC), at a few rural sites in European countries. Meanwhile, the thermal-optical technique is considered by the European and US networking agencies and normalisation bodies as a reference method to quantify EC–OC collected on filters. Although commonly used for many years, this technique still suffers from a lack of information on the comparability of the different analytical protocols (temperature protocols, type of optical correction) currently applied in the laboratories. To better evaluate the EC–OC data set quality and related uncertainties, the French National Reference Laboratory for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring (LCSQA) organised an EC–OC comparison exercise for French laboratories using different thermal-optical methods (five laboratories only). While there is good agreement on total carbon (TC) measurements among all participants, some differences can be observed on the EC / TC ratio, even among laboratories using the same thermal protocol. These results led to further tests on the influence of the optical correction: results obtained from different European laboratories confirmed that there were higher differences between OCTOT and OCTOR measured with NIOSH 5040 in comparison to EUSAAR-2. Also, striking differences between ECTOT / ECTOR ratios can be observed when comparing results obtained for rural and urban samples, with ECTOT being 50% lower than ECTOR at rural sites whereas it is only 20% lower at urban sites. The PM chemical composition could explain these differences but the way it influences the EC–OC measurement is not clear and needs further investigation. Meanwhile, some additional tests seem to indicate an influence of oven soiling on the EC–OC measurement data quality. This highlights the necessity to follow the laser signal decrease with time and its impact on measurements. Nevertheless, this should be confirmed by further experiments, involving more samples and various instruments, to enable statistical processing. All these results provide insights to determine the quality of EC–OC analytical methods and may contribute to the work toward establishing method standardisation.

Description: Numerous laboratory experiments have been performed in an attempt to mimic atmospheric secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation. However, it is still unclear how close the aerosol particles generated in laboratory experiments resemble atmospheric SOA with respect to their detailed chemical composition. In this study, we generated SOA in a simulation chamber from the ozonolysis of α-pinene and a biogenic volatile organic compound (BVOC) mixture containing α- and β-pinene, Δ3-carene, and isoprene. The detailed molecular composition of laboratory-generated SOA was compared with that of background ambient aerosol collected at a boreal forest site (Hyytiälä, Finland) and an urban location (Cork, Ireland) using direct infusion nanoelectrospray ultrahigh-resolution mass spectrometry. Kendrick mass defect and van Krevelen approaches were used to identify and compare compound classes and distributions of the detected species. The laboratory-generated SOA contained a distinguishable group of dimers that was not observed in the ambient samples. The presence of dimers was found to be less pronounced in the SOA from the BVOC mixtures when compared to the one component precursor system. The molecular composition of SOA from both the BVOC mixture and α-pinene represented the overall composition of the ambient sample from the boreal forest site reasonably well, with 72.3 ± 2.5% (n = 3) and 69.1 ± 3.0% (n = 3) common ions, respectively. In contrast, large differences were found between the laboratory-generated BVOC samples and the ambient urban sample. To our knowledge this is the first direct comparison of molecular composition of laboratory-generated SOA from BVOC mixtures and ambient samples.