Accepted Manuscript

Personal Exposure to Air Pollutants in a Bus Rapid Transit System: Impact of Fleet
Age and Emission Standard

R. Morales Betancourt, B. Galvis, J.M. Rincón-Riveros, M.A. Rincón-Caro, A.

Rodriguez-Valencia, O.L. Sarmiento

PII: S1352-2310(19)30048-2
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.01.026
Reference: AEA 16515

To appear in: Atmospheric Environment

Received Date: 30 July 2018

Revised Date: 6 December 2018
Accepted Date: 9 January 2019

Please cite this article as: Betancourt, R.M., Galvis, B., Rincón-Riveros, J.M., Rincón-Caro, M.A.,
Rodriguez-Valencia, A., Sarmiento, O.L., Personal Exposure to Air Pollutants in a Bus Rapid Transit
System: Impact of Fleet Age and Emission Standard, Atmospheric Environment, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.atmosenv.2019.01.026.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Bogotá, 05/12/2018

PT
Statement of Interests

RI
I hereby declare that there's no financial or personal interest that could affect my objectivity related to
the publication of this work.

SC
The funding institutions had no part on the study design or conclusions.

U
AN
All authors approved the manuscript and this submission, and we declare not having any competing
financial interest.
M

Sincerely,

Ricardo Morales, Ph.D.,

D

Assistant Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
TE

Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia

tel.: (+571) 3394949 ext. 1836
e-mail: r.moralesb@uniandes.edu.co
C EP
AC

Departamento de Ingeniería Civil y Ambiental – Facultad de Ingeniería

Cra. 1 Este No. 19A - 40, edificio Mario Laserna (ML), sexto piso, código postal: 111711. Bogotá - Colombia. | Conmutador: (57-1) 3394949 |
Línea directa: (57-1) 332 4312/14/15; Fax: (57-1) 332 4313 | https://civil.uniandes.edu.co |

Universidad de los Andes | Vigilada Mineducación. Reconocimiento como Universidad: Decreto 1297 del 30 de mayo de 1964.
Reconocimiento personería jurídica: Resolución 28 del 23 de febrero de 1949 Minjusticia.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Personal Exposure to Air Pollutants in a Bus Rapid

PT
Transit System: Impact of Fleet Age and Emission
Standard

RI
R. Morales Betancourta,∗, B. Galvisb , J.M. Rincón-Riverosa , M.A.
Rincón-Caroa , A. Rodriguez-Valenciaa , O.L. Sarmientoc

SC
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universidad de Los Andes,
Bogotá, Colombia
b
Environmental and Sanitary Engineering Program, Universidad de La Salle, Bogotá,

U
Colombia
c
School of Medicine, Universidad de Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
AN
Abstract
M

This work documents the extremely high concentrations of fine aerosol parti-
D

cles (PM2.5 ), equivalent black carbon (eBC) and carbon monoxide (CO) ex-
perienced by commuters in one of the world largest Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
TE

systems, located in Bogotá, Colombia. A strong relationship between vehicle

emissions standard and in-vehicle concentrations was established. Extensive
EP

measurements of PM2.5 , eBC, and CO were carried out inside the system
buses and stations. Measurements were performed during eleven months
C

covering all the system lanes and a significant fraction of the bus fleet and
AC

stations. Based on the observed in-bus and in-station concentrations, travel

times, and urban ambient levels, the contribution of a typical round trip
in the BRT system to the daily inhaled dose was estimated to be 60% for
PM2.5 , and between 79% to 90% for eBC. The mean PM2.5 dose inhaled

∗
Corresponding author
Email address: r.moralesb@uniandes.edu.co (R. Morales Betancourt)

Preprint submitted to Atmospheric Environment January 18, 2019

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

by commuters in a typical round trip in the system is 1.2 times the dose a

PT
subject would inhale over 24 hours exposed to WHO guideline of 25 µg m−3 .
In 52 out of 180 buses sampled the mean in-cabin concentration of eBC was

RI
in excess of 100 µg m−3 . Measurements show that mean ratio of in-bus to
urban ambient concentration is 8:1 for PM2.5 and 4:1 for CO. These ratios

SC
were observed to be much larger when traveling inside the older fraction of
the BRT fleet, reaching 11:1 and 7:1 for PM2.5 and CO respectively. These

U
older buses consist exclusively of Euro II and Euro III nominal emission stan-
dard vehicles. Average exposure levels inside Euro II and III buses was twice
AN
as large as those measured inside vehicles with stricter emission standards,
Euro IV or superior. Overall, the measurements suggest that the entrain-
M

ment of polluted pockets of air to the semi enclosed micro-environments in

the system, namely, buses and stations, explains the extreme observed expo-
D

sure concentrations. Measurements inside an underground bus-station where

TE

traffic is restricted to only BRT buses, and on-board a zero emission fully
electric BRT bus suggested most of the pollution in the system comes from
EP

entrainment of the exhaust of the diesel-powered BRT buses. The signif-

icantly lower exposure and inhaled dose of PM2.5 , eBC, and CO observed
for commuters in newer vehicles suggests that a fleet renewal could have a
C

disproportionately large impact on reducing population exposure to air pol-

AC

lutants. The extent of the reduction in exposure and inhaled dose through
fleet renewal is proportional to the gradient of in-bus to urban ambient air
pollution levels.
Keywords: fine particulate, black carbon, black carbon exposure, urban air
pollution, bus rapid transit system, micro-aethalometer loading correction

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 1. Introduction

PT
2 Exposure to air pollutants has been extensively linked with negative
3 health impacts (e.g., Pope III et al., 1991; Dockery et al., 1993; Samet et al.,

RI
4 2000; Brook et al., 2010; Dysart et al., 2014). Air pollution is thought to
cause 17% of all non-communicable disease deaths between the ages of 30

SC
5

6 and 70 (Krzyżanowski et al., 2005) and is the second largest risk factor after
7 tobacco. Air pollution is estimated to have caused seven million prema-

U
8 ture deaths worldwide (Krzyżanowski et al., 2005). Urban commuters are of
AN
9 special interest, since their frequent proximity to pollutant sources implies
10 repeated exposure to peak concentrations (Gulliver and Briggs, 2004; Kaur
M

11 et al., 2007), which is thought to have substantial deleterious health effects

12 (e.g., Krzyżanowski et al., 2005; Michaels and Kleinman, 2000). Activities
D

13 related to daily commute are known to contribute significantly to personal

14 exposure and dose of combustion related air pollutants. For instance, com-
TE

15 muters in Brisbane (Williams and Knibbs, 2016) and The Flemish Region
16 (Dons et al., 2012), spend approximately 6% and 9.8% of their day in traffic
EP

17 respectively, but commuting can account for around 30% and 32% of the
18 daily equivalent black carbon (eBC) inhaled dose, respectively. Similar re-
C

19 sults have also been obtained for fine particles (PM2.5 ) (e.g., de Nazelle et al.,
AC

20 2012), and carbon monoxide (CO) (e.g., Fernandez-Bremauntz and Ashmore,

21 1995).
22 Many studies have shown that travelers inside different types of vehicles
23 are exposed to higher levels of particulates and other pollutants than users
24 of other modes (e.g., Berghmans et al., 2009; Boogaard et al., 2009; Panis
25 et al., 2010; Zuurbier et al., 2010; Cole-Hunter et al., 2012; Huang et al.,

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

26 2012; Both et al., 2013; Kingham et al., 2013; Do et al., 2014; Suarez et al.,

PT
27 2014; Hankey and Marshall, 2015; Ramos et al., 2015; Cepeda et al., 2016;
28 Jeong et al., 2017; Morales Betancourt et al., 2017). Poor air quality levels

RI
29 in micro environments associated with mass transit systems can have a large
30 impact on population exposure to air pollutants, given their ridership and

SC
31 travel times (Rivas et al., 2017). Among mass transit alternatives, Bus Rapid
32 Transit Systems (BRT) have shown the fastest growth rate worldwide. It is

U
33 estimated that BRT systems around the world transport nearly 32 million
people per day in 164 cities in every continent. Some 59 systems have been
AN
34

35 built since 2011, 55 cities are currently expanding their systems, and there
36 are 121 more BRT systems in construction or in planning (BRT, 2018). Many
M

37 of those BRT systems are either located or being built in cities in emerging
38 economies, which often have less stringent emission standards, host aged
D

39 vehicle fleets, and commuters endure longer travel times due to mobility
TE

40 challenges, which may imply higher inhaled dose of air pollutants during
41 commute (Moraes and Schwanen, 2015; Goel et al., 2015).
EP

42 The in-cabin concentration of air pollutants in public transport buses or

43 other motorized modes of transport varies widely according to many fac-
tors, including the use of air conditioning, vehicle age and emission stan-
C

44

45 dard (Dekoninck and Int Panis, 2017), self-pollution (Marshall and Behrentz,
AC

46 2005), as well as contributions from surrounding vehicles (Kingham et al.,

47 2013; Zuurbier et al., 2010). The individual contribution of those factors is
48 uncertain and may vary widely for different situations. Some studies have
49 focused on understanding these factors through the development of statisti-
50 cal or physical models (Dekoninck and Int Panis, 2017). Furthermore, the

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

51 in-cabin to ambient concentration ratio is affected by several environmental

PT
52 factors. For instance, high in-bus concentration of air pollutants are often re-
53 ported in Asian mega-cities (Chan et al., 2002; Both et al., 2013; Goel et al.,

RI
54 2015; Yang et al., 2015). Some of those cities, however, also face severe
55 air quality challenges. Despite the extremely high concentration of PM2.5

SC
56 reported inside urban buses in Delhi, the in-bus to ambient concentration
57 ratio is close to 1. This implies a relatively small gradient of air pollution

