Hafkenscheid ThLKummu PHelmink H2017-02-202012-12-06In het kader van de samenwerking tussen de luchtkwaliteits-meetnetten van het RIVM, de GGD Amsterdam en de DCMR Milieudienst Rijnmond vinden sinds enkele jaren tussen RIVM en de beide organisaties vergelijkende metingen plaats op meetlocaties in Amsterdam (RIVM-GGD) en Rotterdam (RIVM-DCMR): - Rotterdam: stikstofdioxide en PM10 op locatie Bentinckplein/Statenweg. - Amsterdam: stikstofdioxide en PM10 op locatie Overtoom. Deze hebben tot doel de vergelijkbaarheid van de resultaten van de verschillende meetinstanties vast te stellen; bij voldoende vergelijkbaarheid kunnen de instanties wederzijds gebruik maken van elkaars resultaten. Evaluatie van de resultaten van de vergelijkingen verricht in 2011 toont aan dat de resulterende meetonzekerheden in alle gevallen te voldoen aan de criteria gesteld in EU Richtlijn 2008/50/EC. Aangezien alle instanties een ISO 17025 accreditatie voeren voor de betreffende metingen mag ervan worden uitgegaan dat het kwaliteitsniveau en de vergelijkbaarheid zoals bepaald in deze vergelijkingen representatief zijn voor de andere meetlocaties van de netwerken. Dit impliceert dat de instanties in principe gebruik kunnen maken van elkaars meetgegevens voor de componenten waarvoor resultaten zijn vergeleken (stikstofdioxide en PM10).Within the frame of the cooperation between the air quality monitoring networks of RIVM, GGD Amsterdam and DCMR Environmental Protection Agency comparative measurements are performed between RIVM and both regional networks at locations in Amsterdam (RIVM-GGD) and Rotterdam (RIVM-DCMR): - Rotterdam: nitrogen dioxide and PM10 at location Bentinckplein/Statenweg. - Amsterdam: nitrogen dioxide and PM10 at location Overtoom The purpose of these comparisons is demonstrating comparability of results obtained by the different networks. In case of sufficient comparability mutual use can be made of their results. All networks use the European Union reference methods for nitrogen dioxide and PM10. The evaluation involves comparison of hourly average results for nitrogen dioxide and of daily average results for PM10 by applying orthogonal regression analysis and by examination of differences between results as a function of measurement period and concentration level. Evaluation of the comparisons between RIVM and DCMR for the year 2011 shows that for nitrogen dioxide results averaged over the whole year to within ±4%. However, the relationship between the results is deviated from the expected relationship y=x (where x-values are results of RIVM): the slope is significantly lower than 1 and the intercept significantly higher than 0. No explanation has been found for this finding. Results for PM10 results agree within ±4%. However, RIVM systematically measures 4% lower than DCMR. The relationship between the results is deviated from the expected relationship y=x (where x-values are results of RIVM): the slope is significantly lower than 1 and the intercept significantly higher than 0. No explanation has been found for this finding. Evaluation of the comparisons between RIVM and GGD for the year 2011 shows that for nitrogen dioxide results averaged over the whole year to within ±2%. However, the relationship between the results is deviated from the expected relationship y=x (where x-values are results of RIVM): the slope is significantly higher than 1 and the intercept significantly lower than 0. No explanation has been found for this finding. Results for PM10 results agree within ±4%. However, RIVM systematically measures 1 µg/m3 lower than GGD as reflected by the relationship between the results. No explanation has been found for this finding. Evaluation further shows that the resulting measurement uncertainties in all cases are well within the criteria given in EU Directive 2008/50/EC. As all networks have an ISO 17025 accreditation for the measurements compared it may be assumed that the quality levels and, consequently, the comparability of the results determined in these comparisons are representative for the networks as a whole. Consequently, it should be possible for networks to make mutual use of results for the components compared (nitrogen dioxide and PM10).application/pdf28 p2193 kbnlluchtkwaliteitstikstofdioxidePM10vergelijkende metingenair qualitynitrogen dioxidePM10comparative measaurementsReport2017-02-20