Low-Cost Sensing – Current Status and Opportunities

Timothy S. DyeSonoma Technology, Inc.

Petaluma, California

Presented at the National Air Quality Conference

Research Triangle Park, NC

February 12, 2014

5898

Outline2

• Current status– Who– What– Why

• Specific project examples• Concerns and opportunities• Future

Many Efforts3

• Who– University – cutting edge research– Private sector/start-ups– Government– NGOs– DIYers– Schools

Background

What’s Happening

4

Disruptive Technology

Quality Capabilities Size Price

AQ Instrument Manufacturers• Starting with proven technology• Lowering costs• Shrinking size

Industry, Universities, NGOs• Starting with low-cost sensors• Improving quality• Designing packaging

Background

What’s Happening in the Private Sector

5

Canary

Lapka Sensordrone

EsensorsAirboxlab Libelium

SensarisAirBase

CubeSensor

Cairpol

Background

Why This Is Happening

6

• “Because they can” (low cost, easy to create)

• STEM education• Personal health info and protection• Advocacy for changing policy• Decision making• Research

Background

Maker Faire7

Sponsors: STI HabitatMap Manhattan College NY Hall of Science

Type: EducationApproach:

• Developed AirCasting pods• Let people measure particles• Crowdsourced the data• Interviewed participants

Examples

Maker Faire8Examples

Air Quality Egg9

Sponsor: Public via KickStarterType: DIYApproach:

• Sought crowdsourced funding ($140k)• Developed 1200+ eggs to measure CO and

NO2• Costs about $150• Results discouraging; didn’t focus on quality

Examples

Mobile Particle Monitoring

10

Sponsor: Tim Type: EducationApproach:

• Use $5,000 PM instrument and $100 PM sensor

• Use AirCasting platform to store and log data

Examples

Mobile Particle Monitoring

11Examples

Mobile Particle Monitoring

12Examples

Kids Making Sense

13

Sponsor: Knight News FoundationType: EducationObjective:

• Prototype concept of Kids Making Sense Approach:

• Develop 5 PM sensors• Develop curriculum for 4-hr class• Teach high school students in Brooklyn and San

Francisco• Evaluate sensor, curriculum, and concept • Report to Knight News Foundation in June

Examples

Potential Concerns with Low-Cost Monitoring

14

• Inaccurate data used by organizations• Confused citizens• Distrust of government• Time drain on AQ agency staff• Unknown process for how data will be

used

Potential Opportunities from Low-Cost Monitoring

15

• Engage new people/advocates for clean air

• Supplement monitoring networks• Lower cost of monitoring• Outreach and education• Peer regulation (local understanding

local solutions)

Future – How Government Can Help

16

• Quality studies• EPA/ORD – sensor evaluations• EPA Air Sensor Guidebook• AirNow Sensor Evaluation Service

• Pilot studies• Demonstrating claims• Establishing value• Community group monitoring• Engaging stakeholders

• Aggregation for ingesting and quality-controlling data

• Health messaging determination

Contact17

Tim Dye707.665.9900tim@sonomatech.comwww.CitizenAir.net@timsdye@sonoma_tech