U
58 levels inside the transport micro-environment when compared to ambient
levels. Deteriorated air quality levels have also been reported inside the
AN
59

60 public transport environments in Latin American cities, however, compara-

61 tively fewer studies on personal exposure have been conducted in this region
M

62 where fuel quality and less stringent emission standards might contribute to
63 high exposures. Some studies have been performed in Mexico (Fernandez-
D

64 Bremauntz and Ashmore, 1995; Vallejo et al., 2004), Peru (Han et al., 2005)
TE

65 and more recently in Chile (Suarez et al., 2014), Colombia (Morales Betan-
66 court et al., 2017), and Brazil (Targino et al., 2016). However ambient air
EP

67 pollution levels in Latin American cities are typically moderate. Personal

68 exposure to PM2.5 in Santiago de Chile’s BRT system was found to be sim-
ilar to the concentrations reported at the fixed monitoring sites, with mean
C

69

70 in-cabin commuter exposure of 65 µg m−3 compared to 54.5 µg m−3 reported

AC

71 at the fixed monitoring site during commute hours. Those results imply a
72 relatively low in-cabin to ambient concentration ratio.
73 In studies carried out in other regions of the world, low to moderate in-bus
74 exposure to PM2.5 (≤30 µg m−3 ) has been reported (Asmi et al., 2009; Rivas
75 et al., 2017; Tan et al., 2017; de Nazelle et al., 2012). However, in most cases,

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

76 the cities where the studies were done exhibit also low to moderate ambient

PT
77 concentrations, with in-bus to ambient concentration ratio of PM2.5 between
78 1.1 and 1.2. Studies in European cities suggest a slightly larger in-bus to ur-

RI
79 ban ambient ratio compared to Delhi, of around 1.3. However, background
80 air pollution levels are much lower for those locations. In contrast to these

SC
81 moderate exposure levels, a study performed in Bogotá found an alarming 9
82 to 1 in-bus to urban-ambient concentration for a specific route segment stud-

U
83 ied in Bogotá’s BRT system, called Transmilenio, (Morales Betancourt et al.,
2017). The study also found the BRT buses to be the micro environment
AN
84

85 with the largest PM2.5 , eBC, and ultra-fine particle concentrations across all
86 the modes considered, with levels roughly 6 times larger than those experi-
M

87 enced by pedestrians in the vicinity of the BRT lanes. That study, however,
88 was limited to one of the ten lines of the city’s BRT system. In addition
D

89 there is a large variability in the bus fleet regarding vehicle age and emission
TE

90 standard as the system buses have progressively entered in operation at dif-

91 ferent stages over a span of 16 years. This variability was not accounted for
EP

92 in Morales Betancourt et al. (2017).

93 In this study we aim to characterize the exposure in the BRT system
in a manner that is representative of the entire system, and to identify a
C

94

95 quantitative relationships between vehicle-specific characteristics and the in-

AC

96 cabin level of exposure experienced by commuters. We performed extensive

97 sampling of PM2.5 , eBC, and CO concentration inside the BRT system, quan-
98 tifying exposure to particulate and gas phase pollutants for commuters. We
99 crossed these exposure measurements against bus- specific information re-
100 garding manufacturer, vehicle age, vehicle kilometers traveled, and nominal

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

101 emission standard of the vehicle, to determine potential impacts of the fleet

PT
102 characteristics on commuters’ exposure. These impacts are relevant because
103 Bogotá BRT system is one of the world’s largest, with an estimated 701.5

RI
104 million passengers transported in 2016, and a current workday ridership close
105 to 2.4 million in 2017.

SC
106 2. Materials and Methods

U
107 2.1. Study Area and Data Collection
AN
108 We measured air pollutant concentrations in an extensive portion of Bo-
109 gotá BRT system (Transmilenio). The sampling covered the entire 113 km of
dedicated BRT lanes. The system started operation at the end of 2000, serv-
M

110

111 ing 116.6 million passengers in 2001. Its demand has grown by about 35.5
D

112 million passengers every year reaching 2.4 million daily trips in 2017. This
113 is one of the largest BRT systems in the world, with 149 bus stations and
TE

114 a fleet of 2005 buses (75% articulated, 15% bi-articulated, 10% single-cabin
115 buses). There is one fully electric BRT bus in service. Single-cabin buses are
EP

116 hybrid (diesel-electric) with 9.4 liters engines. The remaining articulated and
117 bi-articulated buses are all diesel-powered, with engines displacements of up
C

118 to 14 liters (bi-articulated buses). The fleet is considerably old, with 37% of
AC

119 the vehicles between 10 to 17 years of operation as of 2017. The BRT system
120 has often been used as a model for the implementation of similar systems in
121 other cities (Mejı́a-Dugand et al., 2013). Briefly, in most of its segments it
122 uses exclusive lanes parallel to mixed traffic, which is mostly gasoline pow-
123 ered. A detailed description of the configuration of the Transmilenio system,
124 its bus lanes, the traffic composition in adjacent lanes can be found elsewhere

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

125 (Hidalgo et al., 2013; Morales Betancourt et al., 2017)

PT
-74.22 -74.17 -74.12 -74.08 -74.03

(a.) (b.)
Sampling frequency

RI
Segments / BRT Stations
4.80
1-2
3 - 10
# S2
11 - 20
#S1
> 20

SC
_
^ BOGOTA 4.73

# S3
S4
#

U
"
) S5 4.67

#
AN
S7
#
# Air Quality Stations # S8 # S6
*
#
_ Start point
^ S9
# _
^ 4.60

) EC monitoring site
" S10
#
M

*
# #S11
eBC monitoring site

0 2.25 4.5 9
km 4.53
D

Figure 1: (a.) Geographic location of the city of Bogotá. (b.) Spatial distribution of the
TE

sampling frequency of the BRT system. Sampling frequency of bus stations (circles) and
BRT lines (line segments) is shown. The thickness of the line segments and size of the
circles is related to the sampling frequency. The starting point for the trips is marked
EP

with a star. Triangles show the location of the 11 fixed monitoring sites of the local air
quality network used in this study to determine urban ambient concentration. All stations
C

reported PM2.5 for the study period. Stations S3 to S5 and S7 to S9 reported CO during
the same period.
AC

126 During our sampling campaign we performed round trips in the mass tran-
127 sit system while carrying a set of portable sampling devices for PM2.5 , eBC,
128 CO, and physical activity. Particle number size distributions were measured
129 on some occasions using an optical particle sizer. The trips started from the
130 city center towards one of the 9 system terminal stations. Sampling duration

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

131 was designed to be representative of a typical round-way trip, characterized

PT
132 by an average duration of 140-160 minutes. Measurements were performed
133 between February and December of 2017, exclusively on weekdays morning

RI
134 rush hour, between 7am and 10am. All instruments were carefully synchro-
135 nized. The sample inlets were located in the breathing zone of the individual

SC
136 carrying the devices. Detailed schedule of the field campaign and instruments
137 available for each sample can be found in Supplementary Material.

138

U
2.2. PM2.5 , eBC and CO Exposure Measurements
AN
139 Concentration measurements of PM2.5 , eBC, aerosol particle size distribu-
140 tion, and CO were performed in various micro-environments associated with
M

141 the BRT system. These micro-environments included buses, stations, as well
142 as walking trips from the starting point to the bus-stations. Physical activ-
D

143 ity was measured using accelerometers. The instrumentation and methods
TE

144 used in this study follow closely those of similar studies (Morales Betancourt
145 et al., 2017), and are only briefly described here. Laser scattering based in-
146 struments (DustTrak 8520 and DustTrack DRX 8533, TSI Inc. MN, USA)
EP

147 were utilized to determine continuous PM2.5 concentration. A set of Per-

148 sonal Environmental Monitors (PEMs) (SKC Inc. PA, USA) consisting of a
C

149 single-stage PM2.5 impactor and 37mm PTFE collection filter were used for
AC

150 gravimetric determination of PM2.5 . The PEM sampling flow rate for a 2.5
151 µm cut diameter is 4 LPM, which was carefully calibrated before and after
152 each sampling day. PEMs were utilized as an independent method to ensure
153 the overall accuracy of the optical PM2.5 measurement. PEMs were carried in
154 in all 44 out of 46 sampling days, typically in pairs. Due to the relatively short
155 sampling times, uncertainties in the filter weights was an issue in some days

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

156 due to small collected mass. To overcome this issue, only samples for which

PT
157 duplicate filter samples were within 30% of each other were used for compar-
158 ison to the photometric sensors. DustTrak 8520 showed a 5.7%±28% mean

RI
159 bias relative to the filter samples, and the DRX-8533 model a 11.5%±17.9%
160 relative mean bias, implying both devices slightly overestimate gravimetric

SC
161 filter data. Aerosol particle number size distributions were measured on a
162 limited number of occasions using an optical particle sizer (OPS-3330, TSI

U
163 Inc. MN, USA). The OPS is a single-particle detection device that counts
and classifies particles into 16 size bins in the range of 0.3 µm to 10 µm opti-
AN
164

165 cal particle diameter. eBC data was collected with portable Aethalometers
166 (MicroAeth AE51, AethLabs, CA, USA) operated at a standard flow rate of
M

167 50 cm3 min−1 and a sampling interval of 10 seconds. Following the guidelines
168 of Petzold et al. (2013), we refer to the concentrations of Black Carbon de-
D

169 rived from the Aethalometer as Equivalent Black Carbon. The raw eBC data
TE

170 was corrected for filter loading effects which are known to affect Aethalome-
171 ters (e.g., Virkkula et al., 2007, 2015). We adapted the correction procedure
EP

172 of Drinovec et al. (2015) to the AE51. The method is based on measuring
173 eBC in the same environment at different flow rates to obtain different filter
loading rates. The details of our implementation of the correction method
C

174

175 can be found in the Supplementary Material. The mean loading correction
AC

176 parameter used was k = 0.005, consistent with findings in other studies
177 (Cheng and Lin, 2013). Since we are measuring exclusively in near-road en-
178 vironments, heavily affected by fresh primary combustion of fossil fuel, we do
179 not considered any seasonal variations on the loading correction factor. New
180 filters were used for each sampling day. However, due to the extreme in-cabin

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

181 concentrations encountered, even with the AE51 operated at its minimum

PT
182 flow rate, filters occasionally reached an attenuation of 100 or more even
183 after just 30 minutes of sampling. Only data with a maximum attenuation

RI
184 of 140 is reported in this study. Concentrations of CO werw measured with
185 electro-chemical cell sensors (DeltaOhm, P37AB147 SICRAM probes), with

SC
186 a reported accuracy of ±3ppm for CO at a temporal resolution of 15 seconds.
187 Temperature and relative humidity were also recorded at the same frequency.

