See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/248343325

Personal exposure to particulate air

pollution in transport microenvironments
ARTICLE in ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT JANUARY 2004
Impact Factor: 3.28 DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.09.036

CITATIONS

READS

126

81

2 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
David John Briggs
Imperial College London
153 PUBLICATIONS 3,419 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

Available from: David John Briggs

Retrieved on: 17 October 2015

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18

Personal exposure to particulate air pollution in transport

microenvironments
J. Gulliver*, D.J. Briggs
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College, London W2 1PG, UK
Received 16 June 2003; received in revised form 8 September 2003; accepted 15 September 2003

Abstract
Personal measurements of exposure to particulate air pollution (PM10, PM2.5, PM1) were simultaneously made
during walking and in-car journeys on two suburban routes in Northampton, UK, during the winter of 1999/2000.
Comparisons were made between concentrations found in each transport mode by particle fraction, between different
particle fractions by transport mode, and between transport microenvironments and a xed-site monitor located within
the study area. High levels of correlation were seen between walking and in-car concentrations for each of the particle
fractions (PM10: r2 0:82; PM2.5: r2 0:98; PM1: r2 0:99). On an average, PM10 concentrations were 16% higher
inside the car than for the walker, but there were no difference in average PM2.5 and PM1 concentrations between the
two modes. High PM2.5:PM10 ratios (0.60.73) were found to be associated with elevated sulphate levels. The
PM2.5:PM10 and PM1:PM2.5 ratios were shown to be similar between walking and in-car concentrations.
Concentrations of PM10 were found to be more closely related between transport mode than either mode was with
concentrations recorded at the xed-site (roadside) monitor. The xed-site monitor was shown to be a poor marker for
PM10 concentrations recorded during walking and in-car on a route over 1 km away.
r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Exposure assessment; Air quality; Personal monitoring; Particle fraction; Transportation mode

1. Introduction
Epidemiological studies have provided a considerable
body of evidence to suggest that particulate air pollution
has adverse effects on human health. Clear association
between exposure to particles and adverse health effects
have been shown in studies of acute effects (Pope et al.,
1991; Ostro et al., 1996; Verhoeff et al., 1996). It is
thought that peak exposures, less than 1 h in duration,
are most relevant in terms of health effects (Michaels
and Kleinman, 2000). It is also thought that many
chronic effects are simply the result of repeated exposure
to elevated levels of air pollution (Schwartz, 2000).

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-20-7594-3276; fax: +4420-7594-3196.

E-mail address: j.gulliver@imperial.ac.uk (J. Gulliver).

Sources of exposure to particulate air pollution are

many. Indoor sources, including cooking, unvented
heating appliances and pets often make important
contributions to exposures. Road trafc, however,
generally provides the major source of ambient particulate pollution, especially for ner particles (PM10 and
less). These contributions arise either directly (mainly
through emissions from diesel vehicles) or indirectly (by
formation of secondary particulates in the air).
Although atmospheric particles may also be transported
over long distances, peak concentrations tend to occur
close to roads. Road journeys, whether by car, foot or
cycle, thus tend to make up a large proportion of peak
exposures.
Notwithstanding the potential importance of these
exposures for human health, studies of journey-time
exposures to particles have been relatively rare. Most of
these studies have dealt solely with motorised transport

1352-2310/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.09.036

ARTICLE IN PRESS
2

J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18

(Akbar and Ashmore, 1996; Gee and Raper, 1999;

