Identification of Fine Particle Sources in Mid-Atlantic US Area
- 173 Downloads
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated 20 urban areas including major cities located in mid-Atlantic US area as being in non-attainment of the new national ambient air quality standards for PM2.5 (particulate matter ≤2.5 μm in aerodynamic diameter). To support the development of effective State Implementation Plans for PM2.5 in the non-attainment area, 24-h integrated Speciation Trends Networks data collected in the mid-Atlantic US urban area were analyzed through the application of the positive matrix factorization (PMF).
A total of 117 to 235 samples and 27 to 29 chemical species collected at the four monitoring sites between 2001 and 2003 were analyzed and six to nine sources were identified. Secondary particles provided the highest contributions to PM2.5 mass concentrations (38–50% for secondary sulfate; 9–18% for secondary nitrate). Potential source contribution function analyses show the potential source areas and pathways of secondary particles contributing to this region, especially the regional influences of the biogenic as well as anthropogenic secondary particles. Motor vehicle emissions contributed 21–33% to the PM2.5 mass concentration. In four sites in southern New Jersey and Delaware, gasoline vehicle and diesel emissions were tentatively separated by different abundances of organic and elemental carbons. The compositional profiles for gasoline vehicle and diesel emissions are similar across this area. In addition, other combustion sources, aged sea salt, and intercontinental dust storms were identified.
KeywordsPM2.5 positive matrix factorization speciation trends network source apportionment
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ashbaugh, L. L., Malm, W. C. and Sadeh, W. Z.: 1985, ‘A residence time probability analysis of sulfur concentrations at Grand Canyon National Park’, Atmospheric Environment 19(8), 1263–1270.Google Scholar
- Birch, M. E. and Gary, R. A.: 1996, ‘Elemental carbon-based method for monitoring occupational exposures to particulate diesel exhaust’, Aerosol Science and Technology 25, 221–241.Google Scholar
- Bukowiecki, N., Hegedus, F., Falkenberg, G., Gehrig, R., Hill, M., Weingartner, E. and Baltensperger, U.: 2004, ‘Highly time resolved elemental ambient concentrations of railway generated aerosols’, European Aerosol Conference, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
- Draxler, R. R. and Rolph, G. D.: 2003, ‘HYSPLIT (HYbrid Single-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) Model access via NOAA ARL READY Website (http://www.arl.noaa.gov/ready/hysplit4.html)’, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD.
- Federal Register: 1997, ‘National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter’; Federal Register 40 CFR Part 50. Vol. 62, No. 138.Google Scholar
- Henry, R. C.: 1987, ‘Current factor analysis models are ill-posed’, Atmospheric Environment 21, 1815–1820.Google Scholar
- Hering, S. and Cass, G.: 1999, ‘The magnitude of bias in the measurement of PM2.5 regression arising from volatilization of particulate nitrate from Teflon Filters’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 49, 725–733.Google Scholar
- Hopke, P. K.: 1985, Receptor Modeling in Environmental Chemistry, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Kim, E., Hopke, P. K. and Edgerton, E.: 2003, ‘Source identification of Atlanta aerosol by Positive Matrix Factorization’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 53, 731–739.Google Scholar
- Kim, E., Hopke, P. K. and Edgerton, E. S.: 2004, ‘Improving source identification of Atlanta aerosol using temperature resolved carbon fractions in Positive Matrix Factorization’, Atmospheric Environment 38, 3349–3362.Google Scholar
- Kim, E. and Hopke, P. K.: 2004a, ‘Source apportionment of fine particles at Washington, DC utilizing temperature resolved carbon fractions’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 54, 773–785.Google Scholar
- Kim, E. and Hopke, P. K.: 2004b, ‘Improving source identification of fine particles in a rural northeastern U.S. area utilizing temperature resolved carbon fractions’, Journal of Geophysical Research 109, D09204.Google Scholar
- Kim, E., Hopke, P. K. and Qin, Y.: 2005, ‘Estimation of organic carbon blank values and error structures of the speciation trends network data for source apportionments’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 55, 1190–1199.Google Scholar
- Lee, E., Chun, C. K. and Paatero, P.: 1999, ‘Application of Positive Matrix Factorization in source apportionment of particulate pollutants’, Atmospheric Environment 33, 3201–3212.Google Scholar
- Lewis, C. W., Norris, G. A., Conner, T. L. and Henry, R. C.: 2003, ‘Source apportionment of Phoenix PM2.5 aerosol with the unmix receptor model’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 53, 325–338.Google Scholar
- NASA: ‘Earth probe total ozone mapping spectrometer aerosol index: 2001’, available at http://toms.gsfc.nasa.gov/aerosols/aerosols.html.
- Paatero, P., Hopke, P. K., Song, X. H. and Ramadan, Z.: 2002, ‘Understanding and controlling rotations in factor analytic models’, Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 60, 253–264.Google Scholar
- Pankow, J. F. and Mader, B. T.: 2001, ‘Gas/solid partitioning of semivolatile organic compounds (SOCs) to air filters. 3. An analysis of gas adsorption artifacts in measurements of atmospheric SOCs and organic carbon (OC) when using Teflon membrane filters and quartz fiber Filters’, Environmental Science and Technology 35(17), 3422–3432.Google Scholar
- Polissar, A. V., Hopke, P. K., Paatero, P., Malm, W. C. and Sisler, J. F.: 1998, ‘Atmospheric aerosol over Alaska 2. Elemental composition and sources’, Journal of Geophysical Research 103(D15), 19045–19057.Google Scholar
- Polissar, A. V., Hopke, P. K. and Poirot, R. L.: 2001, ‘Atmospheric aerosol over Vermont: Chemical composition and sources’, Environmental Science and Technology 35, 4604–4621.Google Scholar
- Pope, C. A., Thun, M. J., Namboodiri, M. M., Dockery, D. W., Evans, J. S., Speizer, F. E. and Heath, C. W.: 1995, ‘Particulate air pollution as a predictor of mortality in a prospective study of U.S. adults’, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 151, 669–674.Google Scholar
- Rolph, G. D.: 2003, ‘Real-time Environmental Applications and Display sYstem (READY) Website (http://www.arl.noaa.gov/ready/hysplit4.html)’, NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD.
- RTI: 2004, ‘Quality assurance projects plan chemical speciation of PM2.5 filter samples http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/spec/rtiqap.pdf, Research Triangle Park, NC.
- Schwartz, J., Dockery, D. W. and Neas, L. M.: 1996, ‘Is daily mortality associated specifically with fine particles?’, Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 46, 927–939.Google Scholar
- Tolocka, M. P., Solomon, P. A., Mitchell, W., Norris, G. A., Gemmill, D. B., Wiener, R. W., Vanderpool, R. W., Homolya, J. B. and Rice, J.: 1999, ‘East versus west in the US: Chemical characteristics of PM2.5 during the winter of 1999’, Aerosol Science and Technology 34, 88–96.Google Scholar