Source apportionments of PM2.5 organic carbon using molecular marker Positive Matrix Factorization and comparison of results from different receptor models

被引:99
|
作者
Heo, Jongbae [1 ]
Dulger, Muaz [1 ]
Olson, Michael R. [1 ]
McGinnis, Jerome E. [1 ]
Shelton, Brandon R. [2 ]
Matsunaga, Aiko [3 ]
Sioutas, Constantinos [4 ]
Schauer, James J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Environm Chem & Technol Program, Madison, WI 53706 USA
[2] Univ Wisconsin, Wisconsin State Lab Hyg, Madison, WI 53706 USA
[3] Univ Calif Riverside, Air Pollut Res Ctr, Riverside, CA 92521 USA
[4] Univ So Calif, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
CMB; LA basin; Organic molecular markers; PMF; UNMIX; IMPROVING SOURCE IDENTIFICATION; SYSTEMIC INFLAMMATION; SEASONAL TRENDS; SOURCE PROFILES; FINE PARTICLES; BLACK CARBON; MEXICO-CITY; GAS-PHASE; AEROSOL; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.03.004
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Four hundred fine particulate matter (PM2.5) samples collected over a 1-year period at two sites in the Los Angeles Basin were analyzed for organic carbon (OC), elemental carbon (EC), water soluble organic carbon (WSOC) and organic molecular markers. The results were used in a Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) receptor model to obtain daily, monthly and annual average source contributions to PM2.5 OC. Results of the PMF model showed similar source categories with comparable year-long contributions to PM2.5 OC across the sites. Five source categories providing reasonably stable profiles were identified: mobile, wood smoke, primary biogenic, and two types of secondary organic carbon (SOC) (i.e., anthropogenic and biogenic emissions). Total primary emission factors and total SOC factors contributed approximately 60% and 40%, respectively, to the annual-average OC concentrations. Primary sources showed strong seasonal patterns with high winter peaks and low summer peaks, while SOC showed a reverse pattern with highs in the spring and summer in the region. Interestingly, smoke from forest fires which occurred episodically in California during the summer and fall of 2009 was identified and combined with the primary biogenic source as one distinct factor to the OC budget. The PMF resolved factors were further investigated and compared to a chemical mass balance (CMB) model and a second multi-variant receptor model (UNMIX) using molecular markers considered in the PMF. Good agreement between the source contribution from mobile sources and biomass burning for three models were obtained, providing additional weight of evidence that these source apportionment techniques are sufficiently accurate for policy development. However, the CMB model did not quantify primary biogenic emissions, which were included in other sources with the SOC. Both multivariate receptor models, the PMF and the UNMIX, were unable to separate source contributions from diesel and gasoline engines. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:51 / 61
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of PM2.5 source apportionment using positive matrix factorization and molecular marker-based chemical mass balance
    Ke, Lin
    Liu, Wei
    Wang, Yuhang
    Russell, Armistead G.
    Edgerton, Eric S.
    Zheng, Mei
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2008, 394 (2-3) : 290 - 302
  • [2] Sources of organic aerosol: Positive matrix factorization of molecular marker data and comparison of results from different source apportionment models
    Shrivastava, Manish K.
    Subramanian, R.
    Rogge, Wolfgang F.
    Robinson, Allen L.
    ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 41 (40) : 9353 - 9369
  • [3] Source apportionment of PM2.5 in Beijing using positive matrix factorization
    Xiangchun Jin
    Caijin Xiao
    Jue Li
    Donghui Huang
    Guojun Yuan
    Yonggang Yao
    Xinghua Wang
    Long Hua
    Guiying Zhang
    Lei Cao
    Pingsheng Wang
    Bangfa Ni
    Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 2016, 307 : 2147 - 2154
  • [4] Source apportionment of PM2.5 in Beijing using positive matrix factorization
    Jin, Xiangchun
    Xiao, Caijin
    Li, Jue
    Huang, Donghui
    Yuan, Guojun
    Yao, Yonggang
    Wang, Xinghua
    Hua, Long
    Zhang, Guiying
    Cao, Lei
    Wang, Pingsheng
    Ni, Bangfa
    JOURNAL OF RADIOANALYTICAL AND NUCLEAR CHEMISTRY, 2016, 307 (03) : 2147 - 2154
  • [5] Source apportionment of PM2.5 in Beijing by positive matrix factorization
    Song, Y
    Zhang, YH
    Xie, SD
    Zeng, LM
    Zheng, M
    Salmon, LG
    Shao, M
    Slanina, S
    ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2006, 40 (08) : 1526 - 1537
  • [6] Positive Matrix Factorization of PM2.5: Comparison and Implications of Using Different Speciation Data Sets
    Xie, Mingjie
    Hannigan, Michael P.
    Dutton, Steven J.
    Milford, Jana B.
    Hemann, Joshua G.
    Miller, Shelly L.
    Schauer, James J.
    Peel, Jennifer L.
    Vedal, Sverre
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2012, 46 (21) : 11962 - 11970
  • [7] Source apportionment using positive matrix factorization on daily measurements of inorganic and organic speciated PM2.5
    Dutton, Steven J.
    Vedal, Sverre
    Piedrahita, Ricardo
    Milford, Jana B.
    Miller, Shelly L.
    Hannigan, Michael P.
    ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT, 2010, 44 (23) : 2731 - 2741
  • [8] Assessing source characteristics of PM2.5 in the eastern United States using positive matrix factorization
    Lapina, K
    Paterson, KG
    JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 2004, 54 (09) : 1170 - 1174
  • [9] Spatial and temporal variations of ambient PM2.5 source contributions using positive matrix factorization
    Wang, Qin
    Zhang, Da-Wei
    Liu, Bao-Xian
    Chen, Tian
    Wei, Qiang
    Li, Jin-Xiang
    Liang, Yun-Ping
    Zhongguo Huanjing Kexue/China Environmental Science, 2015, 35 (10): : 2917 - 2924
  • [10] Source Apportionment of PM2.5 Using Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) and PMF with Factor Selection
    Molnar, Peter
    Johannesson, Sandra
    Quass, Ulrich
    AEROSOL AND AIR QUALITY RESEARCH, 2014, 14 (03) : 725 - U711