the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Sustaining Low-Cost PM2.5 Monitoring Networks in South Asia: Technical Challenges and Solutions
Abstract. The need to monitor South Asia's air quality stems from its significant negative effects on human and environmental health. Traditional, regulatory-grade air quality monitoring systems have proven costly to operate and very difficult to maintain in most South Asian countries. Low-cost sensor (LCS) networks have been touted as a viable alternative, but the challenges to sustain them have not been evaluated or thoroughly documented. the acceptance of such monitors, in particular by regulatory agencies, across South Asian countries is still lacking. Lack of acceptance is due to prevailing myths (especially, in the regulatory circles of South Asia) about their accuracy, precision, consistency, dependability, maintenance, and calibration concerns. The present study attempts to fill that knowledge gap while also providing practical solutions to enhance the longevity of LCS, perhaps adding years to their lives. Specifically, this study describes strategies and maintenance plans for operating large networks of TSI BlueSky (8143) Sensors across South Asia, with a focus on problems caused by power outages, power surges, weather conditions, and continued exposure to high amounts of dust and pollution. The article provides further support that incorporating LCS networks into the regulatory framework can facilitate the enforcement of environmental regulations and legislation against polluters. The goal is to develop a more reliable and long-lasting air quality monitoring system that will assist South Asian countries to reduce air pollution-related health hazards and consequent socio-economic disruptions.
- Preprint
(1265 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1932', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Nov 2024
This manuscript provides an examination of the technical and logistical challenges in deploying and maintaining low-cost PM2.5 sensor networks across South Asia (excluding India). It addresses region-specific issues such as power outages, environmental stressors, and maintenance demands, and offers strategies to mitigate these challenges. The work contributes insights into air quality monitoring in low-resource settings, with a focus on practical solutions for scaling low-cost sensors (LCS). However, there are fundamental concerns related to sensor calibration that would require more than analysis and writing adjustments to address.
Specific comments:- The authors assert that maintenance strategies can “debunk the myth” of limited sensor lifespan. However, broader literature indicates that while proactive maintenance can improve sensor performance, low-cost sensors still face durability constraints, particularly in high-dust, high-temperature, and humid environments. Addressing these limitations more directly would help set realistic expectations for LCS durability. Additionally, the lack of discussion on calibration raises questions about the study's claims regarding sensor lifespan.
- While the study is presented as covering South Asia, it does not include India—the region’s largest country. Providing a rationale for excluding India would be valuable for readers, helping clarify the study’s scope. Referring to this work as a “South Asia-wide study” might create an impression of broader coverage than is actually provided, so revising this framing would improve accuracy.
- Although the manuscript details maintenance protocols, it lacks information on the costs associated with these activities. A cost-benefit analysis comparing the maintenance of LCS with that of traditional regulatory monitors would offer policymakers clearer insights into the economic feasibility of implementing LCS networks at scale.
- Some content in the Introduction would be more appropriate in the Methods section. Reorganizing the manuscript to clarify methods and improve flow would make it easier for readers to follow the study’s approach and findings.
- Table 2 summarizes technical challenges and solutions but does not specify whether this information is based solely on the authors’ observations or if it includes input from formal surveys or consultations. If surveys were conducted, please include details on the methodology (including any ethics statement), respondent demographics, survey methods, and response rates to enhance transparency.
- The introduction specifically and the manuscript more generally would benefit from additional context on the scientific basis for low-cost sensors, particularly around sensor accuracy, limitations, and typical calibration challenges in the field. This would provide readers with a stronger foundation for understanding the study’s objectives and limitations.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1932-RC1 -
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-1932', Anonymous Referee #2, 27 Nov 2024
The authors are appreciated for their efforts in maintaining an extensive PM sensor network comprising 380 TSI BlueSky sensors across various South Asian countries (excluding India and Afghanistan). This manuscript represents a commendable attempt to outline various troubleshooting methods for sustaining the TSI BlueSky sensor network over extended periods. However, a few concerns need to be addressed to improve the clarity and robustness of the manuscript.
Specific Comments:
- The manuscript describes a study across South Asia but does not include data from India. This raises questions, as sensors in India are marked in Figure 1. It would be good to specify why these countries are not part of the study despite phrasing as a study in "South Asia" multiple times in the manuscript.
- The description of the calibration and collocation protocols used in the study lacks sufficient detail. Please elaborate on the procedures followed to ensure data reliability and accuracy, as that is a major concern when incorporating the LCS network into the regulatory framework. It is not demonstrated that calibration before and after cleaning was consistent across all countries in the study. Addressing this gap would strengthen the reliability of the results.
- The introduction and methodology sections need significant restructuring for clarity. A considerable portion of the methodology is currently included in the introduction, which should focus on background and objectives. Does “Deployment” in Table 1 refer to the starting month of sensor deployment? Additionally, for how many months was the network operational? Revising these sections will enhance the manuscript's readability.
- The authors mention dust accumulation and environmental exposure but fail to specify the measurement period or the specific environmental conditions the sensors were exposed to. Additionally, how often were the described failures observed across the network? Detailed insights into failure frequency would strengthen the analysis.
- The authors state that the troubleshooting and repair methodology improved the network's reliability and accuracy in Pakistan. Since the manuscript is pointing to the study in South Asia, the readers will expect results on similar benefits observed in other countries.
- To enhance clarity in Table 2, consider presenting the issues faced alongside their corresponding solutions or troubleshooting methods rather than listing all solutions and issues separately. Also, it would be good to add the frequency of the issues in each country. As the manuscript only deals with one brand of PM sensor, a detailed explanation of the issues, the cost involved in the troubleshooting, the downtime faced by each issue, etc can be useful for the readers.
- While heat waves are mentioned as a factor accelerating corrosion, there is insufficient detail on the frequency of corrosion issues across the 380 PM sensors. Are these findings specific to a particular site, or do they represent regional trends? Additionally, the evaluation of solar panels is unclear.
Technical corrections:
1. Ensure that all figures and tables are appropriately cited in the manuscript.
2. Avoid repetition of sentences.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-1932-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
199 | 44 | 8 | 251 | 3 | 3 |
- HTML: 199
- PDF: 44
- XML: 8
- Total: 251
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1