Journal cover Journal topic
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
08 Feb 2018
Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. It is a manuscript under review for the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP).
Global evaluation and calibration of a passive air sampler for gaseous mercury
David S. McLagan1, Carl P. J. Mitchell1, Alexandra Steffen2, Hayley Hung2, Cecilia Shin2, Geoff W. Stupple2, Mark L. Olson3, Winston T. Luke4, Paul Kelley4, Dean Howard5, Grant C. Edwards5, Peter F. Nelson5, Hang Xiao6, Guey-Rong Sheu7, Annekatrin Dreyer8, Haiyong Huang1, Batual Abdul Hussain1, Ying D. Lei1, Ilana Tavshunsky1, and Frank Wania1 1Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences, University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, M1C 1A4, Canada
2Air Quality Processes Research Section, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, M3H 5T4, Canada
3Atmospheric Mercury Network, National Atmospheric Deposition Network, Champaign, 61820-7495, USA
4Air Resources Lab, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Maryland, 20740, USA
5Department of Environmental Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, 2109, Australia
6Center for Excellence in Regional Atmospheric Environment, Institute of Urban Environment, Xiamen, 361021, China
7Department of Atmospheric Sciences, National Central University, Taoyuan City, 32001, Taiwan
8Air Monitoring, Eurofins GfA, Hamburg, 21107, Germany
Abstract. Passive air samplers (PASs) for gaseous mercury (Hg) were deployed for time periods between 1 month and 1 year at 20 sites across the globe with continuous atmospheric Hg monitoring using active Tekran instruments. The purpose was to evaluate the accuracy of the PAS vis-à-vis the industry standard active instruments and to determine a sampling rate (SR; the volume of air stripped of gaseous Hg per unit of time) that is applicable across a broad variety of conditions. The sites spanned a wide range of latitudes, altitudes, meteorological conditions, and gaseous Hg concentrations. Precision, based on 378 replicated deployments performed by numerous personnel at multiple sites, is 3.6 ± 3.0 %*, confirming the PAS's excellent reproducibility and ease-of-use. Using a SR previously determined at a single site, gaseous Hg concentrations derived from the globally distributed PASs deviate from Tekran-based concentrations by 14.2 ± 10 %. A recalibration using the entire new data set yields a slightly higher SR of 0.1354 ± 0.016 m3 day−1. When concentrations are derived from the PAS using this revised SR the difference is reduced to 8.8 ± 7.5 %. At the mean gaseous Hg concentration across the study sites of 1.54 ng m−3, this represents an ability to resolve concentrations to within 0.13 ng m−3. Adjusting the sampling rate to deployment specific temperatures and wind speeds does not decrease the difference in active–passive concentration further (8.7 ± 5.7 %), but reduces its variability by leading to better agreement in Hg concentrations measured at sites with very high and very low temperatures and very high wind speeds. This value (8.7 ± 5.7 %) represents a conservative assessment of the overall uncertainty of the PAS due to inherent uncertainties of the Tekran instruments. Going forward, the recalibrated SR adjusted for temperature and wind speed should be used, especially if conditions are highly variable or deviate considerably from the average of the deployments in this study (9.89 °C, 3.41 m s−1). Overall, the study demonstrates that the sampler is capable of recording background gaseous Hg concentrations across a wide range of environmental conditions with accuracy similar to that of industry standard active sampling instruments. Results at sites with active speciation units were inconclusive on whether the PASs take up total gaseous Hg or solely gaseous elemental Hg primarily because gaseous oxidized Hg concentrations were in a similar range as the uncertainty of the PAS.

Citation: McLagan, D. S., Mitchell, C. P. J., Steffen, A., Hung, H., Shin, C., Stupple, G. W., Olson, M. L., Luke, W. T., Kelley, P., Howard, D., Edwards, G. C., Nelson, P. F., Xiao, H., Sheu, G.-R., Dreyer, A., Huang, H., Abdul Hussain, B., Lei, Y. D., Tavshunsky, I., and Wania, F.: Global evaluation and calibration of a passive air sampler for gaseous mercury, Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss.,, in review, 2018.
David S. McLagan et al.
David S. McLagan et al.
David S. McLagan et al.


Total article views: 283 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML PDF XML Total Supplement BibTeX EndNote
244 32 7 283 8 2 5

Views and downloads (calculated since 08 Feb 2018)

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 08 Feb 2018)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 252 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

Thereof 252 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country # Views %
  • 1



Latest update: 23 Feb 2018
Publications Copernicus
Short summary
A new passive air sampler for gaseous mercury was tested at 20 sites on four continents. These sites have in common that they use the state of the art active air sampling technique for gaseous mercury on a continuous basis and therefore allow for an evaluation and calibration of the passive sampler. The sampler proved to work exceptionally well, with a precision and accuracy on par with the active instrument and better than what has previously been achieved with passive samplers.
A new passive air sampler for gaseous mercury was tested at 20 sites on four continents. These...