4.6 Article

Magnetic, Geochemical, and Microstructural Characteristics of Road Dust on Roadsides with Different Traffic Volumes-Case Study from Finland

期刊

WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION
卷 209, 期 1-4, 页码 295-306

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11270-009-0198-2

关键词

Roadside soils; Vehicle emissions; Magnetic material; Traffic volume; Environmental magnetics

资金

  1. K. H. Renlund Foundation
  2. University of Helsinki Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The combination of magnetic, geochemical, and microstructural methods was used to characterize road dust properties in roadside soils of two sites in southern Finland: a highway (Tuusula no. 45, high traffic volume) and a local road (Mikkeli no. 13, low traffic volume). Significant differences in horizontal (kappa) and vertical (chi) distribution of magnetic susceptibility were observed in the investigated roadside soils. These variations were concluded to be mostly associated to traffic volume, which is considered to be a major factor that determines the degree of particle emissions derived from vehicle traffic. Magnetic parameters of hysteresis, isothermal remanence magnetization (IRM) acquisition curves, and thermomagnetic data indicated coarse-grained (pseudo-single-domain/multi-domain) magnetite as the primary magnetic carrier. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analyses identified two groups of magnetic materials: angular/aggregate particles (diameter similar to 2-100 mu m) derived from circulation of motor vehicles (e.g., vehicle exhaust emission, cycling of dust in suspension due to vehicular movement, dispersion of road construction materials, and abrasion of tires, brake linings, and road surface), and magnetic spherules (d similar to 3-15 mu m) possibly originating from industrial and domestic heating systems. Concentrations of selected trace elements Cu, Zn, and Pb in highway roadside soils were significantly higher than those in local roadside soils.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据