U
188 Commuter exposure measurements were performed during an elven-month
period. During this long sampling period, day-to-day variations in the ur-
AN
189

190 ban ambient air pollution levels could be significant and therefore should be
191 accounted for in the analysis. Urban ambient levels of PM2.5 and CO were
M

192 determined with hourly data from the 11 air quality monitoring stations in
193 Bogotá. All monitoring sites reported PM2.5 but only six reported CO for
D

194 the full sampling period (Figure 1). Monthly mean PM2.5 and CO concentra-
TE

195 tions for 2017 exhibited the typical observed annual cycle with higher values
196 for February, March, and November, and the lowest values observed during
EP

197 June, July, and August (Figure 2). Locations of the air quality monitoring
198 sites in relation to the BRT system layout are shown in Figure 1. The AQ
sites are located in the vicinity of several BRT lines and stations, with 6 of
C

199

200 the sites located less than 1 km away from a BRT station, 9 sites within
AC

201 1.5 km of a BRT station, and all of the sites located less than 2.5 km away
202 from the closest BRT station. Detailed description of the type of AQ station
203 and their locations is included in the Supplementary Material. Two methods
204 were used to characterize a representative urban ambient concentration rele-
205 vant to compare against the commuter exposure data. First method was to

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

206 compute the mean 7am to 10am PM2.5 and CO concentration from the sites,

PT
207 representing rush-hour urban ambient levels. Rush-hour levels are consider-
208 ably higher than daily mean values, as is typical in most cities. The second

RI
209 method consisted on computing an inverse distance weighting concentration
210 using the AQ site data (also rush-hour mean) for each of the segments and

SC
211 BRT stations sampled on each day. In this way, more wight was given to
212 AQ stations that are closer to the exposure measurement locations, and less

U
213 weight to those far away.
Accelerometers (Actigraph GT3X+, Ft. Walton, FL.) placed in the hips
AN
214

215 of the subjects were used to measure physical activity level simultaneously
216 with air pollutant concentration data. The GT3X+ measures acceleration
M

217 in three axis, at a frequency of 30Hz. The acceleration event counts have
218 been shown to correlate with Metabolic Equivalence Units (METs) (Freedson
D

219 et al., 1998) and ventilation rate (Kawahara et al., 2011). All measured
TE

220 variables were synchronized at a 10 second time base.

221 Each BRT bus boarded was individually identified through its license
EP

222 plate. Information associated with each sampled bus was later gathered from
223 a database of the public transport agency (Transmilenio, personal communi-
cation). This database included vehicle date of initial entry into operation,
C

224

225 vehicle nominal emission standard, vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT), engine
AC

226 manufacturer, engine displacement, among other. None of the buses sampled
227 had particulate emission control systems. Since the study is focused on the
228 characterization of the typical exposure experienced in-cabin of the BRT
229 buses the ventilation status on each bus was not controlled for. However,
230 temperatures in the city remain stable throughout the year, with minimum

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

231 and maximum daily temperatures on the range of 10°C to 20°C throughout

PT
232 the year. Because of the weather stability and mild temperatures, AC use is
233 not prevalent and is not expected to have changed significantly during the

RI
234 sampling period.
235 In-station sampling also took place as part of the trips performed. Sta-

SC
236 tions were sampled during the waiting times associated with boarding a given
237 bus route on a specific bus station. The three types of bus stations in the

U
238 system were sampled, namely, regular stations, terminal stations, and one
underground station. Regular stations (139 out of 149) are semi-enclosed
AN
239

240 spaces, located in the middle of the BRT lanes. This stations are equipped
241 with sliding doors on both sides for boarding the buses. Typically these
M

242 stations have more than one bus docking position along the longitudinal di-
243 rection on each side. The common configuration is to have at least three
D

244 docking stations on each side. A unique characteristic of the BRT system
TE

245 is that at the stations there are two exclusive lanes per direction of traffic.
246 This is designed to allow other buses to overtake those that are picking up
EP

247 passengers at that bus station. Therefore, the regular stations are separated
248 from the mixed traffic lanes by at least two exclusive BRT lanes in each
direction of traffic. Terminal stations have a different topology to that of
C

249

250 the regular stations. The terminal stations (9 out of 149) are open spaces,
AC

251 with wide platforms on which passengers wait to board/deboard the BRT-
252 buses. These stations do not have sliding doors separating the passengers
253 from the BRT buses. The system also has one underground station which
254 consist of a 450m long tunnel for the BRT buses. Passenger platforms in
255 the underground station are 150m long, located in the middle section of the

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

256 tunnel and in-between the BRT lanes. The passenger platform is separated

PT
257 from the BRT buses by sliding doors similar to those of regular stations (see
258 Supplementary Material). Careful notes were taken during the data collec-

RI
259 tion process, registering the exact times of arrival to a BRT station, exact
260 time of BRT bus boarding and deboarding. This methodology allowed for

SC
261 real time identification of micro-environment, precise measurement of in-bus
262 travel time, as well as in-station waiting times. Further detailed information

U
263 about the system can be found elsewhere (Hidalgo et al., 2013).
AN
264 2.3. Urban Ambient eBC estimation

265 Although eBC is not measured by the air quality network stations, we es-
M

266 timated upper and lower limits to the contribution of eBC to urban ambient
267 PM2.5 based on two different sources. Firstly, a year-long study performed in
D

268 2015-2016 quantified Elemental Carbon (EC) in PM10 samples collected at

TE

269 an urban background location in the city of Bogotá (Ramı́rez et al., 2018).
270 Annual mean EC concentration was 3.25 ± 1.59 µg m−3 , corresponding to
271 8.7% of PM10 . Maximum EC daily concentration was 11.3 µg m−3 across 308
EP

272 daily measurements. No substantial seasonal pattern was observed in the EC

273 concentration. To infer the contribution of EC to PM2.5 we used the PM2.5
C

274 to PM10 ratio historically observed in the long-term datasets from the fixed
AC

275 monitoring sites. This ratio is close to 0.5 for the city of Bogotá, meaning
276 the coarse and the fine fractions contribute equally to PM10 . Given that EC
277 is originated in combustion, we assume that all the EC is likely in the fine
278 fraction. Therefore, with this assumptions, the contribution of EC to PM2.5
279 should be twice as large as its contribution to PM10 . Although EC and eBC
280 are different estimates of carbonaceous aerosols, EC is often quantitatively

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

281 represented by eBC due to its strong light-absorbing properties. With those

PT
282 assumptions urban ambient eBC/PM2.5 is ∼ 17.5%. This limit is likely an
283 overestimation and it is therefore regarded as an upper limit to eBC/PM2.5

RI
284 ratio in the city. Although high, similar levels have been reported in In-
285 donesian cities (Santoso et al., 2013). A second data source was utilized to

SC
286 estimate a lower limit on the eBC/PM2.5 ratio. Bench Aethalometer data
287 (AE-33, Magee Scientific, CA, USA) collected during the entire year of 2017

U
288 in a hill-top station a few hundred meters away from the city center was used
to directly establish the seasonality of eBC. The site is located in the clean
AN
289

290 sector of the city. Concentrations at this site can be considered representa-
291 tive of urban background. eBC concentration at this site follows the same
M

292 seasonality as PM2.5 (Figure 2). The ratio of the AE-33 monthly mean data
293 to the PM2.5 measured at the AQ monitoring sites has a maximum value of
D

294 10% for February and November, and a minimum value of 5.0% during July
TE

295 and August. The annual mean eBC/PM2.5 is 8%. Due to the location of the
296 site far from the traffic sources, this value likely an underestimation of eBC,
EP

297 and is used as a lower-limit estimate of the actual urban ambient ratio. Both
298 limits are utilized in Section 3.2 to estimate the eBC exposure outside of the
BRT system. The measurement sites for both data sets used are shown in
C

299

300 Figure 1.
AC

301 3. Results and Discussion

302 3.1. Exposure Concentrations

303 The sampling campaign encompassed a total of 136 hours, of which 63

304 hours were in-bus sampling, 34 hours were in-station sampling, and 16 hours

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

30 ▲ CO 1.0

PT
PM2.5 - eBC ( g/m3)
▲
▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
○ PM2.5 ▲ ○
● 0.8

●

CO (ppm)
○ ▲
▲ ○
20 ● ○
▲
○
● ▲ 0.6
○ ●
○ ○ ○
● ● ○

RI
● 0.4
○ ●
10 eBC x 10 ●

● ● 0.2

J F M A M J J A S O N D

SC
Figure 2: Monthly mean PM2.5 (open circles), CO (filled triangles), and eBC (filled circles)
during 2017 in Bogotá. PM2.5 and CO data were compiled from available data from 11

U
fixed air quality monitoring sites in the city. eBC data was measured with an AE33
Aetahlometer at an urban-background site located in the eastern margin of the city (see
AN
Figure 1).
M

305 of sampling in the short walks to or from stations. Another 22 hours of

306 data are indoors sampling, mostly spent inside the University which was
D

307 the starting point for all sampling days. The in-bus sampling covered a
total distance of 802.2 km traveled in the system buses. Measurements were
TE

308

309 performed in 180 individual BRT buses (of a total fleet of 2150) and 39
310 different stations. A detailed summary of the full campaign can be found in
EP

311 the Supplementary Material. The average exposure concentration observed

312 in the system buses and stations is shown in Figure 3. The spatial distribution
C

313 of the observed concentrations shows that almost all system branches and
AC

314 stations have median PM2.5 concentrations higher than 100 µg m−3 , with
315 some critical branches and stations having even higher levels. A similar
316 situation is observed for eBC and CO. Figure 3 suggests that some branches
317 of the system and its stations have higher than average concentrations. This
318 is discussed in Section 3.3.
319 Concentrations of PM2.5 , eBC, and CO were highly correlated and typi-

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PM2.5 (µg/m3) (a.) eBC (µg/m3) (b.) CO (ppm) (c.)

