2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.01.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trends in PM2.5 emissions, concentrations and apportionments in Detroit and Chicago

Abstract: PM2.5 concentrations throughout much of the U.S. have decreased over the last 15 years, but emissions and concentration trends can vary by location and source type. Such trends should be understood to inform air quality management and policies. This work examines trends in emissions, concentrations and source apportionments in two large Midwest U.S. cities, Detroit, Michigan, and Chicago, Illinois. Annual and seasonal trends were investigated using National Emission Inventory (NEI) data for 2002 to 2011, speci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For PM 2.5 , the local increment is spatially resolved by assigning near road blocks (within 200 m of a major freeway) the full local increment; this accounts for local PM 2.5 emissions not included in the dispersion model (e.g., secondary formation or dust) that are higher in the near-road environment; more distant blocks are assigned half of the increment. This approach is justified by the current emissions inventory, which shows that mobile sources account for approximately 50% of the PM 2.5 emissions in Detroit [ 48 ], and by receptor modeling results that show 15% to 30% of PM 2.5 is due to diesel exhaust and other mobile sources [ 51 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For PM 2.5 , the local increment is spatially resolved by assigning near road blocks (within 200 m of a major freeway) the full local increment; this accounts for local PM 2.5 emissions not included in the dispersion model (e.g., secondary formation or dust) that are higher in the near-road environment; more distant blocks are assigned half of the increment. This approach is justified by the current emissions inventory, which shows that mobile sources account for approximately 50% of the PM 2.5 emissions in Detroit [ 48 ], and by receptor modeling results that show 15% to 30% of PM 2.5 is due to diesel exhaust and other mobile sources [ 51 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This factor contributed 3.8 µg m −3 (6.3 % of PM 2.5 mass) during the NCCPC-control period and 11.5 µg m −3 (12.3 %) to PM 2.5 mass in the non-control period. Possible sources for the mineral dust include (i) natural dust, which contains crustal Al, Si, and Ti (Milando et al, 2016); (ii) construction dust, which includes Ca ; and (iii) road dust, which is characterized by trafficrelated species, such as Cu, Zn, Br, and EC (Khan et al, 2016b;Zong et al, 2016). Here, the mineral dust factor did not contain any notable contributions from the traffic-related species.…”
Section: Estimates Of Source Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…This factor contributes 3.8 µg m -3 (6.3% of PM2.5 mass) and 11.2 µg m -3 (12.3%) to PM2.5 mass during the NCCPC control and non-control periods, respectively. The possible sources for causing mineral dust may include (i) natural dust, which contains Al, Si, and Ti (Milando et al, 2016), (ii) construction dust, which includes Ca (Liu et al, 2017), and (iii) road dust, which refers to the traffic-related species, such as Cu, Zn, Br, and EC (Khan et al, 2016b;Zong et al, 2016). Here the mineral dust factor do not contain any notable contributions from the traffic-related species.…”
Section: Estimation Of Source Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 99%