Praml and Schierl, 2000; Zagury et al., 2000; Adams
et al., 2001; Chan et al., 2002), with a few studies looking
at cyclists (Bevan et al., 1991; Sitzmann et al., 1999; Gee
and Raper, 1999; Adams et al., 2001), and even fewer
considering pedestrians (van Wijnen et al., 1995). It is
likely that the size and weight of monitoring devices will
have prohibited work on personal monitoring of
pedestrians exposure to particles. Most studies on
particle levels in transport have been limited to sampling
intervals of several hours, with 1-h sampling times at
best (Monn, 2000). These samples were typically taken
on lters, or as measures of absorbency, providing an
integrated measure of exposure across the whole
sampling period. These techniques are not ideally suited
to measuring peak exposures because many journeys are
less than 1 h in duration, and in many cases even shorter.
In the UK, 45% of all journeys are less than two miles
(DETR, 1998) and the average intra-urban commuting
journey is 28 min (DETR, 2000).
In the last few years, however, smaller devices
for automatic monitoring of particles at high temporal
(i.e. several minutes to 1 h) have become available.
The new generation of monitors are light and portable
making them ideal for personal monitoring. The aim
of this study was to use these devices to measure
personal exposure to particles in different size fractions,
simultaneously during walking and in-car journeys, in
order to explore the effects of journey mode on
exposures.

2. Methods
The study was undertaken in the northern corridor
of Northampton, UK, during the winter of 1999/2000.
Northampton is a provincial town, lying about 80 km
northnortheast of London. The total population is
about 180,000, and the main industries are retailing,
nance and logistics. The study area covered about
8 km2, stretching along one of the main commuter routes
(the A508) to the north of the town centre. The
M1 motorway lies about 7 km to the southwest of the
study area.
Particle measurements were made using light-scattering (OSIRIS) devices. OSIRIS samplers are one of a new
breed of light-weight, portable devices capable of
sampling and recording particle concentrations in real
time at high temporal resolution (1 s minimum). The
light scattered by the individual particles of dust is
converted into an electrical pulse, which is proportional
to the size of the particle. The intensity of the light pulse
is, therefore, an indicator of particle size and from this
the microprocessor is able to calculate the expected mass
of the particle. OSIRIS units can be set to measure
PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 particles electronically selected

from those particles entering the inlet. Data for all three
fractions were collected in this study.
For journeys made by walking, the OSIRIS unit was
carried on the chest in a custom-made pouch, and
powered by a 12-V battery held in a separate pouch. For
in-car journeys, the OSIRIS unit was placed on the front
passenger seat. The same car (1995 Ford Fiesta) was
used in all monitoring campaigns and ventilation
conditions in the car were kept the same throughout;
windows were closed at all time and no air-conditioning
or climatic controls were used. There were no signicant
changes in the mechanical condition of the car during
the 6 month period in which monitoring took place.
Data were also collected from a xed-site (roadside)
monitor (TEOM) within the study area. The xed-site
monitor was located about 10 m from roadside on the
east side of the main thoroughfare, close to a busy road
junction. The performance of the OSIRIS monitors was
initially validated by co-locating samplers alongside the
xed-site monitor (TEOM). Results showed strong
agreement between the OSIRIS and the xed-site
monitor (TEOM): r2 0:83 for 302  15 min intervals;
TEOM=1.03OSIRIS.
Two routes were used for personal monitoring, in
order to provide contrasting trafc conditions and thus
to give a wide range of exposure levels (Fig. 1). The rst
route covers part of the main thoroughfare in the centre
of Kingsthorpe and crosses the junction of the A508/
A5199. The rst two-thirds of the journey is in a heavily
trafcked area, with the last third along a minor street.
The second route covered suburban roads in the northeast of the study area, which is, in general, less heavily
trafcked than the route through the centre of Kingsthorpe. However, a section of the route (on Boughton
Green Road) would often experience congestion and
queuing during the morning peak-ow period.
The following method was piloted in July 1999 and
applied in monitoring campaigns on route 1 during
November 1999 and March 2000. Each campaign
consisted of two iterations of the same route both in
the morning peak hour trafc (08000900 h) and in the
afternoon (15001600 h) period, both of which are
characterised by increased trafc associated with
the school-run. Each walk and car trip commenced at
the same time, departing at 0810 and 0830 in the
morning and 1510 and 1530 in the afternoon. On an
average, the walk took about 15 min and the car 6 min;
thus the car usually arrived ahead of the walk. The car
(with walker as passenger) then returned to the start of
the route for a repeat journey. This yielded four samples
of the route (two in either direction) for each mode, per
day. A single campaign took place during April 2000 on
the second route. The operation of monitoring on this
route was somewhat different from the rst route. This
route was circular, so the walker would return to the
start point without requiring assistance from the car,

ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18

Fig. 1. Personal monitoring routes and study area context.

with the walking taking about 20 min and the car about
6 min, for each iteration. Again, two iterations of the
route were completed within each hour for the walker.
The car was allowed to make up to three iterations of
this route in the time it took the walker to complete one
trip. The three iterations made by the car were taken to
represent a single trip. Both routes were selected to be
complementary in their position to the main carriageway, with pedestrian footpaths never more than a few
metres from the road network. The only apparent
differences between the modes were due to the type
microenvironment.
Personal monitoring was undertaken for a total of
38 h (i.e. maximum of 74 trips) over the three monitoring
campaigns. Table 1 shows a summary of the personal
monitoring campaigns. A single pair of measurements
was lostdue to operational problems with the monitoring equipmentduring the morning campaign on
18th November; thus, 73 pairs of simultaneous in-car
and walk measurements were obtained in total.
The differences between each pair of in-car and
walking measurements were analysed to see if it was
appropriate to take the average of both trips to
represent a single value for each hour. A standardised
difference Ds was adopted that expresses the difference
between each pair of measurements relative to the

Table 1
Summary of personal monitoring campaigns
Survey

November 1999
March 2000
April 2000
Total

Route

1
1
2

Number of measurements
by hour of day
0800

1200

1500

9
14
8

10
16
8

31

34

magnitude of concentrations for any given pair. The

difference is, therefore, standardised by the average of
the in-car and walk measurements. Variance components analysis (VCA) in SPSS were then used to
determine the contribution of a number of factors
(day, route, survey, hour, trip) to the variance of Ds for
each of the particle size fractions (PM10, PM2.5 and
PM1). VCA showed some variation between the
different particle sizes in their contribution to the main
effects. For each of the particle size fractions, the biggest
contribution to the main effects was day (2339%) with
a smaller contribution from hour (3.611%). The

ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18

contribution of trip to the main effects was, however, very small for all three particle size fractions
(0.160.5%). The effect of route and survey was also
small, with the remainder (error) attributed to about
half-a-dozen two-, three- and four-way interactions.
Based on these results, it was considered appropriate
to combine the two monitoring trips within each hour.
Only one trip was made in one of the morning sessions,
so this pair was removed (731) from the data pool. The
two trips collected for each mode during each hour were
subsequently combined, thus a total of 72 pairs of in-car
and walk observations were reduced to 36 pairs of
measurements.

3. Results and discussion

Table 2 shows summary statistics for each particle
fraction by transport mode and for PM10 from the xedsite monitor. As Table 2 shows, the average PM10
concentration for in-car journeys is 16% higher than for
journeys made by walking. For PM2.5 and PM1,
however, the average concentration is almost the same
for journeys made by walking and in-car.

Regression models were constructed between the incar and walking measurements for each particle fraction
size (e.g. PM10, PM2.5, PM1). A single regression model
using data from both routes and separate regression
models for each route were constructed. Chow tests
(Chow, 1960) were then applied to see if there were any
structural changes in the regression models due to the
choice of route. The Chow test is dened as
F k; n  2k

RSS12  RSS1 RSS2 =k

RSS1 RSS2 =n  2k

where RSS1 and RSS2 are the residual sum of squares

from the separate regressions models for routes 1 and 2,
and RSS12 is the combined regression model for both
routes; k is the number of degrees of freedom; and n is
the total number of observations.
Table 3 gives the regression equations and summary
statistics by route for each particle fraction, and Fig. 2
shows the relationship between concentrations recorded
during journeys by walking and in-car by route, for each
particle fraction. Chow tests show that route does not
have a signicant effect on the structure of the regression
models for PM10 and PM2.5, but there is a signicant
difference in the regression models due to route for PM1.