4.80
>240
¯ >120
¯ >6
¯

PT
240 120 6
200 !
( 100 !
( 5 !
(
160 !
( 80 !
( 4 !
(
120 !
( 60 !
( 3 !
(
4.74
80 40 2
<40 <20 <1
!
( !
( !
(

RI
4.68 !
( !
( !
(
(!
! ( (!
! ( (!
! (
!
( !
( !
( !
(
! !
( !
(
( (
! ! ( (
! ( (
! !
!
( !
( !
( !
( !
( !
(
!
( ! ( !
( ! ( !
( ! (
!
( (!
!( !
( (!
!( !
( (!
!(
4.62
!
(!
( ! !
(!
( !
(!
( ! !
(
(!
( !
(!
( ! !
(!
(
( (

SC
!
( ! !
( !
( !
( ! !
( !
( !
( ! !
(
!
( !
( ! ! (!
((! (
!
( !
( ! (!
((
!! (
!
( ! !
!
(
(!
((! (
!
( ( !
( ( !
( ( !
(
!
( !
( !
(
!
( !
( !
(
!
( !
( !
( !
( !
( !
(
4.56

!
( !
( !
(

0 2 4 8 0 2 4 8 0 2 4 8

U
4.50
km km km

-74.20 -74.16 -74.11 -74.07 -74.02 -74.20 -74.16 -74.11 -74.07 -74.02 -74.20 -74.16 -74.11 -74.07 -74.02
AN
Figure 3: Spatial distribution of observed concentration in the BRT system throughout
the sampling campaign for (a.) PM2.5 , (b.) eBC, and (c.) CO. Lines and circles repre-
sents segments and stations respectively. Color scale show median in-bus and in-station
M

concentrations. The gray lines are the main road network of Bogotá.
D

320 cally increase concurrently when sampling is performed inside the BRT buses.
An example of data taken on a typical sampling day can be seen in Figure 4.
TE

321

322 Both BRT buses sampled on that specific date had over 16 years of operation
323 and had traveled over 1.3 million km. Despite the extremely high concen-
EP

324 trations recorded in that sampling day, those are not among the highest
325 concentrations observed during the campaign. Average PM2.5 concentration
C

326 in Bus 1 and Bus 2 of Figure 4 ranks them 38th and 23rd respectively out of
AC

327 180 buses sampled. For the data of Figure 4 PM2.5 , eBC, and CO are highly
328 correlated (ρP M,eBC = 0.85, ρP M,CO = 0.88, ρeBC,CO = 0.83). The high correla-
329 tion with CO, which was observed for every single measurement performed
330 in the system, suggests combustion sources are indeed dominant, while the
331 strong correlation with eBC further suggests the sources are rich in EC emis-
332 sions. The time series of in-bus concentrations are characterized by spikes

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

333 corresponding to episodes of entrainment of polluted air. Such concentration

PT
334 spikes have been associated in the literature with low-speed travel and pas-
335 sengers boarding at bus stops (Lim et al., 2015). A shift in the particle size

RI
336 distribution is observed when measurements are performed inside the BRT
337 buses. Although the OPS cannot detect the smaller particles in the accumu-

SC
338 lation mode, a sharp increase in mass concentration of sub-micron particles
is still visible in the OPS data (Figure 4d).

U
AN
M
D
TE

Figure 4: Times series of (a.) PM2.5 (µg m−3 ) (b.) eBC (µg m−3 ), (c.) CO, and (d.)
EP

Particle mass size distribution dM/d log dp (µg m−3 ) measured with the OPS. The blue
shaded sections mark in-bus sampling, and yellow shaded region show in-station sampling.
C

The number in parenthesis is the mean in-bus concentration. Sampling frequency is 15

seconds. Data was collected on a round trip on the BRT system during 2017/07/19.
AC

339

340 The statistical summary of the concentrations recorded during the sam-
341 pling campaign is compiled in Figure 5 and Table 1. In-bus concentrations of
342 PM2.5 , eBC, and CO were the highest compared to the other environments
343 considered. The observed concentrations of eBC are substantially higher than
344 those reported in the literature, including studies reporting significantly high

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

345 concentrations of (Jeong et al., 2017). Similarly, only few studies known to

PT
346 the authors (e.g., Both et al., 2013; Chan et al., 2002) have reported higher
347 CO levels inside public transport buses than those reported here. Mean in-

RI
348 bus concentration campaign was 176 µg m−3 for PM2.5 , 92 µg m−3 for eBC,
349 and 6 ppm for CO (Figure 5). Extreme cases were found in which average

SC
350 in-cabin concentration over a 17-minute trip was 1203 µg m−3 for PM2.5 , 717
351 for eBC, and 18.1 ppm for CO. In 45 different BRT buses mean PM2.5 con-

U
352 centrations were higher than 200 µg m−3 . Similarly, in 52 out of 180 buses
sampled the mean eBC in-cabin concentration was higher than 100 µg m−3 .
AN
353

354 Urban ambient rush hour PM2.5 concentrations for each sampling day
355 are on average 8.2 times lower than corresponding observed in-bus concen-
M

356 trations. This high in-bus to ambient ratio suggests a strong deterioration
357 of air quality levels inside the BRT buses. Although this ratio is calculated
D

358 with respect to the fixed monitoring sites, it is consistent with the ratio of
TE

359 6 that was reported by Morales Betancourt et al. (2017), when simultane-
360 ous side-by-side measurements of ambient and in-cabin PM2.5 measurements
EP

361 were done. For the case of CO, the urban ambient rush hour concentration
362 is 4.1 times lower than what was observed in-cabin of the BRT buses.
High in-station concentrations were also observed throughout the cam-
C

363

364 paign, with mean in-station concentrations of the three pollutants ranking
AC

365 second among the micro-environments considered, only below the in-bus
366 concentrations. Ratios of in-station to ambient concentrations were 5:1 for
367 PM2.5 , and 2.6:1 for CO. From our results it is apparent that the ventilation of
368 the bus stations is a key factor controlling the concentrations. Although ter-
369 minal stations are typically surrounded by BRT bus traffic, concentrations

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

370 in the terminal stations do not rank amongst the highest (Supplementary

PT
371 Material). Concentrations observed in the many regular stations were higher
372 than on terminal stations. Of special concern were the pollution levels mea-

RI
373 sured in the only underground station of the system, the National Museum
374 Station (NMS), which was sampled 9 times during our campaign, for a total

SC
375 of 120 minutes. The mean concentration observed at NMS was the highest
376 across all stations sampled, with PM2.5 ranging between 253 µg m−3 to 529

U
377 µg m−3 . Mean eBC was 232 µg m−3 , with a maximum mean concentration
of 341 µg m−3 . Mean CO concentration at was 7.6 ppm.
AN
378

379 Measurements during the campaign also revealed that exposure experi-
380 enced during the walks towards or from the stations were significantly lower
M

381 than either inside the BRT system stations or in the BRT system buses.
382 Exposure to PM2.5 , eBC, and CO was higher in-bus, followed by in-station,
D

383 with the lower concentration experienced by pedestrians. However, as can be

TE

384 seen from Table 1, the observed concentrations experienced by pedestrians

385 in our study are comparable to those reported in the literature inside the
EP

386 cabins of buses.

