KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Atmospheric Pollution Research / 2016 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

Evaluation of NOx emissions for Turkey using satellite and ground-based observations

Ecem ÖNER
BURÇAK KAYNAK TEZEL
Sayfa
419–430
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Results also indicated issues on NOx emissionsof large scale power plants in EMEP emission inventory for Turkey.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The aim of this study was to evaluate NOx emissions from available inventories using satellite NO2 retrievalsfor Turkey.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:NOx emission inventories were also comparedwith OMI NO2 satellite retrievals.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Results also indicated issues on NOx emissionsof large scale power plants in EMEP emission inventory for Turkey.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

The aim of this study was to evaluate NOx emissions from available inventories using satellite NO2 retrievalsfor Turkey. NOx emissions from two available inventories (EMEP and TNO) were compared witheach other, differences and similarities were determined. NOx emission inventories were also comparedwith OMI NO2 satellite retrievals. Correlation coefficients (R2) between parameters and emissions werefound in the range of 0.29e0.69 for selected high populated cities. OMI NO2 satellite retrievals overpassNO2 ground observation stations were also processed and the correlation between these observations forselected cities were found highest in summer and lowest in fall and winter. According to the comparisonfor individual cities, good correlations were observed for Ankara (R2 ¼ 0.62), Izmir (R2 ¼ 0.59) andIstanbul (R2 ¼ 0.90). Weekly profiles and weekend/weekday ratios for ground-based and OMI NO2 observationswere calculated and weekly profiles used for EMEP were also compared with observed weeklyprofiles. Findings showed that OMI is able to detect polluted regions in Turkey, but there are discrepanciesbetween OMI and ground-based NO2 observations. Results also indicated issues on NOx emissionsof large scale power plants in EMEP emission inventory for Turkey.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÖNER, E., TEZEL, B. K. (2016). Evaluation of NOx emissions for Turkey using satellite and ground-based observations. Atmospheric Pollution Research, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 419–430. https://ajindex.com/articles/351507

Kaynakça (3)

  1. Atkinson-Palombo, C.M., Miller, J.A., Balling Jr., R.C., 2006. Quantifying the ozone “weekend effect” at various locations in Phoenix, Arizona. Atmos. Environ. 40, 7644e7658. Bechle, M.J., Millet, D.B., Marshall, J.D., 2013. Remote sensing of exposure to NO2: satellite versus ground-based measurement in a large urban. Atmos. Environ. 69, 345e353. Boersma, K.F., Eskes, H.J., Brinksma, E.J., 2004. Error analysis for tropospheric NO2 retrieval from space. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 109. Boersma, K.F., Eskes, H.J., Veefkind, J.P., Brinksma, E.J., Van der A, R.J., Sneep, M., van den Oord, G.H.J., Levelt, P.F., Stammes, P., Gleason, J.F., Bucsela, E.J., 2007. Nearreal time retrieval of tropospheric NO2 from OMI. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 7, 2103e2118. Boersma, K.F., Eskes, H.J., Dirksen, R.J., van der A, R.J., Veefkind, J.P., Stammes, P., Huijnen, V., Kleipool, Q.L., Sneep, M., Claas, J., Leitao, J., Richter, A., Zhou, Y., Brunner, D., 2011. An improved tropospheric NO2 column retrieval algorithm for the ozone monitoring instrument. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 4, 1905e1928.
  2. Bucsela, E.J., Krotkov, N.A., Celarier, E.A., Lamsal, L.N., Swartz, W.H., Bhartia, P.K., Boersma, K.F., Veefkind, J.P., Gleason, J.F., Pickering, K.E., 2013. A new stratospheric and tropospheric NO2 retrieval algorithm for nadir-viewing satellite instruments: applications to OMI. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 6, 2607e2626. Castellanos, P., Boersma, K.F., 2012. Reductions in nitrogen oxides over Europe driven by environmental policy and economic recession. Sci. Rep. 2. CEIP, 2015. Webdab e Emep Database. http://www.ceip.at/ms/ceip_home1/ceip_ home/webdab_emepdatabase/. accessed in 2015.
  3. Damiani, A., De Simone, S., Rafanelli, C., Cordero, R.R., Laurenza, M., 2012. Three years of ground-based total ozone measurements in the Arctic: comparison with OMI, GOME and SCIAMACHY satellite data. Remote Sens. Environ. 127, 162e180. Denier van der Gon, H., Visschedijk, A., van de Brugh, H., Droge, R., 2010. A High € Resolution European Emission Data Base for the Year 2005. Netherlands, p. 78. Dunlea, E.J., Herndon, S.C., Nelson, D.D., Volkamer, R.M., San Martini, F., Sheehy, P.M., Zahniser, M.S., Shorter, J.H., Wormhoudt, J.C., Lamb, B.K., Allwine, E.J., Gaffney, J.S., Marley, N.A., Grutter, M., Marquez, C., Blanco, S., Cardenas, B., Retama, A., Villegas, C.R.R., Kolb, C.E., Molina, L.T., Molina, M.J., 2007. Evaluation of nitrogen dioxide chemiluminescence monitors in a polluted urban environment. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 7, 2691e2704. EN 14