4.8 Article

Comparison of daytime and nighttime concentration profiles and size distributions of ultrafine particles near a major highway

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 2531-2536

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es0516514

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [P30 ES07048-07] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previously we have conducted systematic measurements of the concentration and size distribution of ultrafine particles in the vicinity of major highways during daytime in Los Angeles. The present study compares these with similar measurements made at night. Particle number concentration was measured by a condensation particle counter (CPC) and size distributions in the size range from 7 to 300 nm were measured by a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS). Measurements were taken at 30, 60, 90,150, and 300 m upwind and downwind from the center of the 1-405 freeway. Average traffic flow at night was about 25% of that observed during the day. Particle number concentration measured at 30 m downwind from the freeway was 80% of previous daytime measurements. This discrepancy between changes in traffic counts and particle number concentrations is apparently due to the decreased temperature, increased relative humidity, and lower wind speed at night. Particle size distributions do not change as dramatically as they did during the daytime. Particle number concentration decays exponentially downwind from the freeway similarly to what was observed during the day, but at a slower rate. No particle number concentration gradient has been observed for the upwind side of the freeway. No PM2.5 and very weak PM10 concentration gradients were observed downwind of the freeway at night. Ultrafine particle number concentration measured at 300 m downwind from the freeway was still distinguishably higher than upwind background concentration at night. These data may be used to help estimate exposure to ultrafine particles in the vicinity of major highways for epidemiology studies.

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

4.8
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