Correction: Grøntoft, T. Recent Trends in Maintenance Costs for Façades Due to Air Pollution in the Oslo Quadrature, Norway. Atmosphere 2019, 10, 529

The author wishes to make the following corrections to this paper [1]:

1. Delete the “in 1995” before the sentence “all in accordance with the discussion in Section 6.1”.

The cleaning cost of glass and carbon steel in 2002–2014 was adjusted to half the value shown in Figure 5, the atmospheric wear cost of renderings, as represented by Portland limestone, was assumed to be similar to the cost for rendering in 1995, and it was considered that the cost for possible façade cleaning could probably be represented by the average cost found for maintenance of the façade materials in 1995, all in accordance with the discussion in Section 6.1.

2. In Table 4, the below bold data were changed.

Material (i = Considered Inert by [15])	Material Type: M = Metallic, S = Stone/Mineral-ogical, W = Wooden, O = Other Organic	Area (m2)	Maintenance Cost Due to Atmospheric Wear (2002–2014) in 2019 Prizes (Euro/m2 Per Year)
			Total Costs	Back-Ground Costs	Local Pollution Cost
Portland limestone (T + UB/2)	S	-	1.9 (3.1)	0.9 (1.5)	1.0 (1.6)
Carbon steel with chloride exposure	M	-	2.0	0.3	1.7, 1.5 due to Cl
Carbon steel without chloride exposure	M	-	0.25 (0.5)	0.15 (0.3)	0.1 (0.2)
Zinc (R0.2 + R0.8/2)	M	-	1.3	1.1	0.2
Copper	M		0.3	0.2	0.1
Glass, cleaning (T + UB/2)	S	-	2.0 (4.0)	0.3 (0.6)	1.7 (3.4)
White painted steel, cleaning	O	-	1.6 (2.3)	0.4 (0.6)	1.2 (1.7)
Average, all materials
+ cleaning of glass		19,058	1.62	1.35	0.26 (16%)
+ Portland limestone as substitute for rendering		19,058	1.62	1.0	0.62 (38%)
Average, degrading materials
+ cleaning of glass		17,773	1.73	1.45	0.28 (16%)
+ Portland limestone as substitute for rendering		17,773	1.73	1.07	0.66(38%)

3. Replaced Figure 5.