4.8 Article

Photodegradation of Secondary Organic Aerosol Particles as a Source of Small, Oxygenated Volatile Organic Compounds

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 18, Pages 9990-9997

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b02313

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) [AGS-1227579]
  2. NSF
  3. NSF [MRI-0923323]
  4. Directorate For Geosciences
  5. Div Atmospheric & Geospace Sciences [1227579] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We investigated the photodegradation of secondary organic aerosol (SOA) particles by near-UV radiation and photoproduction of oxygenated volatile organic compounds (OVOCs) from various types of SOA. We used a smog chamber to generate SOA from alpha-pinene, guaiacol, isoprene, tetradecane, and 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene under high-NOx, low-NOx, or ozone oxidation conditions. The SOA particles were collected on a substrate, and the resulting material was exposed to several mW of near-UV radiation (lambda similar to 300 nm) from a light-emitting diode. Various OVOCs, including acetic acid, formic acid, acetaldehyde, and acetone were observed during photodegradation, and their SOA-mass-normalized fluxes were estimated with a Proton Transfer Reaction Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometer (PTR-ToF-MS). All the SOA, with the exception of guaiacol SOA, emitted OVOCs upon irradiation. Based on the measured OVOC emission rates, we estimate that SOA particles would lose at least similar to 1% of their mass over a 24 h period during summertime conditions in Los Angeles, California. This condensed-phase photochemical process may produce a few Tg/year of gaseous formic acid, the amount comparable to its primary sources. The condensed-phase SOA photodegradation processes could therefore measurably affect the budgets of both particulate and gaseous atmospheric organic compounds on a global scale.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available