4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Characteristics of atmospheric single particles during haze periods in a typical urban area of Beijing: A case study in October, 2014

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
卷 40, 期 -, 页码 145-153

出版社

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.jes.2015.10.027

关键词

Single particle mass spectrometry; Haze pollution; Mixing state

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To investigate the composition and possible sources of particles, especially during heavy haze pollution, a single particle aerosol mass spectrometer (SPAMS) was deployed to measure the changes of single particle species and sizes during October of 2014, in Beijing. A total of 2,871,431 particles with both positive and negative spectra were collected and characterized in combination with the adaptive resonance theory neural network algorithm (ART-2a). Eight types of particles were classified: dust particles (dust, 8.1%), elemental carbon (EC, 29.0%), organic carbon (OC, 18.0%), EC and OC combined particles (ECOC, 9.5%), Na-K containing particles (NaK, 7.9%), K-containing particles (K, 21.8%), organic nitrogen and potassium containing particles (KCN, 2.3%), and metal-containing particles (metal, 3.6%). Three haze pollution events (P1, P2, P3) and one clean period (clean) were analyzed, based on the mass and number concentration of PM2.5 and the back trajectory results from the hybrid single particle Lagrangian integrated trajectory model (Hysplit-4 model). Results showed that EC, OC and K were the major components of single particles during the three haze pollution periods, which showed clearly increased ratios compared with those in the clean period. Results from the mixing state of secondary species of different types of particles showed that sulfate and nitrate were more readily mixed with carbon-containing particles during haze pollution episodes than in clean periods. (C) 2015 The Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.2
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