387 3.2. Trip Contribution to PM2.5 and eBC Daily Dose

C

388 The potential inhaled dose of a given air pollutant, j, by users of the BRT
AC

j
389 system during a round trip, Dtrip (µg day−1 ), is calculated as
ntrip
j
X
Dtrip = Cij IRi ∆ti (1)
i∈trip

390 where the summation is over the ntrip micro-environments associated with
391 a trip in the BRT system, namely the walks towards the stations, the BRT

20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1: Statistical summary of concentrations reported in this study. Walking refers

PT
to the short walks towards/from BRT stations, the In-Station and In-Bus entries are
samples taken in those BRT environments respectively. Urban Ambient data comes from

RI
the fixed monitoring sites in Bogotá as described in the text. Other Studies includes only
in-bus data reported in 2 review papers (Kaur et al., 2007; Karanasiou et al., 2014) and
other individual studies (Fernandez-Bremauntz and Ashmore, 1995; Both et al., 2013; Liu

SC
et al., 2015; Rivas et al., 2017; Goel et al., 2015; Tan et al., 2017; Li et al., 2015; Yang
et al., 2015; Suarez et al., 2014), totaling 31 studies. The sample size, n, for each micro-

U
environment is the number of instances were measurements were taken for periods longer
than 3 minutes. The sample size for ambient concentration is the number of sampling
AN
days, and for Other studies is the average of the sample size reported in the studies. The
highest value observed in each column is underlined. SD is the standard deviation, GSD
is the geometric standard deviation.
M

Pollutant Environment n Mean SD Median GSD Min Max

D

Walking 98 55.6 38.1 42.7 2.15 5.0 189.8

TE

PM2.5 In-Station 208 130.0 113.8 89.7 2.39 7.4 621.7

(µg m−3 ) In-Bus 174 176.3 137.8 137.9 1.97 18.4 1203.1
Urban Ambient 26 30.3 12.2- 32.4 - 6.1 51.2
Other studies (in-bus) 35 67.4 57.5 40.0 - 8.5 233.0a
Walking 100 18.9 17.3 15.2 2.35 0.8 99.9
EP

eBC In-Station 214 63.8 72.4 37.0 2.85 0.7 361.8

(µg m−3 ) In-Bus 180 89.9 85.8 60.6 2.21 5.9 716.9
Urban Ambient - - - - - - -
Other studies (in-bus) 30 15.8 14.3 8.8 - 3.2 50.0b
C

Walking 100 2.2 1.4 1.8 2.05 0.3 9.0

CO In-Station 214 3.4 2.3 2.9 2.18 0.3 11.2
AC

(ppm) In-Bus 180 4.8 2.5 4.5 1.82 0.3 18.2

Urban Ambient 26 1.39 0.45 1.45 - 0.81 2.65
Other studies (in-bus) 38 5.1 - 1.80 - 0.60 22.0c
a b c
Delhi, India (Goel et al., 2015); Ljubljana, Slovenia (Bizjak and Tursǐč, 1998);
Jakarta, Indonesia (Both et al., 2013).

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D

Figure 5: Distribution of observed concentrations of (a.) PM2.5 , (b.) eBC, and (c.) CO.
TE

The data is partitioned according to the micro-environment sampled . Walking indicates

the walking trips towards/from BRT stations, Bus-Station corresponds to the samples
taken in the BRT bus stations, and BRT-Bus are measurements taken in-bus. The data
EP

shown here are average concentrations of each pollutant measured on each instance a
specific micro-environment was sampled. The median of each distribution is marked with
C

a dark black line. The notch in the box-plots is the confidence interval for the median
estimate. Whiskers are the maximum and minimum values that are not outliers.
AC

392 bus-stations, and the BRT buses. In Equation (1) Cij (µg m−3 ) is the concen-
393 tration of pollutant j in micro-environment i, IRi (m3 min−1 ) is the inhalation
394 rate associated with the activity level in the environment, ∆ti (min day−1 ) is
395 the time of exposure on each micro-environment. Although indoor air pollu-
396 tant concentrations can be different from those in ambient air, the ratio of

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

397 indoor to outdoor concentration depends on a large number of factors. How-

PT
398 ever in studies of commuter’s exposure it is commonly assumed that when
399 individuals are in non-commute activities they are exposed to urban ambient

RI
400 concentrations (e.g., de Nazelle et al., 2012; Tainio et al., 2016), which are
401 supposed to be representative of the long-term exposure of the individual.

SC
402 Furthermore, fixed monitoring air quality data has been the primary source
403 for establishing associations between air pollution exposure and mortality

U
404 (e.g., Dockery et al., 1993). In this study, the dose for the rest of the day,
j
Drest , is therefore estimated by assuming the individual is exposed to the
AN
405

406 urban ambient concentration reported by the air quality monitoring sites,
j
407 Cbg .
M

j
X
nd −ntrip
j
Drest = Cbg IRi ∆ti (2)
i6∈trip
D

408 where nd is the number of micro-environments the person occupies during

TE

409 a typical day. The individual is assumed to be sleeping for 8 hours during
410 the night (IRsleep = 4.7 LPM), performing light physical activity for 3 hours
(IRlight = 13 LPM), and the remaining 13 hours of the day excluding the
EP

411

412 BRT system travel time, involved in activities with a passive level of phys-
413 ical activity (IRpassive = 5.11 LPM). The inhalation rates are those for a
C

414 young adult, 20-30 years old, (US-EPA, 2011). The values used for each trip
AC

415 micro-environment are consistent with the average METs inferred from ac-
416 celerometer data for each environment (Supplementary Material). The total
417 daily dose is then computed as Dtot = Dtrip + Drest. To have a meaningful
418 unit to quantify the potential dose inhaled in each round trip performed in
419 the system, we compute the dose an individual exposed to the daily PM2.5

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

420 WHO guidelines, CWHO = 25µg m−3 , would inhale. Therefore, DWHO is

PT
X
nd
DWHO = CWHO IRi ∆ti (3)
i=1

RI
421 For the ventilation rate and activity pattern assumed in in this study, DWHO =
422 226 µg day−1 , a value similar to that reported by de Nazelle et al. (2012). By

SC
423 computing the inhaled dose for the full period of 24 hours and the trip contri-
424 bution we circumvent the normalization problem often discussed in exposure
studies (Bigazzi and Figliozzi, 2014).

U
425 AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

Figure 6: Daily dose estimates for (a.) PM2.5 and (b.) eBC. The stacked bars show the
estimated dose during the trip only, Dtrip , and the dose during the rest of the day, Drest .
Horizontal red line in (a.) indicates the value DWHO = 226 µg day−1 . In the calculation
BC
of Drest it was assumed that 17.5% of PM2.5 mass was Elemental Carbon (Ramı́rez et al.,
2018), and assumed equivalent to eBC.

426 The average round-trip duration for our samples was 132 ± 32 minutes,

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

427 which was only slightly shorter than the reported 140 minutes average du-

PT
428 ration of a round trip in the system. The total daily dose Dtot for both
429 PM2.5 and eBC as well as the trip contribution for all the measurement days

RI
430 can be seen on Figure 6. On average, the estimated PM2.5 daily dose was
431
PM2.5
Dtot = 460.8µg day−1 . This value is equivalent to two times DWHO . More-

SC
432 over, on average, a BRT round-trip alone accounts for 60.2% of the total
433
PM2.5
PM2.5 daily dose, with Dtrip = 277.8 µg day−1 . This average daily dose as-

U
434 sociated with the trip alone, is equivalent to 1.2 times DWHO . Furthermore,
under the assumption that eBC is 17% of ambient PM2.5 (See Section 2.2),
AN
435

436
eBC
the total daily dose of eBC was found to be Dtot = 174.1µg day−1 . In this
437 case, an alarming 79% of the daily eBC dose can be attributed to the BRT
M

438 trip alone. If we assume our lower limit estimate for eBC/PM2.5 of 8.7%,
439 then even a larger fraction, 90%, of the daily eBC dose can be attributed to
D

440 the BRT trip alone.

TE

441 3.3. Exposure Concentration and Vehicle Emission Standard

442 The association between in-bus concentrations and vehicle nominal emis-
EP

443 sion standard is explored by crossing the measured air pollutants concentra-
444 tion inside each individual BRT bus with the vehicle-specific characteristics.
C

445 When the data collected during the campaign on-board 180 randomly sam-
AC

446 pled buses is partitioned based on the nominal emission standard of each in-
447 dividual bus, twice as large concentrations are observed in Euro II-III buses
448 compared to concentrations measured in the newer Euro IV-V buses (See
449 Figure 7). For PM2.5 mean (median) concentration in Euro II-III buses was
450 257 (218) µg m−3 compared to 136 (112) µg m−3 in Euro IV-V, a ratio of 1.9
451 for the mean concentration. For eBC mean (median) concentrations in the

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

452 Euro II-III vehicles is 140 (108) µg m−3 while it reduces to 63 (51) µg m−3 for

PT
453 Euro IV-V. For CO, the reduction is from 5.9 (5.2) to 4.2 (3.7) ppm. The
454 differences in the medians are statistically significant (Mann-Whitney test

RI
455 p-value≤ 0.00001). It is highly unlikely that ventilation settings could ex-
456 plain these differences, since the vehicles were not sampled based on this

SC
457 parameter.
350 n = 67 7
n = 111
300 6

U
Electric Bus
PM2.5 - eBC ( g/m3)

250 5

CO (ppm)
200 4
AN
150 3

100 2

50 1
M

EURO II-III EURO IV-V EURO II-III EURO IV-V EURO II-III EURO IV-V
PM2.5 eBC CO

Figure 7: In-bus PM2.5 and eBC exposure concentration partitioned as a function of bus
D

emission standard, for the 165 individual buses sampled.

TE

458 It should be noted that the nominal emission standard in the fleet is
459 strongly correlated with VKTs and vehicle age. The 67 Euro II-III buses
EP

460 sampled have a mean 1.08×106 VKT and service time of 13.4 years, compared
461 to 3.52×105 VKTs and 4.4 years for the 111 BRT buses sampled with nominal
C

462 emission standard Euro IV-V. It is expected that emissions are higher for
AC

463 the Euro II-III vehicles, and that those emissions could be exacerbated by
464 the considerable service time of those buses. Therefore, when the in-cabin
465 concentration data is partitioned according to any variables describing vehicle
466 age or emission standard, significant differences are observed. Further details
467 can be found in the Supplementary Material.
468 Many factors could contribute to the substantial differences in in-cabin

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

469 concentrations. As has been shown in other studies, self-pollution is a po-

PT
470 tential contributor to in-cabin concentrations (Marshall and Behrentz, 2005).
471 Entrainment of emissions from nearby vehicles of all types is likely a strong

RI
472 contributor to high in-bus concentrations. Stops for picking up passengers
473 have also been identified as key determinants of in-cabin concentration ex-

SC
474 cursions (Lim et al., 2015). Because of the configuration of the BRT system
475 under study, surrounding traffic is mainly that of other BRT buses. This is

U
476 particularly true at bus-stations. While a BRT bus is picking up passengers
at a bus station, nearby buses can be either accelerating after having picked
AN
477

478 up passengers, or slowing down to stop at the same bus-station, or simply

479 overtaking the stopped vehicle at cruise speed. All this activities will likely
M

480 contribute to the admission of polluted air to the cabin and to the station.
481 Furthermore, bus operators which own the older vehicles are in charge the
D

482 operation of specific branches of the system. Therefore, there are branches
TE

483 with mainly older buses circulating in them. However, this separation be-
484 comes increasingly difficult as are portion of the BRT lanes that are used
EP

485 by all the buses irrespective of the specific operator. The map on Figure 3
486 show that some specific corridors have higher concentrations. This explains
in part the very large differences observed between in-cabin exposure in older
C

487

488 and newer buses.

