4.7 Article

New equation to predict size-resolved gas-particle partitioning quotients for polybrominated diphenyl ethers

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 400, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123245

关键词

Size-segregated; Gas/particle partition; Polybrominated diphenyl ethers; Healthy exposure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21577030]
  2. Polar Academy, Harbin Institute of Technology [PA-HIT-201901]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment (Harbin Institute of Technology) [2019DX04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gas/particle (G/P) partition quotients of semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) for bulk air have been widely discussed in experimental and theoretical contexts, but research on size-resolved G/P partition quotients (K-Pi) are scarce and limited in scope. To investigate G/P partition behavior of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) for size-segregated particles in the atmosphere, 396 individual size-segregated particulate samples (36 batches x 11 size-ranges), and 108 pairs of concurrent gaseous and bulk particulate samples were collected in Harbin, China. A steady-state equation based on bulk particles is derived to determine G/P partition quotients of PBDEs for size-segregated particles, which depends on the organic matter contents of size-segregated particles (f(OMi)). This equation can well predict K-Pi with knowledge of bulk partition quotient (K-PS), ambient temperature, and f(OMi), the results of which match well with monitoring data in Harbin and other published data collected in Shanghai and Guangzhou of China and Thessaloniki of Greece, and remedies a defect of over-estimate K-Pi for high-brominated PBDEs by the previous equation. In particular, the new equation contributes to obtaining the PBDEs concentrations in all atmospheric phase from partial phase, then provides a credible path to evaluate healthy exposure dose from the airborne PBDEs, by co-utilization with exposure models.

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

4.7
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