Acculation
Talk with Ivy League PhD data scientists...
Internet map: network data visualization...
A Visualization of Wikipedia Data...
Streamgraph: multidimensional data visua...
Data viz: scoreboards as the original an...
Evolution of historical notions of Earth...

Cheap air filters for the broke?

Cheap air filters (purifiers) for those who need to slice their budget? Photo Credits: taxcredits.net/Flickr/Creative Commons By Attribution License

Cheap air filters when you can’t afford to make a fashion statement?

Air pollution is serious enough to create elevated cancer, trigger allergies and asthma is of concern in nearly every major city in the world. However, according to NASA, the worst PM2.5 pollution is in Chinese and Indian cities, places where it may be difficult for the average citizen to afford a traditional, consumer-grade air purifier. As most people don’t want to wear a mask all day long and look like a medieval plague doctor, the hunt is on for other cheap technologies, such as dirt cheap air filters and purifiers.

[UPDATE: Thomas Talhelm of Smart Air Filters emailed us some comments/corrections on the article. We’ve included these in the comments below.]

One Chinese/American startup, based in Beijing and the US [Update: they are mainly in Beijing], may have a solution. Smart Air Filters has come up with inexpensive kits consisting of little more than a fan, some duct tape [Update: it’s a velcro strap], and a HEPA filter. (The low end on these already cheap air filters apparently only has duct tape and maybe the HEPA filter.) The kits are aimed primarily at China and other developing markets. It does look like they’ll ship to the US, and the cost listed on their website is around USD$30-50 depending on the exact kit.

They provide “proof” on their blog page that the kits “work.” They’re even using a Dylos to “prove” that their inexpensive duct-tape solution works and cleans the air. (And some of the counts when he moves back into the room show pretty dirty air in the room, so I’m curious as to where it was filmed.)

A problem with their analysis

There’s a problem with their website and video demo. What they call “PM2.5” is actually intended to be the PM10 channel, and what they call “PM0.5” is intended to measure PM2.5 levels. (Readers with our app can do the conversion into US EPA AQI equivalents and see just how bad their air is!)


The reason is the left Dylos “PRO” channel (which they assume are using, although our app also supports the non-PRO version, which has different channel calibrations but should still provide good conversion to US EPA AQI equivalents when used with our app) measure 0.5-2.5 microns, and is intended for PM2.5, while the rightmost channel measures 2.5 microns and up, and, when summed with the left channel, measures PM10. (So above I said they called the PM10 channel the PM2.5 channel. In reality, the right channel is not the PM10 channel, but combining the two channels together mathematically, as our app does, lets you measure PM10.)

Here’s the reason. Most of the traditional government and health data was collected using much older technology, and this measures particles SMALLER than the size using a collection filter. So PM10 is everything SMALLER than the 10 micron collection filter that was used, including PM2.5. The new technology (particle counters like the ones supported by our app) measures everything in a range or LARGER than a certain size, so the 2.5 channel (right Dylos PRO channel) measures everything LARGER than 2.5 microns out to 10 microns, and thus is intended to help measure PM10 (by combing the two channels together to create a 0.5-10 channel). It is not currently cost-effective to go below 0.5 microns (or 0.3 microns, really) with a home laser particle counter, but by measuring 0.5-2.5 you can statistically estimate what 0-0.5 microns looks like from the 0.5-2.5 reading, and thus estimate both PM2.5 and PM10 from the two channels.

If you use our AQcalc iOS app this will becomes clear. Download it here.

The reason this is important, of course, is that PM2.5 is generally considered much more dangerous than PM10. (Most people have a DIY PM10 filter called “their nose” that seems to work OK. 🙂 This is a bit of an exaggeration — PM10 eventually becomes dangerous — but if you mixed up PM2.5 readings and used them as PM10 readings as they do on their webpage and video you would get a false sense of security. )

Looking at their numbers, it becomes pretty clear something is very wrong for Beijing! They show their make-shift duct-tape air purifier supposedly getting the PM2.5 numbers down to zero right away. I assure you this is really, really hard in Beijing! Of course, once you realize they’re actually talking about PM10 when they are saying PM2.5, it becomes clear what is going on.

Defending traditional manufacturers

Let me put in a defense for the “expensive” air purifier manufacturers:

We’ve discussed the PM2.5 and PM0.5 mislabeling on their website with the Smart Air folks, and they’ve acknowledged there may be some issues with their blog information. (They admit elsewhere on their blog that they’re just a small start up and aren’t experts in air quality or anything like that. They seem to have sold out of their kits, so it looks like they have a hit product.)

That being said, for people in developing countries who absolutely can’t afford a full-blown air purifier, desperately need protection from PM2.5 pollution, don’t mind risking something that’s not UL safety-tested, and don’t like respirator masks and don’t want to make an air quality fashion statement these cheap air purifiers may be a good solution.

Note: We are not affiliated in any way with Smart Air Filters.

Photo Credits: taxcredits.net/Flickr/CC-BY

Next steps: Check out our YouTube channel for more great info, including our popular "Data Science Careers, or how to make 6-figures on Wall Street" video (click here)!