Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Comparison and Evaluation of Chemically Speciated Mobile Source PM2.5 Particulate Matter Profiles
Mobile sources are significant contributors to ambient PM2 5, accounting for 50% or more of the total observed levels in some locations. One of the important methods for resolving the mobile source contribution is through chemical mass balance (CMB) receptor modeling. CMB requires chemically speciated source profiles with known uncertainty to ensure accurate source contribution estimates. Mobile source PM profiles are available from various sources and are generally in the form of weight fraction by chemical species. The weight fraction format is commonly used, since it is required for input into the CMB receptor model. This paper examines the similarities and differences in mobile source PM2.5 profiles that contain data for elements, ions, elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC), and in some cases speciated organics (e.g., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]), drawn from four different sources.
Notable characteristics of the mass fraction data include variability (relative contributions of elements and ions) among supposedly similar sources and a wide range of average EC:OC ratios (0.60 ± 0.53 to 1.42 ± 2.99) for light-duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs), indicating significant EC emissions from LDGVs in some cases. For diesel vehicles, average EC:OC ratios range from 1.09 ± 2.66 to 3.54 ± 3.07. That different populations of the same class of emitters can show considerable variability suggests caution should be exercised when selecting and using profiles in source apportionment studies.
Comparison and Evaluation of Chemically Speciated Mobile Source PM2.5 Particulate Matter Profiles
Mobile sources are significant contributors to ambient PM2 5, accounting for 50% or more of the total observed levels in some locations. One of the important methods for resolving the mobile source contribution is through chemical mass balance (CMB) receptor modeling. CMB requires chemically speciated source profiles with known uncertainty to ensure accurate source contribution estimates. Mobile source PM profiles are available from various sources and are generally in the form of weight fraction by chemical species. The weight fraction format is commonly used, since it is required for input into the CMB receptor model. This paper examines the similarities and differences in mobile source PM2.5 profiles that contain data for elements, ions, elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC), and in some cases speciated organics (e.g., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]), drawn from four different sources.
Notable characteristics of the mass fraction data include variability (relative contributions of elements and ions) among supposedly similar sources and a wide range of average EC:OC ratios (0.60 ± 0.53 to 1.42 ± 2.99) for light-duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs), indicating significant EC emissions from LDGVs in some cases. For diesel vehicles, average EC:OC ratios range from 1.09 ± 2.66 to 3.54 ± 3.07. That different populations of the same class of emitters can show considerable variability suggests caution should be exercised when selecting and using profiles in source apportionment studies.
Comparison and Evaluation of Chemically Speciated Mobile Source PM2.5 Particulate Matter Profiles
Gillies, John A. (Autor:in) / Gertler, Alan W. (Autor:in)
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association ; 50 ; 1459-1480
01.08.2000
22 pages
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Unbekannt
Comparison and Evaluation of Chemically Speciated Mobile Source PM~2~.~5 Particulate Matter Profiles
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2000
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2005