评估改进PM2.5元素测量。

IF 2.1 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Nicholas J Spada, Sinan Yatkin, Jason Giacomo, Krystyna Trzepla, Nicole P Hyslop
{"title":"评估改进PM2.5元素测量。","authors":"Nicholas J Spada, Sinan Yatkin, Jason Giacomo, Krystyna Trzepla, Nicole P Hyslop","doi":"10.1080/10962247.2023.2262417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) network has collected airborne particulate matter (PM) samples at locations throughout the United States since 1988 and provided chemical speciation measurements on the samples using several techniques including X-ray fluorescence (XRF). New XRF instruments for measuring PM elemental content of IMPROVE samples were introduced in 2011. To evaluate the performance of these new instruments relative to the old instruments, archived sample from three IMPROVE monitoring sites were retrieved and analyzed on the new instruments. The agreement between the two instruments varied by element. Comparisons of the results were very good (slopes within 10% of unity) for most elements regularly measured well above the detection limits (sulfur, chlorine, potassium, titanium, vanadium, manganese, iron, copper, zinc, selenium, lead). Different particle compositions at the three sites highlighted different measurement interferences. High sea salt concentrations at the coastal site emphasized corrections applied in the old systems to light elements - sodium and magnesium - and resulted in poor agreement for these elements. Comparisons of the XRF measurements with collocated sulfate measurements by ion chromatography suggest that sulfur measurements from the new instruments are more precise but slight underestimates. Comparing elemental ratios to expected ratios for soil-derived PM demonstrate the new instruments are better at resolving the aluminum and silicon peaks.<i>Implications</i>: The presented work represents a comprehensive analysis of the method change enacted within the Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) air monitoring network. This work describes the implications of the last change in elemental quantification methodology. The most important point for data users performing longitudinal analyses is that light elements (e.g., sodium - sulfur) were affected; the old instrumentation overestimated these elements while the current measurements are slightly underestimated. The authors recommend these results to be taken into consideration when interpreting sea salt and crustal sources of atmospheric dust.</p>","PeriodicalId":49171,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating IMPROVE PM<sub>2.5</sub> element measurements.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas J Spada, Sinan Yatkin, Jason Giacomo, Krystyna Trzepla, Nicole P Hyslop\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10962247.2023.2262417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) network has collected airborne particulate matter (PM) samples at locations throughout the United States since 1988 and provided chemical speciation measurements on the samples using several techniques including X-ray fluorescence (XRF). New XRF instruments for measuring PM elemental content of IMPROVE samples were introduced in 2011. To evaluate the performance of these new instruments relative to the old instruments, archived sample from three IMPROVE monitoring sites were retrieved and analyzed on the new instruments. The agreement between the two instruments varied by element. Comparisons of the results were very good (slopes within 10% of unity) for most elements regularly measured well above the detection limits (sulfur, chlorine, potassium, titanium, vanadium, manganese, iron, copper, zinc, selenium, lead). Different particle compositions at the three sites highlighted different measurement interferences. High sea salt concentrations at the coastal site emphasized corrections applied in the old systems to light elements - sodium and magnesium - and resulted in poor agreement for these elements. Comparisons of the XRF measurements with collocated sulfate measurements by ion chromatography suggest that sulfur measurements from the new instruments are more precise but slight underestimates. Comparing elemental ratios to expected ratios for soil-derived PM demonstrate the new instruments are better at resolving the aluminum and silicon peaks.<i>Implications</i>: The presented work represents a comprehensive analysis of the method change enacted within the Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) air monitoring network. This work describes the implications of the last change in elemental quantification methodology. The most important point for data users performing longitudinal analyses is that light elements (e.g., sodium - sulfur) were affected; the old instrumentation overestimated these elements while the current measurements are slightly underestimated. The authors recommend these results to be taken into consideration when interpreting sea salt and crustal sources of atmospheric dust.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2023.2262417\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2023.2262417","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自1988年以来,受保护视觉环境机构间监测网络在美国各地收集了空气中颗粒物(PM)样本,并使用包括X射线荧光(XRF)在内的多种技术对样本进行了化学形态测量。2011年推出了用于测量PROVEE样品PM元素含量的新型XRF仪器。为了评估这些新仪器相对于旧仪器的性能,检索了来自三个PROVEE监测点的存档样本,并对新仪器进行了分析。这两项文书之间的协议因内容而异。对于经常测量的远高于检测限的大多数元素(硫、氯、钾、钛、钒、锰、铁、铜、锌、硒、铅),结果的比较非常好(斜率在10%以内)。三个地点的不同颗粒组成突出了不同的测量干扰。沿海地区的高海盐浓度强调了旧系统对钠和镁等轻元素的校正,导致这些元素的一致性较差。通过离子色谱法对XRF测量和并置硫酸盐测量的比较表明,新仪器的硫测量更精确,但略有低估。将土壤衍生PM的元素比率与预期比率进行比较表明,新仪器更能分辨铝和硅峰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating IMPROVE PM2.5 element measurements.

The Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) network has collected airborne particulate matter (PM) samples at locations throughout the United States since 1988 and provided chemical speciation measurements on the samples using several techniques including X-ray fluorescence (XRF). New XRF instruments for measuring PM elemental content of IMPROVE samples were introduced in 2011. To evaluate the performance of these new instruments relative to the old instruments, archived sample from three IMPROVE monitoring sites were retrieved and analyzed on the new instruments. The agreement between the two instruments varied by element. Comparisons of the results were very good (slopes within 10% of unity) for most elements regularly measured well above the detection limits (sulfur, chlorine, potassium, titanium, vanadium, manganese, iron, copper, zinc, selenium, lead). Different particle compositions at the three sites highlighted different measurement interferences. High sea salt concentrations at the coastal site emphasized corrections applied in the old systems to light elements - sodium and magnesium - and resulted in poor agreement for these elements. Comparisons of the XRF measurements with collocated sulfate measurements by ion chromatography suggest that sulfur measurements from the new instruments are more precise but slight underestimates. Comparing elemental ratios to expected ratios for soil-derived PM demonstrate the new instruments are better at resolving the aluminum and silicon peaks.Implications: The presented work represents a comprehensive analysis of the method change enacted within the Interagency Monitoring of PROtected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) air monitoring network. This work describes the implications of the last change in elemental quantification methodology. The most important point for data users performing longitudinal analyses is that light elements (e.g., sodium - sulfur) were affected; the old instrumentation overestimated these elements while the current measurements are slightly underestimated. The authors recommend these results to be taken into consideration when interpreting sea salt and crustal sources of atmospheric dust.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.70%
发文量
95
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (J&AWMA) is one of the oldest continuously published, peer-reviewed, technical environmental journals in the world. First published in 1951 under the name Air Repair, J&AWMA is intended to serve those occupationally involved in air pollution control and waste management through the publication of timely and reliable information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信