4.7 Review

Comparison of atmospheric mercury (Hg) among Korea, Japan, China and Taiwan during 2000-2008

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Volume 162, Issue 2-3, Pages 607-615

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.05.142

Keywords

Total gaseous mercury; Atmospheric particulate mercury; Mercury dry deposition fluxes; Organic mercury; Divalent mercury

Funding

  1. National Science Council of the Republic of China, Taiwan [NSC 95-2221-E-241-012-MY3]
  2. HungKuang Academic Industrial Cooperation Project [HK95-006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The paper reviewed studies about total gaseous mercury, atmospheric particulate of mercury and average dry deposition fluxes of mercury in Korea, Japan, China and Taiwan. This study compared sample collection and analytical methods for mercury in Asian countries. Analytical results indicated that the primary mercury sources are anthropogenic source (for example coal burning) and high temperature processes. This study also elucidates the sources, analytical tools, and the average concentrations for atmospheric mercury (Hg) for these Asian countries during 2000-2008. This study indicated that the total gaseous mercury concentrations were higher in urban area than that in suburban area in Asian countries (Korea, Japan, China and Taiwan). As for the seasonal variations, in general, the average total gaseous mercury concentrations were higher in winter than that in summer especially in China. In addition, the average total gaseous mercury concentrations were higher in mining areas than that in the rest of the other areas. And the total gaseous mercury concentrations were decreasing as this distance increasing. These phenomena revealed that the total gaseous mercury concentrations are reduced by long-distance transportation especially in the main land of China. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available