Chemical characterization and sources of PM2.5 at 12-h resolution in Guiyang, China
- 80 Downloads
The increasing emission of primary and gaseous precursors of secondarily formed atmospheric particulate matter due to continuing industrial development and urbanization are leading to an increased public awareness of environmental issues and human health risks in China. As part of a pilot study, 12-h integrated fine fraction particulate matter (PM2.5) filter samples were collected to chemically characterize and investigate the sources of ambient particulate matter in Guiyang City, Guizhou Province, southwestern China. Results showed that the 12-h integrated PM2.5 concentrations exhibited a daytime average of 51 ± 22 µg m−3 (mean ± standard deviation) with a range of 17–128 µg m−3 and a nighttime average of 55 ± 32 µg m−3 with a range of 4–186 µg m−3. The 24-h integrated PM2.5 concentrations varied from 15 to 157 µg m−3, with a mean value of 53 ± 25 µg m−3, which exceeded the 24-h PM2.5 standard of 35 µg m−3 set by USEPA, but was below the standard of 75 µg m−3, set by China Ministry of Environmental Protection. Energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF) was applied to determine PM2.5 chemical element concentrations. The order of concentrations of heavy metals in PM2.5 were iron (Fe) > zinc (Zn) > manganese (Mn) > lead (Pb) > arsenic (As) > chromium (Cr). The total concentration of 18 chemical elements was 13 ± 2 µg m−3, accounting for 25% in PM2.5, which is comparable to other major cities in China, but much higher than cities outside of China.
KeywordsTrace elements PM2.5 Source apportionment
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its Office of Research and Development, partially funded and participated in the research described here through cooperative agreement CR-833232-01 through the U.S. National Science Foundation-National Research Council Research Associateship Award. We acknowledge Dr. Teri L. Conner for X-Ray Fluorescence data analysis with her comments. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of EPA. It has been subjected to EPA Agency review and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This research was also partially funded by the National Key Basic Research Program of China (2013CB430004) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 40773067).
- Crilley LR, Ayoko GA, Stelcer E, Cohen DD, Mazaheri M, Morawska L (2014) Elemental composition of ambient fine particles in urban schools: sources of children’s exposure. Aerosol Air Qual Res 14(7):1906–1916Google Scholar
- Feng XB, Shang LH, Wang SF, Tang SL, Zheng W (2004) Temporal variation of total gaseous mercury in the air of Guiyang, China. J Geophys Res 109(109):215–229Google Scholar
- HEI NPACT Review Panel (2013) Executive summary. HEI’s National Particle Component Toxicity (NPACT) initiative. Health Effects Institute, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Huang RJ, Zhang YL, Bozzetti C, Ho KF, Cao JJ, Han YM, Daellenbach KR, Slowik JG, Platt SM et al (2014) High secondary aerosol contribution to particulate pollution during haze events in China. Nature 514(7521):218–222Google Scholar
- Kodavanti UP, Hauser R, Christiani DC, Meng ZH, McGee J, Ledbetter A, Richards J, Costa DL (1998) Pulmonary responses to oil fly ash particles in the rat differ byvirtue of their specific soluble metals. Toxicol Sci 43:204–212Google Scholar
- Kong SF, Ji YQ, Lu B, Zhao XY, Han B, Bai ZP (2014) Similarities and differences in PM2.5, PM10 and TSP chemical profiles of fugitive dust sources in a coastal oilfield city in China. Aerosol Air Qual Res 14:2017–2028Google Scholar
- US EPA (2009) Final report: Integrated science assessment for particulate matter. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–08/139FGoogle Scholar
- Wang P, Cao JJ, Tie XX, Wang GH, Li GH, Hu TF et al (2015) Impact of meteorological parameters and gaseous pollutants on PM2.5 and PM10 mass concentrations during 2010 in Xi’an, China. Aerosol Air Qual Res 15:1844–1854Google Scholar
- World Health Organization (2005) WHO air quality guidelines for particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide-global update 2005-summary of risk assessment. WHO/SDE/PHE/OEH/06.02, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
- Xu G, Li XQ, Huang RS, Jiang W, Ding WC (2008) Seasonal variations of HCOOH and HCHO in precipitation in Guiyang. Environ Sci 29(7):1780–1784Google Scholar