4.5 Article

PM2.5 in an industrial district of Zhengzhou, China: Chemical composition and source apportionment

Journal

PARTICUOLOGY
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 99-109

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.partic.2012.08.004

Keywords

PM2.5; Component; Seasonal variation; PMF; Source apportionment

Funding

  1. Henan Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs
  2. Science and Technology Bureau of Zhengzhou City [094SYJH36069]
  3. Peking University
  4. Taiwan Yunlin University of Science and Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Zhengzhou is a developing city in China, that is heavily polluted by high levels of particulate matter. In this study, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) was collected and analyzed for their chemical composition (soluble ions, elements, elemental carbon (EC) and organic carbon (OC)) in an industrial district of Zhengzhou in 2010. The average concentrations of PM2.5 were 181, 122, 186 and 211 mu g/m(3) for spring, summer, autumn and winter, respectively, with an annual average of I 75 mu g/m(3), far exceeding the PM2.5 regulation of USA National Air Quality Standards (15 mu g/m(3)). The dominant components of PM2.5 in Zhengzhou were secondary ions (sulphate and nitrate) and carbon fractions. Soluble ions, total carbon and elements contributed 41%, 13% and 3% of PM2.5 mass, respectively. Soil dust, secondary aerosol and coal combustion, each contributing about 26%, 24% and 23% of total PM2.5 mass, were the major sources of PM2.5, according to the result of positive matrix factorization analysis. A mixed source of biomass burning, oil combustion and incineration contributed 13% of PM2.5. Fine particulate matter arising from vehicles and industry contributed about 10% and 4% of PM2.5, respectively. (C) 2012 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available