Table 2
Statistical summary of particle fraction measurements (mg/m3)
Walk

PM10
PM2.5
PM1

In-car

Fixed-site

Mean

Range

SD

Mean

Range

SD

Mean

Range

SD

38.18
15.06
7.14

93.98
70.49
43.60

25.17
16.15
9.62

43.16
15.54
7.03

91.04
73.99
46.30

22.71
15.92
9.67

26.55

36.95

10.53

N 36 h.

Table 3
Regression models for predicting in-car concentrations from walking concentrations, and Chow test summary statistics, for each
particle fraction by route

ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18
Route 2

Route 1

Route 1

Y = 0.42X + 19.86
r2 = .57

Y = 0.82X + 13.21
r2 = .77

+2

Y = 0.83X + 13.10
r2 = .82

Route 2

Route 1

Y = 0.77X + 1.52
r2 = .97

Y = 0.97X + 1.35
r2 = .98

120

Route 1

+2

Y = 0.98X + 0.84
r2 = .98

80

in-car PM2.5 conc (g/m3)

in-car PM10 conc (g/m3)

100
80
60
40
20

60

40

20

0
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

walking PM10 conc. (g/m3)

(a)

Route 2

Route 1

Route 1

Y = 0.65X + 0.55
r 2 = .94

Y = 0.99X + 0.23
r 2 = .99

20

Y = 0.99X 0.09
r 2 = .98

80

Route 2

Route 1

+2

60

40

walking PM2.5 conc. (g/m3)

(b)

Route 1

Y = 0.22X + 18.44
r2 = 0.12

Y = 0.72X + 12.22
r 2 = 0.48

+2

Y = 0.68X + 13.19
r2 = 0.54

80

50
in-car PM10-PM2.5 conc (g/m3)

in-car PM1 conc (g/m3)

70

40

30

20

10

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

0
0

(c)

10

20

30

40

50

walking PM1 conc. (g/m3)

(d)

10

20

30

40

50

60

walking PM10-PM2.5 conc. (g/m3)

Fig. 2. Comparison of particle concentrations between walking and in-car journeys for (a) PM10, (b) PM2.5, (c) PM1, and (d) PM10
PM2.5.

Fig. 2a shows the relationship between journeys made

by walking and in-car for PM10. As this indicates, there
is a strong, linear association between monitored
concentrations during walking and in-car (r2 0:82;
Po0:001). Where concentrations during walking are less
than 20 mg/m3, in-car concentrations are higher than
those recorded during walking by about a factor
between 1.5 and 2. The magnitude of difference between
in-car and walk concentrations gradually diminishes
with increased levels of concentrations. Values for in-car
and walk concentrations reach equivalence at 70 mg/m3.
Figs. 2b and c show the relationships between
journeys made by walking and in-car for PM2.5 and
PM1, respectively. In both cases, there is a very strong,
linear, one-to-one relationship between concentrations
recorded in-car and those recorded while walking. In
each case, however, there are three pairs of measurements (3 h) with greatly elevated particle levels. It is
worthy of note that the relationship between concentrations recorded during walking and in-car remains
very strong when these elevated values are removed:

r2 0:92 for PM2.5; r2 0:88 for PM1. The weaker

correlation between walking and in-car concentrations
for PM10 can thus be attributed to the coarse particle
fraction (PM10PM2.5). Indeed, as Fig. 2d shows there
is a somewhat weaker, yet signicant (r2 0:54;
Po0:005), association between in-car concentrations
and concentrations from journeys by walking for the
coarse fraction. Taking separate regression models for
the two routes shows a good t between walking and incar concentrations for route 1, but a weak, nonsignicant (P > 0:05) model for route 2.
Comparisons were also made between the different
particle fractions for both journeys by walking and incar. Figs. 3a and b show the relationships between
concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 recorded during
journeys made by walking and those made in-car,
respectively. As Figs. 3a and b shows, there is a clear
non-linear relationship between PM10 and PM2.5 for
both transport modes. Both associations are best
described by a cubic function. It is important, however,
to recognise the inuence of three data points that have

ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18
120

120

100

100

PM10 conc (g/m3)

PM10 conc (g/m3)

