An integrated PM2.5 source apportionment study: Positive Matrix Factorisation vs. the chemical transport model CAMx

Abstract Receptor and Chemical Transport Models are commonly used tools in source apportionment studies, even if different expertise is required. We describe an experiment using both approaches to apportion the PM2.5 (i.e., particulate matter with aerodynamic diameters below 2.5 μm) sources in the city of Genoa (Italy). A sampling campaign was carried out to collect PM2.5 samples daily for approximately six month during 2011 in three sites. The subsequent compositional analyses included the speciation of elements, major ions and both organic and elemental carbon; these data produced a large database for receptor modelling through Positive Matrix Factorisation (PMF). In the same period, a meteorological and air quality modelling system was implemented based on the mesoscale numerical weather prediction model WRF and the chemical transport model CAMx to obtain meteorological and pollutant concentrations up to a resolution of 1.1 km. The source apportionment was evaluated by CAMx over the same period that was used for the monitoring campaign using the Particulate Source Apportionment Technology tool. Even if the source categorisations were changed (i.e., groups of time-correlated compounds in PMF vs. activity categories in CAMx), the PM2.5 source apportionment by PMF and CAMx produced comparable results. The different information provided by the two approaches (e.g., real-world factor profile by PMF and apportionment of a secondary aerosol by CAMx) was used jointly to elucidate the composition and origin of PM2.5 and to develop a more general methodology. When studying the primary and secondary components of PM, the main anthropogenic sources in the area were road transportation, energy production/industry and maritime emissions, accounting for 40%–50%, 20%–30% and 10%–15%, of PM2.5, respectively.

[1]  Mar Viana,et al.  Toward a standardised thermal-optical protocol for measuring atmospheric organic and elemental carbon: the EUSAAR protocol , 2009 .

[2]  P. Quinn,et al.  Variations in the methanesulfonate to sulfate molar ratio in submicrometer marine aerosol particles over the south Pacific Ocean , 1992 .

[3]  Eliseo Monfort,et al.  Application of Optimally Scaled Target Factor Analysis for Assessing Source Contribution of Ambient PM10 , 2009, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[4]  B. Mason Principles of geochemistry , 1958 .

[5]  John S. Kain,et al.  The Kain–Fritsch Convective Parameterization: An Update , 2004 .

[6]  John D. Spengler,et al.  A QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF SOURCE CONTRIBUTIONS TO INHALABLE PARTICULATE MATTER POLLUTION IN METROPOLITAN BOSTON , 1985 .

[7]  P. Paatero,et al.  Application of positive matrix factorization in source apportionment of particulate pollutants in Hong Kong , 1999 .

[8]  Christian George,et al.  Inter-comparison of source apportionment models for the estimation of wood burning aerosols during wintertime in an Alpine city (Grenoble, France) , 2010 .

[9]  G. Kallos,et al.  Investigating impacts of chemistry and transport model formulation on model performance at European scale , 2012 .

[10]  Christian Seigneur,et al.  Current Status of Air Quality Models for Particulate Matter , 2001, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[11]  S Nava,et al.  Elemental characterization of PM10, PM2.5 and PM1 in the town of Genoa (Italy). , 2006, Chemosphere.

[12]  P. Plummer,et al.  Theory of Nucleation of Water. I. Properties of Some Clathrate-Like Cluster Structures , 1972 .

[13]  A. D'Alessandro,et al.  Characterization of particulate matter sources in an urban environment. , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[14]  G. Powers,et al.  A Description of the Advanced Research WRF Version 3 , 2008 .

[15]  M. Talat Odman,et al.  MULTISCALE AIR QUALITY SIMULATION PLATFORM (MAQSIP): SOURCE CODE DOCUMENTATION AND VALIDATION , 2000 .

[16]  Philip K. Hopke,et al.  Discarding or downweighting high-noise variables in factor analytic models , 2003 .

