Ultrafine particles and PM 2.5 in the air of cities around the world: Are they representative of each other?

Alma Lorelei de Jesus,Md Mahmudur Rahman,Mandana Mazaheri,Helen Thompson,Luke D Knibbs,Cheol Jeong,Greg Evans,Wei Nei,Aijun Ding,Liping Qiao,Li Li,Harri Portin,Jarkko V Niemi,Hilkka Timonen,Krista Luoma,Tuukka Petäjä,Markku Kulmala,Michal Kowalski,Annette Peters,Josef Cyrys,Luca Ferrero,Maurizio Manigrasso,Pasquale Avino,Giorgio Buonano,Cristina Reche,Xavier Querol,David Beddows,Roy M Harrison,Mohammad H Sowlat,Constantinos Sioutas,Lidia Morawska
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.05.021
IF: 11.8
2019-01-01
Environment International
Abstract:Can mitigating only particle mass, as the existing air quality measures do, ultimately lead to reduction in ultrafine particles (UFP)? The aim of this study was to provide a broader urban perspective on the relationship between UFP, measured in terms of particle number concentration (PNC) and PM2.5 (mass concentration of particles with aerodynamic diameter < 2.5 μm) and factors that influence their concentrations. Hourly average PNC and PM2.5 were acquired from 10 cities located in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia over a 12-month period. A pairwise comparison of the mean difference and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with the application of bootstrapping were performed for each city. Diurnal and seasonal trends were obtained using a generalized additive model (GAM). The particle number to mass concentration ratios and the Pearson's correlation coefficient were calculated to elucidate the nature of the relationship between these two metrics.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?