80
60
40

80
60
40

20

20

20

60

80

PM2.5 conc. (g/m )

(a)

80

80

70

70

60

60

50
40
30
20

40

60

80

PM2.5 conc. (g/m )

(b)

50
40
30
20
10

10

(c)

20

PM2.5 conc. (g/m3)

PM2.5 conc. (g/m3)

40

10

20

30

40

50

PM1 conc. (g/m )

10

20

30

40

50

PM1 conc. (g/m )

(d)

Fig. 3. Comparisons of different particle fractions by mode and route (1: m and 2: ) for (a) PM2.5 and PM10 for walking, (b) PM2.5
and PM10 for in-car, (c) PM1 and PM2.5 for walking, and (d) PM1 and PM2.5 for in-car.

a particularly high PM2.5:PM10 ratio (0.60.73). Table 4

shows ratios between different particle fractions by
transport mode. Based on an analysis of data on daily
sulphate levels from the nearest rural monitoring site
(Stoke Ferry, Norfolk), these high PM2.5:PM10 ratios
were found to be associated with particularly high levels
of sulphate. Daily average sulphate levels typically will
range between 1 and 2 mg/m3 in Southern England,
whereas these hours with elevated PM2.5:PM10 ratios
were associated with daily average sulphate in the range
3.54 mg/m3. It was not possible, however, to analyse the
differential effects of other sources of PM10 (e.g.
nitrates, chloride, etc.) due to the lack of available data.
Removal of the 3 h of data with a high ratio between
PM2.5 and PM10 renders the relationship between PM10
and PM2.5 concentrations almost linear for both the incar and walking journeys. As Figs. 3c and d indicate, the
relationship between PM2.5 and PM1 is also almost
linear for both transport modes; therefore, sulphate can

Table 4
Ratios between different particle fractions by transport mode
Mode

Median

Meana

Min

Max

PM2.5:PM10

Walk
In-car

0.32
0.28

0.35
0.31

0.21
0.12

0.73
0.72

PM1:PM2.5

Walk
In-car

0.43
0.41

0.47
0.45

0.19
0.21

0.69
0.61

Mean is obtained from all data in each particle fraction

before calculating the ratio.

be taken as predominantly contained within the PM1

fraction. Table 4 further shows that the median
PM2.5:PM10 and PM1:PM2.5 ratios for walking and incar are comparable. This suggests that in-car air quality
is no more associated with trafc-related emissions than
outdoor air quality at the roadside.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18
Route 1

Route 1 + 2

Route 2
Y = .84X + 2.76
r2 = .19

Y = 1.61X - .25
R2 = .49

Y = 1.76X 8.64
r2 = .54

walking PM10 conc (g/m3)

100

80

60

40

20

0
0

20

(a)

40

60

80

100

fixed-site PM10 conc. (g/m3)

Route 1

Route 2

Route 1

Y = .38X + 20.56
r2 = .13

Y = 1.67X + 3.04
r2 = .60

+2

Y = 1.70X - .68
r2 = .62

100

car PM10 conc (g/m3)