AC

489 Further evidence suggest that a substantial portion of the in-cabin and
490 in-station air pollution is likely the result of fumes entrained from other BRT
491 buses, and potentially, from self-contamination as well. First, our measure-
492 ments show there is a large contribution of eBC to the PM2.5 across the
493 system. Particulates rich in Elemental Carbon are more likely to come from

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

494 diesel combustion (Zielinska et al., 2004; Maricq, 2014). The particulates

PT
495 coming from mixed traffic, which are mostly gasoline vehicles that use the
496 adjacent lanes, or the industrial sources which are sparse and far away from

RI
497 the BRT system, or even the urban background, all should have a lower eBC
498 content.

SC
600 PM2.5 (μg/m3) (a.)

400 S 1
S 2
200

U
600 eBC (μg/m3) (b.)

400
AN
200

20 CO (ppm) (c.)
M

10

30 60 90
time (min)
D

Figure 8: Measured concentrations of (a.) PM2.5 , (b.) eBC, and (c.) CO. Measurements
TE

were performed inside a BRT underground station (open circles, shaded region) and outside
the station (black filled circles, and open circles in the not-shaded region).
EP

499 Data supporting such hypothesis are the measurements performed simul-
500 taneously inside and outside the National Museum underground station using
C

501 two sets of sampling devices. In the first 30 minutes of sampling both sets
AC

502 were side-by-side at the sidewalk outside of the above ground next to the
503 mixed-traffic lanes that pass on top the underground station. Then, one of
504 the teams entered the underground station for 40 minutes, then emerged
505 and sampled again side-by-side (Figure 8). These measurements show that
506 concentrations inside are 5.7, 6.2 and 2.6 higher for PM2.5 , eBC, and CO re-
507 spectively. These ratios are comparable to the observed in-cabin to ambient,

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

508 or in-station to ambient reported in Section ??. eBC to PM2.5 ratio inside

PT
509 the underground station increases to 0.6 from 0.3 at the sidewalk. These eBC
510 to PM2.5 ratios inside this station are very similar to those found inside buses

RI
511 or stations above ground. However given the forced ventilation system at the
512 underground station blows inside air out, and the large mismatch between

SC
513 inside and outside concentrations (Figure 8), it is very unlikely that sources
514 different to the BRT buses are causing the alarmingly high concentrations.

U
515 In this tunnel, exhaust fumes from the diesel-powered vehicles are the only
combustion sources.
AN
516

517 Additional evidence for this hypothesis comes from measurements per-
518 formed on-board an electric BRT bus over a four-hour period. The observed
M

519 concentrations were not significantly different from those inside the Euro
520 IV-V portion of the fleet (Figure 7). We identified higher pollutant concen-
D

521 trations at the parking lot, as well as at the bus stations. Given that the
TE

522 parking lot is far from other traffic lanes, its likely pollutants come from the
523 system buses. At the stations, peaks in concentrations occurred when the
EP

524 bus doors opened, or other buses accelerated to overtake the stopped electric
525 bus.
The potential reduction in daily dose of commuters using the BRT, Dtot ,
C

526

527 that could be achieved with a renewal of the bus fleet, can be estimated with
AC

528 the data-set reported in this study. For that purpose, we assumed all Euro
529 II-III vehicles would be replaced by Euro IV-V nominal emission standard
530 vehicles, and therefore, the average exposure level in those older vehicles
531 would be replaced by the average exposure measured inside the Euro IV-V.
532 Our measurements show a ratio of PM2.5 in newer buses to average in-bus

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

avg
533 PM2.5 , fP M2.5 = PMnew
2.5 /PM2.5 equal to 0.77. Assuming travel times, travel

PT
534 time distribution in micro-environments, and urban background concentra-
535 tions remain the same in the system, and by further assuming the new in-bus

RI
536 average concentration should be equal to that of the current Euro IV-V ve-
537 hicles, the expected reduction in total daily dose, R, can be shown to be

SC
new
Dtot
R=1− old
= (1 − fP M2.5 )FBRT ≈ 0.1 (4)
Dtot

U
538 were, FBRT is the current fraction of the daily dose attributable to the trip
in the BRT. Therefore, a reduction of approximately 10% of the daily dose
AN
539

540 of PM2.5 for commuters using the BRT system could be expected just from
541 assuming all old buses are replaced with newer vehicles. This is a conservative
M

542 estimate since it assumes that the exposure reduction is only felt during week
543 days and neglects any potential reduction in exposure associated with the
D

544 removal of the high-emitting vehicles. When the calculation is repeated for
TE

545 eBC a reduction of 16% to 18% could be expected. This substantial reduction
546 in daily exposure to air pollutants for commuters is only possible due to the
EP

547 extremely large in-bus to ambient concentration gradients documented in this

548 work. For a mass transit system like the BRT of this study, this potential
C

549 reduction could positively impact the 1.2 million people that use the system
on a daily basis. The findings of this study suggest that a renewal of the fleet,
AC

550

551 or its replacement with low-emitting vehicles, could have a disproportionately

552 large effect in the reduction of air pollution exposure and daily dose for
553 commuters.

30
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

554 4. Conclusions

PT
555 The concentration of PM2.5 , eBC, CO, and the size distribution of aerosol
556 particles was measured in micro-environments associated to a Bus Rapid

RI
557 Transit System in the city of Bogotá, Colombia. Extremely high concen-
trations of all the monitored pollutants were observed inside the bus cabins

SC
558

559 as well as in the interior of the system stations. The in-bus average con-
560 centration was 176 µg m−3 of PM2.5 , 90 µg m−3 of eBC, and 4.8 ppm of CO.

U
561 Extreme cases were observed in which average in-bus concentrations of PM2.5
AN
562 reached levels as high as 1200 µg m−3 , and over 700 µg m−3 of eBC. The ob-
563 served in-bus concentrations were the highest among the micro-environments
M

564 considered in this study. Furthermore, the observed concentrations are much
565 higher than those reported in the available literature.
D

566 A sharp increase in air pollution levels was observed in the micro-environments
567 associated with the BRT system. In-bus eBC concentration was 50% of PM2.5
TE

568 mass, suggesting a strong contribution from diesel combustion emissions to

569 the PM2.5 exposure concentration. Similarly, high exposure concentrations
EP

570 were found in the interior of bus stations. Concentrations higher than 500
571 µg m−3 of PM2.5 with a eBC contribution of up to 60% were observed in
C

572 an underground station in which traffic is restricted only to BRT vehicles.

AC

573 The high soot content of fine particle mass inside the BRT vehicles and sta-
574 tions suggests that a substantial fraction of the air pollutants inside the BRT
575 system buses comes from either the same bus or the surrounding BRT buses.
576 Estimates of the contribution of a round-way trip in the BRT system
577 were performed, finding that on average it can account for 60% of PM2.5
578 daily dose. The average round-way trip dose is equivalent to 1.2 times the

31
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

579 average daily dose a person would receive during a 24 hours exposure to the

PT
580 WHO guidelines for PM2.5 . The contribution of a typical BRT trip to daily
581 eBC dose was estimated to be between 79% to 89%.

RI
582 The data in this study shows that regardless of the month-to-month vari-
583 ations in air pollution levels in the city, in-bus and in-station concentrations

SC
584 are several times higher than ambient concentrations even in the months with
585 higher-than-average air pollution levels.

U
586 The in-bus concentration data was partitioned based on the nominal emis-
sion standard attained by the individual buses monitored. The in-bus ex-
AN
587

588 posure concentration was significantly higher for vehicles with nominal Euro
589 II-III standards compared to those with Euro IV-V nominal standards. Al-
M

590 most a two-fold increase was observed for both PM2.5 and eBC, while a 1.4
591 increase was detected for CO. Given the association between vehicle emis-
D

592 sion standard and in-bus concentration exposures, our findings suggest that
TE

593 a renewal of the fleet and a replacement with vehicles with stricter emis-
594 sion standards could have a disproportionately large effect in the reduction
EP

595 of air pollution exposure. The relevance of this potential reduction is con-
596 siderable given the large population exposed daily to these pollution levels.
Such reduction in exposure is only possible provided the large gradient in
C

597

598 concentration between ambient and transport related environments.

AC

599 Acknowledgments.
600 This work was funded by the Department of Civil and Environmental
601 Engineering from Universidad de Los Andes, and by the Program of En-
602 vironmental and Sanitary Engineering, Universidad de la Salle. The fund-
603 ing institutions had no part on the study design or conclusions. Authors

32
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

604 thank the many students taking part in the data collection, specially Natalia

PT
605 Duarte, Andres F. Rojas, and Yadert Contreras. We acknowledge Dr. Omar
606 Ramirez, for kindly providing Elemental Carbon concentration data, and we

RI
607 also thank Trasnmilenio S.A. for for providing the bus fleet database.

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC

33
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

608 References

PT
609 , 2018. BRT+ Centre of excellence and embarq. global brtdata. version 3.36.
610 http://www.brtdata.org. Accessed: 2018-06-30.

