In many countries, water quality monitoring is limited due to the high cost of logistics and professional equipment such as multiparametric probes. However, low-cost sensors integrated with the Internet of Things can enable real-time environmental monitoring networks, providing valuable water quality information to the public. To facilitate the widespread adoption of these sensors, it is crucial to identify which sensors can accurately measure key water quality parameters, their manufacturers, and their reliability in different environments. Although there is an increasing body of work utilizing low-cost water quality sensors, many questions remain unanswered. To address this issue, a systematic literature review was conducted to determine which low-cost sensors are being used for remote water quality monitoring. The results show that there are three primary vendors for the sensors used in the selected papers. Most sensors range in price from US$6.9 to US$169.00 but can cost up to US$500.00. While many papers suggest that low-cost sensors are suitable for water quality monitoring, few compare low-cost sensors to reference devices. Therefore, further research is necessary to determine the reliability and accuracy of low-cost sensors compared to professional devices.

The international journal of Aerosol and Air Quality Research (AAQR) covers all aspects of aerosol science and technology, atmospheric science and air quality related issues.

Most of the world’s population lives in rural areas or small to medium-sized cities (totalling 68% of the world population), all of which are impacted by distant air pollution sources. In Brazil, primary pollutant emissions have decreased in urban centres because of government actions, while secondary pollutants such as surface ozone (O₃) increased. In addition, O₃ and its precursors can be worsening air quality in areas already affected by biofuels production, especially ethanol. We provide almost 3 months of hourly data (June 7, 2019 to August 25, 2019) for concentrations of O₃, CO₂ and other priority pollutants from a mobile station positioned to distinguish among pollutant plumes (biomass burning, metropolitan area of São Paulo (MASP) and other cities). Although the concentrations of O₃ and CO₂ were highest in the plumes from biomass burning, the MASP accounted for up to 80% of the O₃ concentration in communities over 200 km away.