Comparisons were also made between PM10 concentrations in transport microenvironments and PM10
concentrations recorded at the xed-site monitor. Figs.
4a and b show the relationships between the PM10
concentrations from the xed-site monitor and PM10
concentrations recorded during journeys made by
walking and in-car, respectively. A summary of models
to predict PM10 journey concentrations from the xedsite monitor is shown in Table 5. As the regression
equations and coefcients of determination indicate, for
a combined model using both routes the concentrations
recorded at the xed-site give a good prediction of
concentrations monitored during both journeys by
walking and in-car. It is, however, notable that the
slope coefcient is well above 1 in both cases, so the
monitored xed site tends to under-predict the in-car
and walk concentrations at higher levels of PM10, by a
factor of about 1.6 in both cases. For journeys made by
walking, the average PM10 concentration is about 30%
higher than recorded at the xed site, whereas the
average in-car PM10 concentration is 67% higher than
the xed-site (see Table 2). The weak, non-signicant
model for route 2 is probably due to its greater distance
from the xed-site monitor, and the differing trafc
levels and meteorological conditions compared to route
1. In other words, the representativeness of the xed site
monitor as a measure of journey-time exposure appears
to decline with increasing distance.
Comparison between these results and those found in
other studies is difcult because many studies have used
different fractions of particulate matter and have
adopted different averaging times, ranging from 1 to
8 h. Nevertheless, there is a clear pattern in terms of the
magnitude of difference between concentrations in
transport microenvironments and those measured at
xed-site monitors. In a study of PM2.5 exposure levels
in transport, for example, Adams et al. (2001) found
that road transport levels were, on average, elevated by
100% compared to levels at an urban centre monitor
(London Bloomsbury) located 35 m form the nearest
road. In summer, concentrations in road transport were
about 50% higher than those reported by an urban
roadside monitor (Marylebone), but no difference was
seen between the kerbside xed-site monitor and
concentrations in road transport during winter. Morandi et al. (1988) found PM3.5 levels to be about 60%
higher inside cars than at an urban xed-site monitor
(background site). Furthermore, Akbar and Ashmore
(1996) showed 1-h samples of PM4 from Delhi, India, to
be 20% lower at the xed-site (roadside) than in buses
and cars. The same trend was reported by Zagury et al.
(2000) in a study of Paris taxi drivers exposure to black
smoke (BS), which can be seen as a surrogate to
particles. For a total of 28 samples taken over a number
of different routes, concentrations in taxis were, on
average, twice those at the urban centre monitor

80
60
40
20
0
0

20

(b)

40

60

80

100

fixed-site PM10 conc. (g/m3)

Fig. 4. Comparison between PM10 concentrations in each

transport mode and PM10 concentrations at the xed-site
monitor.
Table 5
Summary of models to predict PM10 concentrations during
journeys from the PM10 xed-site monitor
Route Slope Const r

r2

SEE

Sig.

Walking 1+2
1
2

1.76
1.61
0.84

8.64 0.74 0.54 17.25 0.000 36

0.25 0.70 0.49 18.34 0.000 24
2.76 0.43 0.19 11.32 0.159 12

In-car

1.70
1.67
0.38

0.68 0.79 0.62 14.23 0.000 36

3.04 0.78 0.60 15.30 0.000 24
20.56 0.36 0.13 6.32 0.251 12

1+2
1
2

(located close to busy roads) and four times those at

suburban (background) sites. Clearly, the magnitude of
difference in particle levels between a xed-site monitor
and any transport microenvironment depends to a large
extent on the proximity of the xed-site monitor in
relation to the monitoring route. Nonetheless, it is clear
from the data presented here that there is a tendency for

ARTICLE IN PRESS
8

J. Gulliver, D.J. Briggs / Atmospheric Environment 38 (2004) 18

the xed-site monitor to under-predict PM10 levels even

when situated very close to the monitoring route.

4. Conclusions
A number of studies have made comparisons of levels
of particle exposure between different types of motorised
transport, but there has been very little work comparing
levels of particles found in motorised transport with
pedestrians exposure to particles along complementary
routes. This study provides new data on levels of
different particle fractions in motorised transport and
for pedestrians. Notably, close, more-or-less 1:1 relationships are seen for all three size fractions studied
between exposures in-car and walking. Weaker associations are, however, found for coarse-grade particles
(PM10PM2.5). Fixed-site monitoring of PM10 at a
kerbside site was seen to provide consistent estimates
of exposure both for walking and in-car, though in both
cases exposures were somewhat under-estimated. For a
more distant route (ca. 1 km away) the xed site monitor
gave relatively poor predictions of exposures by both
modes. On the one hand, therefore, these results suggest
that exposures experienced in-car and walking are
broadly similar, when the routes are comparable. On
the other hand, they suggest that care is needed in using
xed-site monitors as a basis for assessing journey-time
exposures. This may have signicant implications for
exposure assessment in epidemiological studies of
trafc-related air pollution. The results also have
important implications for policy and management.
They suggest, for example, that efforts to reduce car
usage, by encouraging people to take short journeys on
foot, may actually increase exposures to air pollution.
This is because the longer journey times on foot
compared to car would lead to raised overall exposures,
unless the achieved reduction in trafc volumes is
sufcient to provide compensatory reductions in ambient pollution levels.

