Navigating the Confusing Air Quality Landscape in Los Angeles
The ongoing wildfires in Los Angeles have left residents grappling with air quality metrics that often conflict. As wildfires ignited last week, many noticed discrepancies between the air quality readings provided by the U.S. government and those from various apps, including Apple's Weather app and the wildfire tracker Watch Duty.
These applications utilize data from similar monitoring equipment to assess air pollution levels, yet they apply different algorithms to convert raw data into user-friendly air quality estimates. The situation has become increasingly complex with the rise of climate change, which has sparked more severe wildfires and increased pollen blooms. This has led to a surge of interest and investment from tech giants like Google, startups, and academic researchers in developing air quality metrics aimed at helping individuals avoid hazardous conditions.
Consequently, selecting a reliable source for air quality information has turned into a common source of confusion, particularly during wildfire events across the United States. Recently, the multitude of fires in Los Angeles compounded this difficulty, as the region's varied topography can create areas of poor air quality. For instance, on one occasion, Google reported safe air quality across Los Angeles, while Watch Duty flagged specific neighborhoods near the Palisades Fire as dangerous.
Environmental researchers specializing in pollution's impact on health recommend that individuals rely primarily on data from the Environmental Protection Agency's AirNow map, which displays larger circles to indicate air quality levels. These circles represent readings from government monitoring stations distributed throughout the country, with approximately one station for every 300,000 residents. In Los Angeles, a limited number of these stations provide hourly updates on air quality, which the EPA uses to calculate the Air Quality Index (AQI), categorizing air quality from safe (green) to hazardous (maroon).
Another popular data source is PurpleAir, a company based in Utah that offers sensors that, while less powerful and accurate than government equipment, are more affordable and accessible. These sensors report data every two minutes and have been widely adopted in Los Angeles. PurpleAir combines its sensor data with its own algorithms to create a real-time air quality map.
AirNow's fire map integrates data from PurpleAir sensors, represented by smaller circles, and applications like Watch Duty also utilize this data. However, inconsistencies often arise due to the varying calculations and processing times among different services. For example, a PurpleAir sensor near Los Angeles International Airport can report significantly different AQI values across platforms, indicating a range of air quality from healthy to hazardous.
To enhance accuracy, companies such as BreezoMeter and Ambee have emerged, utilizing extensive data sources--including EPA and PurpleAir sensors, satellites, and weather conditions--to provide hyperlocal air quality estimates. These firms aim to deliver timely and relevant air quality data across multiple regions, with BreezoMeter now operating in over 40 countries following its acquisition by Google.
Although some researchers express skepticism about the reliability of these systems, particularly regarding low-cost sensors, they acknowledge that these sensors can effectively gauge advisory levels about 90% of the time. When air quality is a concern, experts suggest erring on the side of caution by considering the highest AQI reading from various sources.
In regions lacking sufficient government monitoring, private startups are filling the gaps, offering crucial air quality information. As demand for accurate air quality data grows, researchers are working to enhance the capabilities of low-cost sensors and advocate for the installation of diverse monitoring equipment, including pollen counters. The consensus among experts is clear: as air quality continues to deteriorate, improving measurement accuracy is critical.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!