4.8 Article

Study of the effects of particle-phase carbon on the gas/particle partitioning of semivolatile organic compounds in the atmosphere using controlled field experiments

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 36, 期 23, 页码 5218-5228

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es011048v

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A controlled field experiment (CFE) methodology with a filter/sorbent sampler was used to minimize artifact effects when measuring values of the gas/particle (G/P) partitioning constant (K(p), m(3) mug(-1)) for semivolatile organic compounds (SOCs) in the atmosphere. CFE sampling was conducted at three different locations (Beaverton, OR; Denver, CO; and Hills, IA). Kp values were measured for a series of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlorinated dibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs), To examine the possible effects on the G/P partitioning of the amounts of organic material (om) phase, organic carbon (OC), and elemental carbon (EC) in the sampled particulate material, the measured Kp values were normalized by the aerosol mass fractions f(om), f(OC), and f(Ec) according to K(p)/f(om), f(om), and K(p)/f(EC). Using a log-log format, the resulting normalized values were all found to be more highly correlated with the subcooled liquid vapor pressure p(L)(0) than were the unnormalized K(p) values. For the PAHs, the oneparameter model assuming K(p) = K(p,OC) f(OC) yielded only slightly less variability in the predicted Kp values than did the one-parameter model K(p) =(-)K(p,EC) f(EC). The twoparameter model K(p) = K(p,OC) f(OC) + K(p,EC) f(EC) was found to provide only small improvements over each of the oneparameter models. Overall,the data are more consistent with an absorptive mechanism of partitioning to the particulate material but do not rule out some role for adsorption to particle surfaces. The data suggest that small amounts of organic carbon (f(OC) similar to 0.02) can have significant effects on the G/P partitioning of SOCs.

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