References
Adams, H.S., Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., Colvile, R.N., McMullen,
M.A.S., Khandelwal, P., 2001. Fine particle (PM2.5)
exposure levels in transport microenvironments, London,
UK. The Science of the Total Environment 279, 2944.
Akbar, S., Ashmore, M.R., 1996. Particulate air pollution and
respiratory morbidity: personal exposure in Delhi and its
implications. Paper presented at the World Congress on Air
Pollution in Developing Countries, San Jose, Costa Rica,
2126 October, 1996.
Bevan, M.A.J., Proctor, C.J., Baker-Rogers, J., Warren, N.D.,
1991. Exposure to carbon monoxide, respirable suspended
particulates, and volatile organic compounds whilst com-

muting be bicycle. Environmental Science and Technology

25, 788791.
Chan, L.Y., Lau, W.L., Zou, S.C., Cao, Z.X., Lai, S.C., 2002.
Exposure level of carbon monoxide and respirable suspended particulate in public transportation modes while
commuting in urban area of Guangzhou, China. Atmospheric Environment 36 (38), 58315840.
Chow, G.C., 1960. Tests of equality between sets of coefcients
in two linear regressions. Econometrica 28, 591605.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions
(DETR), 1998. A New Deal for Transport. HMSO,
London.
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions
(DETR), 2000. Transport Statistics Bulletin. National
Travel Survey: 1997/99 Update. HMSO, London.
Gee, I.L., Raper, D.W., 1999. Commuter exposure to respirable
particles in buses and by bicycle. The Science of The Total
Environment 235 (13), 403405.
Michaels, R.A., Kleinman, M.T., 2000. Incidence and apparent
health signicance of brief airborne particle excursions.
Aerosol Science and Technology 32 (2), 93105.
Monn, C., 2000. Exposure assessment of air pollutants: a review
on spatial heterogeneity and indoor/outdoor/personal exposure to suspended particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide
and ozone. Atmospheric Environment 35, 132.
Morandi, M.T., Stock, T.H., Contant, C.F., 1988. A comparative study of respirable particulate microenvironmental
concentrations and personal exposures. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment 10 (2), 105122.
Ostro, B.D., Sanchez, J.M., Aranda, C., Eskeland, G.S., 1996.
Air pollution and mortality: results from a study of
Santiago, Chile. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology 6, 97114.
Pope III, C.A., Dockery, D.W., Spengler, J.D., Raizenne, M.E.,
1991. Respiratory health and PM10 pollution: a daily time
series analysis. American Review of Respiratory Disease
144, 668674.
Praml, G., Schierl, R., 2000. Dust exposure in Munich public
transportation: a comprehensive 4 yr survey in buses and
trams. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 73 (3), 209214.
Schwartz, J., 2000. Is there harvesting in the association of
airborne particles with daily deaths and hospital admissions? Epidemiology 12 (1), 5561.
Sitzmann, B., Kendall, M., Watt, J., Williams, I., 1999.
Characterisation of airborne particles in London by
computer-controlled scanning electron microscopy. The
Science of The Total Environment 241 (13), 6373.
van Wijnen, J.H., Verhoeff, A.P., Jans, H.W.A., Vanbruggen,
M., 1995. The exposure of cyclists, car drivers and
pedestrians to trafc-related air pollutants. International
Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 67 (3),
187193.
Verhoeff, A.P., Hoek, G., Schwartz, J., van Wijnen, J.H., 1996.
Air pollution and daily mortality in Amsterdam. Epidemiology 7 (3), 225230.
Zagury, E., Le Moullec, Y., Momas, I., 2000. Exposure of Paris
taxi drivers to automobile air pollutants within their
vehicles. Occupational Environmental Medicine 57 (6),
406410.