Particle toxicity's role in air pollution Response

Baojing Gu,Lin Zhang,Mike Holland,Massimo Vieno,Hans J M Van Grinsven,Shaohui Zhang,Shilpa Rao,Mark A Sutton
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abn7647
IF: 56.9
2022-01-01
Science
Abstract:Thurston et al. argue that ammonia (NH3) abatement may not reduce the adverse health effects of particles with a diameter of less than 2.5 µm (PM2.5) due to the dependence of toxicity on the acidity of PM2.5. Although they have usefully highlighted the effect of acidity of PM2.5 on human health, there is no definitive evidence that quantification of the effects of PM2.5 components separately should be recommended in policy-making (1) or that emission controls of ammonia like those we suggest would substantially change the aerosol acidity. We are not arguing for NH3 controls in isolation; rather, we contend that NH3 abatement can play an important role in reducing exposure to PM2.5 and associated health impacts in the context of continued mitigation of other pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx).
What problem does this paper attempt to address?