SECONDHAND SMOKE IN MINNESOTA

MULTI-UNIT HOUSING :

Using physicochemical properties of tobacco

smoke to identify SHS incursion in multi-unit

housing

Zheng Zhou, S.D., David Bohac, P.E., Martha Hewett, Joshua Novacheck Lara A. Gundel, Ph.D. (LBNL)

October 15, 2014

Pg. 2

Introduction

• 26% of U.S. households live in multi-unit housing (34 million households)

• Nearly half report SHS incursions in the past 12 months (King et al. 2010, Hewett et al. 2007)

• Air moves between units: • Bohac et al. (2011) found upper floor units in 6 Minnesota

buildings got 2-65% of their air from other units (median 16%)

• Residents in multi-unit housing have little control over their exposure to SHS

• Households in smoking-permitted buildings had higher PM2.5 concentration than households in smoke-free buildings (Russo et al. 2014)

Pg. 3

Measuring SHS Exposure at Homes

• Fine particle (PM2.5) • Pros:

• easy to measure

• real-time

• Cons:

• not specific to tobacco smoke

• rely on resident’s activity log

• Nicotine • Pros:

• highly specific to tobacco smoke

• Cons:

• not very sensitive at low concentration,

• time-weighted average,

• may not transfer at the same rate as other SHS constitutes

Pg. 4

Objectives

• Develop a cost-effective approach to

identify and quantify SHS transfer in multi-

unit housing

• Assess non-smokers’ exposure to SHS in

multi-unit housing in the Minneapolis-St.

Paul metropolitan area

Pg. 5

Ultraviolet-absorbing Particulate Matter

(UVPM)

• Combustion-derived

• Contains organic compounds (e.g. PAHs)

and black carbon

• (UVPM-BC)/UVPM distinguish tobacco

smoke from other common indoor sources

Pg. 6

Study Design

• Chamber test • Cigarette smoke, wood smoke, stick incense,

candle and cooking activities

• Field test • Three units (1 smoker’s; 1 adjacent non-smoker’s,

and 1 above non-smoker’s)

• Field monitoring • 65 nonsmoker’s units in smoking-permitted

buildings in winter (42 were re-monitored in mild weather)

• 14 nonsmoker’s units in smoke-free buildings in winter (8 were re-monitored in mild weather)

Pg. 7

Measurements

• Real-time UVPM and BC (1 min interval)

• Dual-Channel Aethalometer (Magee Scientific)

• Wavelengths: 880 nm for BC, 370 nm for UVPM

• Real-time PM2.5 (1 min interval)

• Sidepak AM510 (TSI)

• Integrated gas phase sample

• Active sampling in Tenax TA sorbent tube

• Nicotine, 3-Ethenylpyridine (3-EP)

Pg. 8

Other Measurements

• Room temperature and relative humidity

• Hobo logger (Onset)

• Pressure difference between units and hallway/outdoor

• APT digital micromanometer (TEC)/Rabbit

• Range/oven use

• iButton logger (Maxim)

• Toaster, microwave oven use

• Current transducer w/logger

• Resident’s hourly activity log

Pg. 9

Chamber Test: a Smolder-smoked

Cigarette

16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00

PM

UVPM

BC

(UVPM-BC)/UVPM

PM

2.5

, U

VP

M a

nd B

C (m

g/m

3)

(UV

PM

-BC

)/UV

PM

PM

UVPM

BC

(UVPM-BC)/UVPM

Pg. 10

Chamber Test: Cooking (Frying Bacon)

15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00

PM

UVPM

BC

(UVPM-BC)/UVPM

(UV

PM

-BC

)/UV

PM

PM

UVPM

BC

(UVPM-BC)/UVPM

PM

2.5

, U

VP

M a

nd B

C (m

g/m

3)

Pg. 11

Chamber Test Results

0.9

(UV

PM

-BC

)/U

VP

M A

ve

rage

PM

2.5 (m

g/m

3)

