4.7 Article

Highly time-resolved characterization of water-soluble inorganic ions in PM2.5 in a humid and acidic mega city in Sichuan Basin, China

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 580, 期 -, 页码 224-234

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.048

关键词

High time resolution; Water-soluble ions; Particle acidity; Formation mechanism

资金

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [KJZD-EW-TZ-G06-04]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41403089, 41375123, 41405027]
  3. Chongqing Science and Technology Commission [cstc2014yykfC20003, cstckjcxljrc13]
  4. CAS Light of West China Program
  5. Fortelice International Co., Ltd., Taiwan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To investigate the characteristics of water-soluble inorganic ions (WSIIs) in Chongqing, a well-known foggy and acid region in southwestern China, hourly real-time concentrations of five cations (Na+, K+, Ca2+, and Mg2+) and six anions (F-, Cr-, NO2-, NO3-, PO43-, and SO42-) in PM2,5 during winter (from Dec. 18, 2015 to Mar. 20, 2016) in Chongqing were collected by applying In-situ Gas and Aerosol Compositions Monitor. The hourly total concentration of WSIIs was 38.5 mu g/m(3) on average, accounting for 57% of PMz5 mass concentration. Secondary inorganic aerosols (NH4+, NO3-, and SO42-) were dominant WSIIs, accounting for 91% of WSIIs mass. Compared to ten years ago, SO42- concentrations were decreased by 31% but NO3- levels were doubled, likely indicative of sharply enhanced contribution to fine particle pollution from mobile sources over stationary sources. NO3- originated from the current fluxes of NH3 and HNO3 onto sulfate particles and/or from in-cloud processes were critical pathways under humid conditions in the study area. Water content and/or RH might be important factors controlling nitrate formation. Trajectory analysis manifested that aerosol pollutions in Chongqing were mostly caused by local emissions. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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