RI
611 Asmi, E., Antola, M., Yli-Tuomi, T., Jantunen, M., Aarnio, P., Mäkelä, T.,

SC
612 Hillamo, R., Hämeri, K., 2009. Driver and passenger exposure to aerosol
613 particles in buses and trams in Helsinki, Finland. Sci. Total Environ. 407,
2860 – 2867. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.01.004.

U
614 AN
615 Berghmans, P., Bleux, N., Panis, L., Mishra, V., Torfs, R., Van Poppel, M.,
616 2009. Exposure assessment of a cyclist to PM10 and ultrafine particles.
Sci. Total Evniron. 407, 1286 – 1298. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.
M

617

618 10.041.
D

619 Bigazzi, A.Y., Figliozzi, M.A., 2014. Review of urban bicyclists’ intake and
TE

620 uptake of traffic-related air pollution. Transport Reviews 34, 221–245.

621 doi:10.1080/01441647.2014.897772.
EP

622 Bizjak, M., Tursǐč, J., 1998. Measurement of aerosol black carbon concen-
623 tration inside the city buses of ljubljana. Journal of Aerosol Science 29,
C

624 S291 – S292. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-8502(98)00435-2.

proceedings of the 1998 International Aerosol Conference Part 1.
AC

625

626 Boogaard, H., Borgman, F., Kamminga, J., Hoek, G., 2009. Exposure to
627 ultrafine and fine particles and noise during cycling and riving in 11 Dutch
628 cities. Atmos. Environ. 43, 4234–4242. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.
629 05.035.

34
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

630 Both, A.F., Westerdahl, D., Fruin, S., Haryanto, B., Marshall, J.D., 2013.

PT
631 Exposure to Carbon Monoxide, Fine Particle Mass, and Ultrafine Parti-
632 cle Number in Jakarta, Indonesia: Effect of commute mode. Sci. Total

RI
633 Environ. 443, 965 – 972. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.082.

Brook, R.D., Rajagopalan, S., Pope, C.A., Brook, J.R., Bhatnagar, A., Diez-

SC
634

635 Roux, A.V., Holguin, F., Hong, Y., Luepker, R.V., Mittleman, M.A., Pe-
636 ters, A., Siscovick, D., Smith, S.C., Whitsel, L., Kaufman, J.D., 2010.

U
637 Particulate Matter Air Pollution and Cardiovascular Disease 121, 2331–
AN
638 2378. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181dbece1.

639 Cepeda, M., Schoufour, J., Freak-Poli, R., Koolhaas, C.M., Dhana, K.,
M

640 Bramer, W.M., Franco, O.H., 2016. Levels of ambient air pollution ac-
641 cording to mode of transport: A systematic review. The Lancet Public
D

642 Health , –doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(16)30021-4.

TE

643 Chan, L., Lau, W., Zou, S., Cao, Z., Lai, S., 2002. Exposure level of carbon
644 monoxide and respirable suspended particulate in public transportation
EP

645 modes while commuting in urban area of Guangzhou, China. Atmos. En-
646 viron. 36, 5831 – 5840. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(02)
C

647 00687-8.
AC

648 Cheng, Y.H., Lin, M.H., 2013. Real-time performance of the microaeth ae51
649 and the effects of aerosol loading on its measurement results at a traffic site.
650 Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 13, 1853–1863. doi:10.4209/aaqr.2012.12.0371.

651 Cole-Hunter, T., Morawska, L., Stewart, I., Jayaratne, R., Solomon, C.,
652 2012. Inhaled particle counts on bicycle commute routes of low and high

35
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

653 proximity to motorised traffic. Atmos. Environ. 61, 197 – 203. doi:10.

PT
654 1016/j.atmosenv.2012.06.041.

655 Dekoninck, L., Int Panis, L., 2017. A High Resolution Spatiotemporal Model

RI
656 for In-Vehicle Black Carbon Exposure: Quantifying the In-Vehicle Expo-
sure Reduction Due to the Euro 5 Particulate Matter Standard Legislation.

SC
657

658 Atmosphere 8.

U
659 Do, D.H., Van Langenhove, H., Chigbo, S.I., Amare, A.N., Demeestere, K.,
Walgraeve, C., 2014. Exposure to volatile organic compounds: Compari-
AN
660

661 son among different transportation modes. Atmos. Environ. 94, 53 – 62.
662 doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.05.019.
M

663 Dockery, D.W., Pope, C.A., Xu, X., Spengler, J.D., Ware, J.H., Fay, M.E.,
D

664 Ferris, B.G., Speizer, F.E., 1993. An association between air pollution
665 and mortality in six U.S. cities. New England Journal of Medicine 329,
TE

666 1753–1759. doi:10.1056/NEJM199312093292401.

Dons, E., Panis, L.I., Poppel, M.V., Theunis, J., Wets, G., 2012. Personal
EP

667

668 exposure to black carbon in transport microenvironments. Atmos. Environ.

669 55, 392 – 398. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.03.020.
C

Drinovec, L., Močnik, G., Zotter, P., Prévôt, A.S.H., Ruckstuhl, C., Coz, E.,
AC

670

671 Rupakheti, M., Sciare, J., Müller, T., Wiedensohler, A., Hansen, A.D.A.,
672 2015. The ”dual-spot” Aethalometer: An improved measurement of aerosol
673 Black Carbon with real-time loading compensation. Atmos. Meas. Tech.
674 8, 1965–1979.

36
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

675 Dysart, M.M., Galvis, B.R., Russell, A.G., Barker, T.H., 2014. Environmen-

PT
676 tal particulate (PM2.5) augments stiffness-induced alveolar epithelial cell
677 mechanoactivation of transforming growth factor beta. PLOS ONE 9.

RI
678 Fernandez-Bremauntz, A., Ashmore, M., 1995. Exposure of commuters to
carbon monoxide in Mexico City–I. Measurement of in-vehicle concentra-

SC
679

680 tions. Atmos. Environ. 29, 525–532.

U
681 Freedson, P.S., Melanson, E., Sirard, J., 1998. Calibration of the Computer
Science and Applications, Inc. accelerometer. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 30,
AN
682

683 777 – 781.

Goel, R., Gani, S., Guttikunda, S.K., Wilson, D., Tiwari, G., 2015. On-
M

684

685 road PM2.5 pollution exposure in multiple transport microenvironments

D

686 in Delhi. Atmos. Environ. 123, 129 – 138. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/

687 j.atmosenv.2015.10.037.
TE

688 Gulliver, J., Briggs, D., 2004. Personal exposure to particulate air pollution
in transport microenvironments. Atmos. Environ. 38, 1 – 8. doi:10.1016/
EP

689

690 j.atmosenv.2003.09.036.
C

691 Han, X., Aguilar-Villalobos, M., Allen, J., Carlton, C.S., Robinson, R.,
Bayer, C., Naeher, L.P., 2005. Traffic-related occupational exposures
AC

692

693 to PM2.5, CO, and VOCs in Trujillo, Peru. International Journal

694 of Occupational and Environmental Health 11, 276–288. doi:10.1179/
695 107735205800246073.

696 Hankey, S., Marshall, J.D., 2015. On-bicycle exposure to particulate air

37
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

697 pollution: Particle number, black carbon, PM2.5, and particle size. At-

PT
698 mos. Environ. 122, 65 – 73. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.09.025.

699 Hidalgo, D., Lleras, G., Hernndez, E., 2013. Methodology for calculating

RI
700 passenger capacity in bus rapid transit systems: Application to the trans-
milenio system in bogot, colombia. Research in Transportation Economics

SC
701

702 39, 139–142. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2012.06.006.

U
703 Huang, J., Deng, F., Wu, S., Guo, X., 2012. Comparisons of personal ex-
posure to PM2.5 and CO by different commuting modes in beijing, china.
AN
704

705 Sci. Total Environ. 425, 52 – 59. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.03.007.

Jeong, C.H., Traub, A., Evans, G.J., 2017. Exposure to ultrafine particles
M

706

707 and black carbon in diesel-powered commuter trains. Atmos. Environ. 155,
D

708 46–52. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.02.015.

TE

709 Karanasiou, A., Viana, M., Querol, X., Moreno, T., de Leeuw, F., 2014. As-
710 sessment of personal exposure to particulate air pollution during commut-
ing in European cities: Recommendations and policy implications. Sci. To-
EP

711

712 tal Environ. 490, 4781 – 4810. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.05.036.

C

713 Kaur, S., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., Colvile, R., 2007. Fine particulate matter
and carbon monoxide exposure concentrations in urban street transport
AC

714

715 microenvironments. Atmos. Environ. 41, 4781 – 4810. doi:10.1016/j.

716 atmosenv.2007.02.002.

717 Kawahara, J., Tanaka, S., Tanaka, C., Aoki, Y., Yonemoto, J., 2011. Es-
718 timation of daily inhalation rate in preschool children using a tri-axial

38
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

719 accelerometer: A pilot study. Sci. Total Environ. 409, 3073 – 3077.

PT
720 doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.04.006.

721 Kingham, S., Longley, I., Salmond, J., Pattinson, W., Shrestha, K., 2013.

RI
722 Variations in exposure to traffic pollution while travelling by different
modes in a low density, less congested city. Environmental Pollution 181,

SC
723

724 211 – 218. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2013.06.030.

Krzyżanowski, M., Kuna-Dibbert, B., Schneider, J., 2005. Health effects of

U
725

726 transport-related air pollution. WHO Regional Office Europe.

AN
727 Li, B., Lei, X.N., li Xiu, G., yuan Gao, C., Gao, S., sheng Qian, N., 2015.
Personal exposure to black carbon during commuting in peak and off-peak
M

728

729 hours in Shanghai. Sci. Total Environ. 524–525, 237–245. doi:10.1016/j.