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Can

dle_

0828

Can

dle_

0824

Pop

corn

_070

9

Ham

burger_0

904

Onion

_090

4

Frie

dEgg

_082

8

Pop

tart_0

904

Bac

on_0

828

Bread

_083

1

BurntBread

_082

5

BurntPop

corn_0

719

Woo

dSmok

e_12

28

Woo

dSmok

e_12

30

Woo

dSmok

e_12

31

Ince

nse_

0903

Ince

nse_

0821

Cigarette_1

116

Cigarette_1

229

Cigarette_1

023

Cigarette_1

028

Cigarette_1

029

Cigarette_1

014

Cigarette_1

015

Cigarette_1

026

Cigarette_1

027

Cigarette_1

113

0

200

400

600

800

Tobacco smoke

Wood smoke, Incense, burnt food

Pg. 12

Field Test

• Three units in a two-floor smoking-permitted

building for 10 days

• One smoker’s unit in the first floor

• One non-smoker’s unit above the smoker’s unit

• One non-smoker’s unit adjacent to the smoker’s unit

Pg. 13

Example: 24-hour Measurements

Self-reported Smoking

Ratio: 0.9 to 0.96

Self-reported Smoking + Candle + Burnt food

Ratio: 0.8 to 0.9

Ratio: 0.9

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0

10

20

30

40

50

00:00 02:00 04:00 06:00 08:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00 00:00

Smoker unit

Above NS unit

Ratio: 0.81

Sm

oke

r’s u

nit P

M2.5

(m

g/m

3) N

on-s

mo

ke

r’s u

nit P

M2.5 (m

g/m

3)

Pg. 14

PM Events in Smoker’s Unit

0.9

(UV

PM

-BC

)/U

VP

M

Self-reported Smoking

Ave

rage

PM

2.5

(mg/m

3)

Self-reported smoking + Other

Unknown

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Burnt food + candle

cooking

Pg. 15

PM Events in Above Non-smoker’s Unit

(UV

PM

-BC

)/U

VP

M

0.9

Ave

rage

PM

2.5

(mg/m

3)

Burnt food

Burnt food

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Suspected SHS transfer from the smoker’s unit

Self-reported non-smoking activities

Unknown

Stove & toaster

Pg. 16

Field Test Results

UNIT

# OF PM2.5

EVENTS

# OF SHS EVENTS

TOTAL SHS EXPOSURE* (mg/m3•hr)

3-EP (ng/m3)

NICOTINE

(ng/m3)

SMOKER’S UNIT 31 26 6093 472.8 530.0

ABOVE NON-SMOKER’S UNIT

18 11 1492 203.8 88.5

ADJACENT NON-SMOKER’S UNIT

25 10 220 49.1 140.1

* SHS Exposure is quantified using PM2.5 concentration

Pg. 17

Field Monitoring

• 65 nonsmoker's units in smoking-permitted

buildings in winter (of which 42 were re-

monitored in mild weather)

• 14 nonsmoker's units in smoke-free

buildings in winter (of which 8 were re-

monitored in mild weather)

Pg. 18

Field Monitoring Results

Building # of units

Average # of SHS events per unit (6

days)

Average SHS exposure per unit

in 6 days * (mg/m3•hr)

Average 3-EP level (ng/m3)

Average Nicotine level (ng/m3)

Smoke-permitted (winter)

65 2.4 245.4 52.4 41.1

Smoke-free (winter) 14 0.9 36.7 17.0 12.8

Smoke-permitted (mild)

42 1.1 94.3 52.5 33.5

Smoke-free (mild)

8 0.4 48.9 16.4 28.5

* SHS Exposure is quantified using PM2.5 concentration

Pg. 19

Conclusion

• Findings • Non-smoker resident’s activity log often miss SHS

incursion

• (UVPM – BC)/UVPM > 0.9 indicates tobacco smoke

• Many determinants affect SHS transfer

• SHS incursion and exposure were lower in smoke-free buildings than in smoking-permitted buildings

• Limitations • Mix of sources

• Potential confounders: burning wood and incense, grilling or charring food