Journals / Atmospheric Pollution Research / 2020 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 9

Impacts of PM2.5 sources on variations in particulate chemical compounds in ambient air of Bangkok, Thailand

Pages
1658–1667
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results indicated that the effects of vehicular exhausts and biomass burning played an important role in governing the PM2.5 level in ambient air of Bangkok.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, PM2.5-bound carbonaceous compounds, including organic carbon (OC), elemental carbon (EC), water-soluble ionic species (WSIS), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the ambient air of Bangkok were analysed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The mean PM2.5 concentration was 77.0 ± 21.2 μg m−3, while the average concentrations of OC, and EC were 8.03 ± 4.02, and 2.62 ± 1.49 μg m−3, respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results indicated that the effects of vehicular exhausts and biomass burning played an important role in governing the PM2.5 level in ambient air of Bangkok.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

In this study, PM2.5-bound carbonaceous compounds, including organic carbon (OC), elemental carbon (EC), water-soluble ionic species (WSIS), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in the ambient air of Bangkok were analysed. The mean PM2.5 concentration was 77.0 ± 21.2 μg m−3, while the average concentrations of OC, and EC were 8.03 ± 4.02, and 2.62 ± 1.49 μg m−3, respectively. The relatively high OC/EC ratio (3.52 ± 1.41) coupled with a strong positive correlation between K+ and carbonaceous compounds (K+ vs. OC (r = 0.86), K+ vs. EC (r = 0.87), K+ vs. Char-EC (r = 0.82)) suggest that biomass burning are one of the major contributors to PM2.5 in the sampling area. A comparatively high abundance of both B[g,h,i]P and Ind guides that vehicular exhausts, industrial combustion, and burning of waste might reflect the sources of these PAHs in Bangkok's atmosphere. Interestingly, hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) indicated that the main source of PM2.5 was a mixture of various combustion activities (e.g. biomass burning, vehicular exhaust, fossil fuel, coal, and industrial emissions). Principal Component Analysis (PCA) successfully classified five principal sources of PM2.5, including vehicular exhaust, biomass burning, sea salt aerosol, power plant, and industrial emissions, which accounted for 43.7%, 24.0%, 10.5%, 6.48%, and 4.46%, respectively. These results indicated that the effects of vehicular exhausts and biomass burning played an important role in governing the PM2.5 level in ambient air of Bangkok. The findings of this study aid policymakers in launching effective air quality control strategies based on the source apportionment analysis.

🔖

Cite This Article

CHOOCHUAY, C., PONGPİACHAN, S., TİPMANEE, D., Suttinun, O., DEELAMAN, W., Wang, Q., SU, X. L., Lİ, G., Han, Y., PALAKUN, J., CAO, J. (2020). Impacts of PM2.5 sources on variations in particulate chemical compounds in ambient air of Bangkok, Thailand. Atmospheric Pollution Research, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 9, 1658–1667. https://ajindex.com/articles/141870

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Ahrens, M.J., Depree, C.V., 2010. A source mixing model to apportion PAHs from coal tar and asphalt binders in street pavements and urban aquatic sediments. Chemosphere 81, 1526–1535.
  2. Akunne, A.F., Louis, V.R., Sanon, M., Sauerborn, R., 2006. Biomass solid fuel and acute respiratory infections: the ventilation factor. Int. J. Hyg Environ. Health 209, 445–450. Álvareza, V.M., Rosasb, F.H., Reyesc, M.M., Murillod, J.H., De La Rosaa, N.S., Arzaluza, M.G., Laraa, J.J.F., Cardosoa, G.G., 2018. Sugarcane burning emissions: characterization and emission factors. Atmos. Environ. 193, 262–272.
  3. Andreae, M.O., 1983. Soot carbon and excess fine potassium: long-range transport of combustion-derived aerosols. Science 220, 1148–1151.
  4. Arbabi, H., Mayfield, M., 2016. Urban and rural-population and energy consumption dynamics in local authorities within england and wales. Buildings 6, 34. Bach, P.B., Kelley, M.J., Tate, R.C., McCrory, D.C., 2003. Screening for lung cancer: a review of the current literature. Chest 123, 72–82.
  5. Bari, M.A., Baumbach, G., Kuch, B., Scheffknecht, G., 2010. Particle-phase concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air of rural residential areas in southern German. Air Qual. Atmos. Health. 3, 103–116.
  6. Birgül, A., Tasdemir, Y., Cindoruk, S.S., 2011. Atmospheric wet and dry deposition of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) determined using a modified sampler. Atmos. Res. 101, 341–353.
  7. Boonyatumanond, R., Murakami, M., Wattayakorn, G., Togo, A., Takada, H., 2007. Sources of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in street dust in a tropical Asian megacity, Bangkok, Thailand. Sci. Total Environ. 384, 420–432.
  8. Boström, C.E., Gerde, P., Hanberg, A., Jernström, B., Johansson, C., Kyrklund, T., Rannug, A., Törnqvist, M., Victorin, K., Westerholm, R., 2002. Cancer risk assessment, indicators, and guidelines for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the ambient air. Environ. Health Perspect. 110 (3), 451–488.
  9. Brown, J.N., Peake, B.M., 2006. Sources of heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in urban stormwater runoff. Sci. Total Environ. 359, 145–155.
  10. Campo, L., Rossella, F., Pavanello, S., Mielzynska, D., Siwinska, E., Kapka, L., Bertazzi, P.A., Fustinon, S., 2010. Urinary profiles to assess polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons exposure in coke-oven workers. Toxicol. Lett. 192, 72–78.
  11. Cao, J.J., Lee, S.C., Ho, K.F., Zhang, X.Y., Zou, S.C., Fung, K., Chow, J.C., Watson, J.G., 2003. Characteristics of carbonaceous aerosol in pearl