Different roles of primary and secondary sources in reducing PM 2.5 : Insights from molecular markers in Pearl River Delta, South China
Kong Yang,Duo-Hong Chen,Xiang Ding,Jun Li,Yu-Qing Zhang,Tao Zhang,Qiao-Yun Wang,Jun-Qi Wang,Qian Cheng,Hao Jiang,Ping Liu,Zi-Rui Wang,Yun-Feng He,Gan Zhang,Xin-Ming Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2022.119487
IF: 5
2022-11-16
Atmospheric Environment
Abstract:It is essential to understand the variations of PM 2.5 sources under different pollution levels for improving air quality. The Pearl River Delta (PRD) was one of the most polluted areas by PM 2.5 in China and is now the advanced region with the most significant improvement in PM 2.5 pollution. In the year that regional PM 2.5 over the PRD met the National Air Quality Standard (35 μg m −3 ) for the first time, we conducted a year-round PM 2.5 sampling campaign at 9 sites and measured organic tracers for primary and secondary sources as well as water-soluble ions and heavy metals. Based on the daily PM 2.5 concentrations in these samples, we divided the data into four pollution levels: Polluted (PM 2.5 > 75 μg m −3 ), Moderate (75 μg m −3 > PM 2.5 > 35 μg m −3 ), Clean (35 μg m −3 > PM 2.5 > 25 μg m −3 ), and Good (PM 2.5 < 25 μg m −3 ). The average concentrations of PM 2.5 under the Polluted, Moderate, Clean, and Good levels were 91.8 ± 18.8 μg m −3 , 47.6 ± 10.7 μg m −3 , 30.1 ± 3.22 μg m −3 , and 17.3 ± 4.67 μg m −3 , respectively. Under different pollution levels, the reduction rates of molecular markers for biomass burning, vehicle exhaust, anthropogenic secondary organic aerosol (ASOA), nitrate aerosol, and industrial emission were rapider than or close to those of PM 2.5 , implying that the control measures on these sources were effective in the PRD. Based on the chemical characterization of specific molecular markers and source apportionment by the Positive Matrix Factorization model, we found that PM 2.5 over the PRD predominantly originated from anthropogenic sources (82% on average), and the contributions of primary sources (53% on average) were slightly higher than those of secondary sources (41% on average). Compared with the Polluted days, the Good days had large decreases in anthropogenic sources of PM 2.5 with significant reductions in both primary (industrial emission, vehicle exhaust, and biomass burning) and secondary (secondary nitrate, secondary sulfate and ASOA) contributions. The declines of PM 2.5 from Polluted to Moderate and Clean to Good were mainly due to the reductions of primary (69% on average) and secondary (58% on average) sources, respectively. Our findings highlight the different roles of reducing primary and secondary aerosols in improving PM 2.5 air quality under different pollution levels.
environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences