2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-57645-9_70
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regional Refined Grid Modeling of Acidic and Mercury Deposition over Northeastern US and the Contribution of New York Power Point Sources

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the one hand, it may be related to the rapid reduction in SO 2 and sulfate emissions in many regions (especially in Europe, the United States [US], and China) during recent years, which has resulted in the sharp decline in the observed concentration of sulfate (de Meij et al., 2006; Fedkin et al., 2019; Itahashi et al., 2018; H. Li et al., 2019; McClure & Jaffe, 2018; Sickles & Shadwick, 2015; Xie et al., 2016). On the other hand, considering that the WD of sulfate is derived from cloud formation and has great uncertainty (Breider et al., 2017; Z. Chen et al., 2019; Dentener et al., 2006; Echeverria et al., 2016; Horowitz, 2006; Luo et al., 2020), it also tends to be underestimated in some studies (S. Itahashi, 2018; Sedefian et al., 2016; Vivanco et al., 2017). An analysis of modeling studies suggests that the greatest uncertainty in global sulfur cycling is derived from the WD of aerosol sulfate and the heterogeneous oxidation of SO 2 in clouds and aerosols (Faloona, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the one hand, it may be related to the rapid reduction in SO 2 and sulfate emissions in many regions (especially in Europe, the United States [US], and China) during recent years, which has resulted in the sharp decline in the observed concentration of sulfate (de Meij et al., 2006; Fedkin et al., 2019; Itahashi et al., 2018; H. Li et al., 2019; McClure & Jaffe, 2018; Sickles & Shadwick, 2015; Xie et al., 2016). On the other hand, considering that the WD of sulfate is derived from cloud formation and has great uncertainty (Breider et al., 2017; Z. Chen et al., 2019; Dentener et al., 2006; Echeverria et al., 2016; Horowitz, 2006; Luo et al., 2020), it also tends to be underestimated in some studies (S. Itahashi, 2018; Sedefian et al., 2016; Vivanco et al., 2017). An analysis of modeling studies suggests that the greatest uncertainty in global sulfur cycling is derived from the WD of aerosol sulfate and the heterogeneous oxidation of SO 2 in clouds and aerosols (Faloona, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, considering that the wet deposition of sulfate is derived from cloud formation and has great uncertainty (Breider et al, 2017;Z. Chen et al, 2019;Dentener et al, 2006;Echeverria, Abreu, Gonzalez, Ortega, & Echeverria, 2016;Horowitz, 2006;Luo et al, 2020), it also tends to be underestimated in some studies (S. Itahashi, 2018;Sedefian, Ku, Civerolo, Hao, & Zalewsky, 2016;Vivanco et al, 2017). An analysis of modeling studies suggests that the greatest uncertainty in global sulfur cycling is derived from the wet deposition of aerosol sulfate and the heterogeneous oxidation of SO 2 in clouds and aerosols (Faloona, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%