Airborne Particulates Around Frac Sand Plants Using Handheld Instruments Research led by dr. crispin pierce Joshua Burns, Ethan Fuhrman – BSEPH Candidates | Environmental Public Health Introduction Handheld instrumentation is useful for real-time environmental quality surveying. The instruments used in this research – the Dylos air sampler and the DustTrak I – are both laser-based particulate matter sampling instruments. Background Industrial silica sand mining in West-Central Wisconsin has expanded greatly in the last several years. As of 2016, 135 active mine sites are in operation with many more processing, loading, and transporting facilities in operation (see Image 1). Increased exposure to respirable crystalline silica and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10) in general among residents living near these facilities are a concern with this type of mining. Image 2: Dylos Air Quality Sampling Instrument Image 3: DustTrak I Air Quality Sampling Instrument Methods Handheld instruments record particulate matter concentrations (PM2.5) simultaneously with EPA- certified instruments Field data collected weekly at sampling location in Bloomer, WI Field data compared to concurrent PM2.5 data from WDNR in Eau Claire, WI (see figure 1 and figure 2). DustTrak I sampling times range from 5 to 45 minutes Dylos sampling times average to 24 hours Image 1: Industrial silica sand facilities in Wisconsin Results & Discussion Acknowledgements Health problems associated with excessive exposure to respirable crystalline silica and particulate matter include: Silicosis Lung Cancer Bronchitis Cardiovascular Disease This research is performed simultaneously with EPA-certified, filter-based particulate matter sampling instruments and other handheld, direct-reading particulate sampling instruments, and data are compared to DNR PM measurements taken at the WDOT Sign Shop in Eau Claire, WI. Dylos Dusttrak I PM2.5 concentrations consistently higher than concurrent DNR measurements (see figure 1) Instrument is sensitive to excessive air moisture content (>95% humidity) On average, the DustTrak I saw an average PM2.5 concentration of 15.2 µg/m3 while the DNR measured an average PM2.5 concentration 3.93 µg/m3 during concurrent time periods PM2.5 concentrations consistently higher than concurrent DNR measurements (see figure 2) Instrument is sensitive to excessive air moisture content (>95% humidity) On average, the Dylos saw an average PM2.5 concentration of 14.9 µg/m3 while the DNR measured an average PM2.5 concentration 5.00 µg/m3 during concurrent time periods Dylos can accumulate large amounts of dust within the machine itself. This could introduce error into the measurements UW-Eau Claire Office of Research & Sponsored Programs, UW-Eau Claire Watershed Institute Objectives Determine exposure levels to PM2.5 Compare PM2.5 concentrations from handheld instruments (Dylos, DustTrak I) to EPA-certified instruments (Dicot)