4.6 Article

Identification of marine and continental aerosol sources in Paris using high resolution aerosol mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-ATMOSPHERES
卷 118, 期 4, 页码 1950-1963

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/jgrd.50151

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Community [212520]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation
  3. NSF [0701013]
  4. Office Of The Director
  5. Office Of Internatl Science &Engineering [0701013] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Major summertime aerosol emission sources in Paris were assessed using a high resolution time-of-flight aerosol mass spectrometer (HR-ToF-AMS). The application of positive matrix factorization (PMF) to the highly mass and time-resolved AMS measurements allowed the identification of primary and secondary sources of organic (OA) and sulfate aerosols. Primary anthropogenic emissions contributed on average similar to 27% (14.7% cooking, 12% traffic) to the total organic mass, while the major contribution to the organic fraction was associated with secondary formation products. Low-volatility oxygenated OA (LV-OOA, 25.2%) and semi-volatile oxygenated OA (SV-OOA, 32.4%) factors were classified as SOA. An additional component with high S : C and O : C ratios was identified and attributed to marine emissions (marine organic aerosol, MOA), owing to its high correlation with methanesulfonic acid (R-2 = 0.84) and contributing on average 15.7% to the total OA mass, even in the continental megacity of Paris. Non-sea salt sulfate was apportioned by including both organic and sulfate ions in the PMF data matrix. This allowed apportionment of submicron sulfate to continental versus marine sources. A detailed source apportionment of PM1 combining AMS, aethalometer, and filter data is presented. Citation: Crippa, M., et al. (2013), Identification of marine and continental aerosol sources in Paris using high resolution aerosol mass spectrometry, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 118, 1950-1963, doi: 10.1002/jgrd.50151.

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