Particulate Matter's Sticking Point

Using glue to trap particulate matter? U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson (when he was the Mayor of London) thought it was a good idea. As an expert, what are your thoughts on the possibilities for this to be effective? Please share with us interesting, novel, and innovative ideas meant to tackle particulate matter at a larger scale (city/state/nation) that have been successful and/or unsuccessful - and why?

See another related article here:

Hi @rgschreib, @hopkepk, @djaffe, @josephjjames,
Given your area of expertise and experience, I feel you should be able to answer Jessica’s question. @JessicaYoon
Please join the discussion.

Sticky tape will not be an effective method for quantitatively assessing particulate matter exposure. Depending on whether it is horizontal or vertical will have a major impact on the amount of collected material and it will favor the collection of larger particles. It will also depend considerably on the nature of the air flows in its vicinity. It will collect dust, pollen, dander, and a variety of other materials, but not reproducibly or quantitatively. You really need an active system to do that and you probably want to use a size selective inlet to look at particular size fractions of the aerosol.

Agree with hopke (hi ph!). Sticky tape? Could not collect nearly enough and not of small sizes that are most important.

Thanks Dr. Philip and Dan for your feedback. @hopkepk @djaffe
@jamesburbridge do let us have your input on the above comments.

The response to BoJo’s PM trapping seemed skeptical at best and from what I’m seeing here the community echoes that sentiment. I’m curious about other types of materials or catalysts that could serve as effective capture agents of different types of air pollution? I’m especially interested in environmental catalysis in ambient air. Would it be possible to introduce some catalyst to a metropolitan area in an effort to reduce air pollution transported over long distances?? @hopkepk @djaffe

A more realistic but not yet proven practical is descrived in
Given how much went into building and operating it, I am not sure there are net savings in pollution. @jamesburbridge

Dear @mlacey, @alanDRI and @mccubbin
Please share your thoughts on James question and Jessica’s solution. Thanks.

@JessicaYoon, @jamesburbridge
It’s much better to tackle emissions at source (the exhaust pipe/chimney). Once pollutants are in the air they are not only being hovered up by a (hopeful/hypothetical) technology, but by the lungs of people. In the case of vehicle emissions people are usually on the front line, right next to the road - breathing pollutants in before any ambient technology has had chance to remove them from the air.

The idea at the top of this page has limited effectiveness. The article says: The city’s studies showed it reduced PM-10 (that’s particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometers or smaller) by 10 to 14 percent.

Thanks Adam (@akb) for sharing your views on this proposed solution.

For Indoor air quality control.
I have a patented solution to deal with indoor pollution. I designed a drone based device, measures 8"x 4" ( 20cm x 10cm ) small autopilot drone. Under the drone there is a system of TIo2 charged plates and with UV irritated tube and Ions generator and O3 generator. User can command the drone remotely ( using Wi-Fi ) and watch its action live when he is away from home. The drone takes off and shower the rooms with billions of negative Ions which attach to polluted air particulates make them heavier. Polluted air participated to ground due to extra ions. UV activates TIo2 then converts bad air and bacteria to harmless Co2 and water. And O3 eliminates bad odors. By the time user returns home, the rooms become free from polluted air. Also, the drone equipped with a set of high voltage screens that kills mosquitoes in contact. 10-2-19

Excellent product @Simonyu
Thank you for sharing it with us.

We have developed a new porous material (SUNSPACE), that can trap air particulate matter. It can trap also ultra-fine PM. It can be applied as a coating on external building surfaces, such as walls, roofs, and so on…
For information see:

Hi @Simonyu sounds like an interesting solution. Are you not concerned with introducing more O3 into a room? Is there a way to design an ionizer without emitting O3 byproduct?

Hello Prof. @bontempi. Yes, we spoke to you colleague, Dr. Zanoletti, the other day. Really intriguing solution! Sounds ideal for PM, is there any thought or validity to adding more capability to the material such that it could address gaseous pollutants?

Thank you very much. For gaseous pollutants it is possible to add TiO2 (anatase) to the material. In this manner it would be possible to degradate some gaseous pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides.

Hi @jamesburbridge Excessive O3 is bad . I recommend operate the drone only when everyone is not inside the room. Use O3 option if there is cigarette smoke residue . O3 will dissipated in 15 to 30 minutes from air. For example, you go to work. You instruct the drone via Wi-Fi from you remonte office at 4pm. When you return home at 6pm. Your room will be odor and mosquito free . The drone rests on its own battery charging station ready for next instruction.