Literature DB >> 14871017

Loss of particle nitrate from teflon sampling filters: effects on measured gravimetric mass in California and in the IMPROVE network.

Lowell L Ashbaugh1, Robert A Eldred.   

Abstract

The extent of mass loss on Teflon filters caused by ammonium nitrate volatilization can be a substantial fraction of the measured particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microm (PM2.5) or 10 microm (PM10) mass and depends on where and when it was collected. There is no straightforward method to correct for the mass loss using routine monitoring data. In southern California during the California Acid Deposition Monitoring Program, 30-40% of the gravimetric PM2.5 mass was lost during summer daytime. Lower mass losses occurred at more remote locations. The estimated potential mass loss in the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments network was consistent with the measured loss observed in California. The biased mass measurement implies that use of Federal Reference Method data for fine particles may lead to control strategies that are biased toward sources of fugitive dust, other primary particle emission sources, and stable secondary particles (e.g., sulfates). This analysis clearly supports the need for speciated analysis of samples collected in a manner that preserves volatile species. Finally, although there is loss of volatile nitrate (NO3-) from Teflon filters during sampling, the NO3- remaining after collection is quite stable. We found little loss of NO3- from Teflon filters after 2 hr under vacuum and 1 min of heating by a cyclotron proton beam.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14871017     DOI: 10.1080/10473289.2004.10470878

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc        ISSN: 1096-2247            Impact factor:   2.235


  5 in total

1.  Continuous and filter-based measurements of PM 2.5 nitrate and sulfate at the Fresno Supersite.

Authors:  Judith C Chow; John G Watson; Douglas H Lowenthal; Kihong Park; Prakash Doraiswamy; Ken Bowers; Richard Bode
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2007-10-12       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  The Acidity of Atmospheric Particles and Clouds.

Authors:  Havala O T Pye; Athanasios Nenes; Becky Alexander; Andrew P Ault; Mary C Barth; Simon L Clegg; Jeffrey L Collett; Kathleen M Fahey; Christopher J Hennigan; Hartmut Herrmann; Maria Kanakidou; James T Kelly; I-Ting Ku; V Faye McNeill; Nicole Riemer; Thomas Schaefer; Guoliang Shi; Andreas Tilgner; John T Walker; Tao Wang; Rodney Weber; Jia Xing; Rahul A Zaveri; Andreas Zuend
Journal:  Atmos Chem Phys       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 6.133

3.  Chemical fingerprint and source apportionment of PM2.5 in highly polluted events of southern Taiwan.

Authors:  Huazhen Shen; Tsung-Mou Yang; Chun-Chung Lu; Chung-Shin Yuan; Chung-Hsuang Hung; Chi-Tsan Lin; Chia-Wei Lee; Guohua Jing; Gongren Hu; Kuo-Cheng Lo
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 5.190

4.  Mass reconstruction methods for PM2.5: a review.

Authors:  Judith C Chow; Douglas H Lowenthal; L-W Antony Chen; Xiaoliang Wang; John G Watson
Journal:  Air Qual Atmos Health       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 3.763

5.  Collocated comparisons of continuous and filter-based PM2.5 measurements at Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada.

Authors:  Yu-Mei Hsu; Xiaoliang Wang; Judith C Chow; John G Watson; Kevin E Percy
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.235

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.