[17]  G. Thompson,et al.  Explicit Forecasts of Winter Precipitation Using an Improved Bulk Microphysics Scheme. Part II: Implementation of a New Snow Parameterization , 2008 .

[18]  Gabriele Curci,et al.  A model for European Biogenic Volatile Organic Compound emissions: Software development and first validation , 2010, Environ. Model. Softw..

[19]  Christian Seigneur,et al.  Evaluation of three probing techniques in a three-dimensional air quality model , 2005 .

[20]  D. Melas,et al.  MOSESS: A New Emission Model for the Compilation of Model-Ready Emission Inventories—Application in a Coal Mining Area in Northern Greece , 2013, Environmental Modeling & Assessment.

[21]  Source apportionment of fine particulate matter over the Eastern U.S. Part II: source apportionment simulations using CAMx/PSAT and comparisons with CMAQ source sensitivity simulations , 2011 .

[22]  Robin L. Dennis,et al.  NARSTO critical review of photochemical models and modeling , 2000 .

[23]  E. Mlawer,et al.  Radiative transfer for inhomogeneous atmospheres: RRTM, a validated correlated-k model for the longwave , 1997 .

[24]  R. Cary,et al.  Elemental Carbon-Based Method for Monitoring Occupational Exposures to Particulate Diesel Exhaust , 1996 .

[25]  Andrea Gambaro,et al.  Comparison of PM10 concentrations and metal content in three different sites of the Venice Lagoon: an analysis of possible aerosol sources. , 2012, Journal of environmental sciences.

[26]  M. Chou,et al.  Technical report series on global modeling and data assimilation. Volume 3: An efficient thermal infrared radiation parameterization for use in general circulation models , 1994 .

[27]  J. Seinfeld Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics of Air Pollution , 1986 .

[28]  J. Christensen,et al.  Test of two numerical schemes for use in atmospheric transport-chemistry models , 1993 .

[29]  P. Paatero Least squares formulation of robust non-negative factor analysis , 1997 .

[30]  P. Hopke,et al.  Source apportionment of particulate matter in Europe: A review of methods and results , 2008 .

[31]  D. Massabò,et al.  An alternative way to determine the size distribution of airborne particulate matter , 2010 .

[32]  J. Shah,et al.  Analysis of Organic and Elemental Carbon in Ambient Aerosols by a Thermal-Optical Method , 1982 .

[33]  D. Massabò,et al.  Size-resolved comprehensive characterization of airborne particulate matter , 2013 .

[34]  Zaviša I. Janić Nonsingular implementation of the Mellor-Yamada level 2.5 scheme in the NCEP Meso model , 2001 .

[35]  J. Dudhia,et al.  Coupling an Advanced Land Surface–Hydrology Model with the Penn State–NCAR MM5 Modeling System. Part II: Preliminary Model Validation , 2001 .

[36]  Philip K. Hopke,et al.  The concentrations and sources of PM2.5 in metropolitan New York City , 2006 .

[37]  P. Paatero,et al.  Positive matrix factorization: A non-negative factor model with optimal utilization of error estimates of data values† , 1994 .

[38]  J. Dudhia,et al.  Coupling an Advanced Land Surface–Hydrology Model with the Penn State–NCAR MM5 Modeling System. Part I: Model Implementation and Sensitivity , 2001 .

[39]  P. Paatero,et al.  Understanding and controlling rotations in factor analytic models , 2002 .

[40]  D. Massabò,et al.  A multi-wavelength optical set-up for the characterization of carbonaceous particulate matter , 2013 .

[41]  Greg Yarwood,et al.  Development and application of a computationally efficient particulate matter apportionment algorithm in a three-dimensional chemical transport model , 2008 .

[42]  S. Friedlander,et al.  A Chemical Element Balance for the Pasadena Aerosol , 1972 .

[43]  Judith C. Chow,et al.  The dri thermal/optical reflectance carbon analysis system: description, evaluation and applications in U.S. Air quality studies , 1993 .