4.7 Article

Improving the spatial resolution of atmospheric polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons using passive air samplers in a multi-industrial city

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Volume 241, Issue -, Pages 252-258

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.09.039

Keywords

PAHs; Passive air sampler; Source-receptor relationship; Air pollution; Ulsan

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  2. Korea government (MEST) [2010-0003424, 2010-0026716]
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2010-0026716, 2010-0003424] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The source-receptor relationship of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the industrial city has been generally investigated using active air samplers (AAS), but they only provide low spatial resolution data. In this study, the spatial resolution of PAHs was improved by the use of polyurethane foam based passive air samplers (PUF-PAS). We deployed 40 passive air samplers in duplicate at 20 sites in the largest industrial city of Ulsan, South Korea during winter (January 7-February 25, 2011). Among the 16 US-EPA priority PAHs, 13 compounds excluding naphthalene, acenaphthylene, and acenaphthene were selected for the calculation of air concentrations. The level of gaseous Sigma(13)PAHs in Ulsan (mean: 43 ng/m(3)) was not as high as we expected due to prevailing winds which transported large amounts of PAHs to the East Sea. The spatial distribution of PAHs, principal component analysis, and diagnostic ratios suggested the influence of PAH emissions from industrial complexes to the surrounding areas. This study demonstrated that the source-receptor relationship of PAHs in the industrial area can be more clearly understood using passive air samplers. (C) 2012 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