D

730 scitotenv.2015.03.088.
TE

731 Lim, S., Dirks, K.N., Salmond, J.A., Xie, S., 2015. Determinants of spikes in
732 ultrafine particle concentration whilst commuting by bus. Atmos. Environ.
112, 1 – 8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.04.025.
EP

733

734 Liu, W.T., Ma, C.M., Liu, I.J., Han, B.C., Chuang, H.C., Chuang, K.J.,
C

735 2015. Effects of commuting mode on air pollution exposure and car-
diovascular health among young adults in Taipei, Taiwan. Interna-
AC

736

737 tional Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 218, 319 – 323.
738 doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2015.01.003.

739 Maricq, M.M., 2014. Examining the relationship between black carbon and
740 soot in flames and engine exhaust. Aerosol Science and Technology 48,
741 620–629. doi:10.1080/02786826.2014.904961.

39
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

742 Marshall, J.D., Behrentz, E., 2005. Vehicle self-pollution intake fraction:

PT
743 Children’s exposure to school bus emissions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39,
744 2559–2563. doi:10.1021/es040377v. pMID: 15884349.

RI
745 Mejı́a-Dugand, S., Hjelm, O., Baas, L., Rı́os, R.A., 2013. Lessons from the
spread of bus rapid transit in latin america. Journal of Cleaner Production

SC
746

747 50, 82 – 90. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.028.

748 special Issue: Advancing sustainable urban transformation.

U
Michaels, R.A., Kleinman, M.T., 2000. Incidence and apparent health sig-
AN
749

750 nificance of brief airborne particle excursions. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 32,
751 93–105. doi:10.1080/027868200303803.
M

752 Moraes, R.H., Schwanen, T., 2015. Commute Time in Brazil (1992-2009):
D

753 Diferences Between Metropolitan Areas by Incombe Levels and Gender.

754 Discussion Paper.
TE

755 Morales Betancourt, R., Galvis, B., Balachandran, S., Ramos-Bonilla, J.P..,
Sarmiento, O.L.., Gallo-Murcia, S.M.., Contreras, Y., 2017. Exposure to
EP

756

757 fine particulate, black carbon, and particle number concentration in trans-
758 portation microenvironments. Atmos. Environ. 157, 135–145. doi:http:
C

759 //dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.03.006.
AC

760 de Nazelle, A., Scott, F., Dan., W., Martinez, D., Ripoll, A., Nadine, K.,
761 Nieuwenhuijsen, M., 2012. A travel mode comparison of commuters’ ex-
762 posures to air pollutants in Barcelona. Atmos. Environ. 59, 151–159.
763 doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.05.013.

40
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

764 Panis, L., de Geus, B., Vandenbulcke, G., Willems, H., Degraeuwe, B., Bleux,

PT
765 N., Mishra, V., Thomas, I., Meeusen, R., 2010. Exposure to particulate
766 matter in traffic: A comparison of cyclists and car passengers. Atmos. En-

RI
767 viron. 44, 2263–2270. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.04.28.

Petzold, A., Ogren, J.A., Fiebig, M., Laj, P., Li, S.M., Baltensperger, U.,

SC
768

769 Holzer-Popp, T., Kinne, S., Pappalardo, G., Sugimoto, N., Wehrli, C.,
770 Wiedensohler, A., Zhang, X.Y., 2013. Recommendations for reporting

U
771 ”black carbon” measurements. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 13,
AN
772 8365–8379. URL: https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/13/8365/2013/,
773 doi:10.5194/acp-13-8365-2013.
M

774 Pope III, C., Dockery, D.W., Spengler, J.D., Raizenne, M.E., 1991. Respi-
775 ratory health and PM10 pollution: a daily time series analysis. American
D

776 Review of Respiratory Disease 144, 668–674.

TE

777 Ramı́rez, O., Sanchez de la Campa, A., Amato, F., Catacolı́, R.A., Rojas,
778 N.Y., de la Rosa, J., 2018. Chemical composition and source apportion-
EP

779 ment of PM10 at an urban background site in a high-altitude latin amer-

780 ican megacity (Bogota, Colombia). Environmental Pollution 233, 142 –
C

781 155. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.10.045.

AC

782 Ramos, M.J., Vasconcelos, A., Faria, M., 2015. Comparison of particulate
783 matter inhalation for users of different transport modes in Lisbon. Trans-
784 portation Research Procedia 10, 433 – 442. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2015.
785 09.093. 18th Euro Working Group on Transportation, EWGT 2015, 14-16
786 July 2015, Delft, The Netherlands.

41
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

787 Rivas, I., Kumar, P., Hagen-Zanker, A., 2017. Exposure to air pollutants

PT
788 during commuting in London: Are there inequalities among different socio-
789 economic groups? Environment International 101, 143 – 157. doi:https:

RI
790 //doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2017.01.019.

Samet, J.M., Dominici, F., Curriero, F.C., Coursac, I., Zeger, S.L., 2000.

SC
791

792 Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality in 20 U.S. Cities, 1987-
793 1994. New England Journal of Medicine 343, 1742–1749. doi:10.1056/

U
794 NEJM200012143432401.
AN
795 Santoso, M., Lestiani, D.D., Hopke, P.K., 2013. Atmospheric black carbon
796 in PM2.5 in Indonesian cities. Journal of the Air & Waste Management
M

797 Association 63, 1022–1025. doi:10.1080/10962247.2013.804465.

D

798 Suarez, L., Mesias, S., Iglesias, V., Silva, C., Caceres, D.D., Ruiz-Rudolph,
799 P., 2014. Personal exposure to particulate matter in commuters using
TE

800 different transport modes (bus, bicycle, car and subway) in an assigned
801 route in downtown Santiago, Chile. Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts 16,
EP

802 1309–1317. doi:10.1039/C3EM00648D.

803 Tainio, M., de Nazelle, A.J., Götschi, T., Kahlmeier, S., Rojas-Rueda, D.,
C

804 Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., de Sá, T.H., Kelly, P., Woodcock, J., 2016. Can
AC

805 air pollution negate the health benefits of cycling and walking? Pre-
806 ventive Medicine 87, 233 – 236. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.
807 com/science/article/pii/S0091743516000402, doi:https://doi.org/
808 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.02.002.

809 Tan, S.H., Roth, M., Velasco, E., 2017. Particle exposure and inhaled

42
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

810 dose during commuting in Singapore. Atmos. Environ. 170, 245 – 258.

PT
811 doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.09.056.

812 Targino, A., Gibson, M.D., Krecl, P., Rodrigues, M.V.C., dos Santos, M.M.,

RI
813 de Paula Corrêa, M., 2016. Hotspots of Black Carbon and PM2.5 in an
urban area and relationships to traffic characteristics. Environmental Pol-

SC
814

815 lution 218, 475 – 486. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.

816 07.027.

US-EPA, 2011.
U
Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition (Final),
AN
817

818 EPA/600/R-09/052. United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Vallejo, M., Lerma, C., Infante, O., Hermosillo G., A., Riojas-Rodriguez, H.,
M

819

820 Cardenas, M., 2004. Personal expsure to particulate matter less than 2.5
D

821 µm in Mexico City: A pilot study. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 14,
822 323 – 329.
TE

823 Virkkula, A., Chi, X., Ding, A., Shen, Y., Nie, W., Qi, X., Zheng, L., Huang,
X., Xie, Y., Wang, J., Petäjä, T., Kulmala, M., 2015. On the interpretation
EP

824

825 of the loading correction of the Aethalometer. Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss.
826 8, 7373–7411.
C

Virkkula, A., Mäkelä, T., Hillamo, R., Yli-Tuomi, T., Hirsikko, A., Hämeri,
AC

827

828 K., Koponen, I., 2007. A simple procedure for correcting loading effects
829 of aethalometer data. J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 57, 1214–1222.
830 doi:10.3155/1047-3289.57.10.1214.

831 Williams, R.D., Knibbs, L.D., 2016. Daily personal exposure to black carbon:

43
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

832 A pilot study. Atmos. Environ. 132, 296 – 299. doi:https://doi.org/10.

PT
833 1016/j.atmosenv.2016.03.023.

834 Yang, F., Kaul, D., Wong, K.C., Westerdahl, D., Sun, L., Ho, K.f., Tian,

RI
835 L., Brimblecombe, P., Ning, Z., 2015. Heterogeneity of passenger exposure
to air pollutants in public transport microenvironments. Atmos. Environ.

SC
836

837 109, 42 – 51. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.03.009.

U
838 Zielinska, B., Sagebiel, J., McDonald, J.D., Whitney, K., Lawson, D.R.,
2004. Emission rates and comparative chemical composition from selected
AN
839

840 in-use diesel and gasoline-fueled vehicles. Journal of the Air & Waste
841 Management Association 54, 1138–1150. doi:10.1080/10473289.2004.
M

842 10470973.
D

843 Zuurbier, M., Hoek, G., Oldenwening, M., Lenters, V., Meliefste, K., van den
844 Hazel, P., Brunekreef, B., 2010. Exposure to particulate matter in traffic:
TE

845 A comparison of cyclists and car passengers. Environ. Health Perspect.

846 118, 783–789. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2010.04.28.
C EP
AC

44
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights for “Personal Exposure to Air Pollutants in a Bus Rapid Transit System: Impact of Fleet
Age and Emission Standard”

• Extreme Black Carbon, PM2.5, and CO concentrations were measured in buses and stations
of one of the largest BRT systems in the world
• The PM2.5 dose of a commuter on a typical round-trip account for 60% of the daily inhaled

PT
dose
• In-cabin concentrations were twice as large for commuters in Euro II or III buses compared
to those in Euro IV or V.
•

RI
A fleet renovation could have disproportionate effects on commuters’ exposure reduction

U SC
AN
M
D
TE
C EP
AC