Literature DB >> 21705119

Assessment of modeled mercury dry deposition over the Great Lakes region.

L Zhang1, P Blanchard, D Johnson, A Dastoor, A Ryzhkov, C J Lin, K Vijayaraghavan, D Gay, T M Holsen, J Huang, J A Graydon, V L St Louis, M S Castro, E K Miller, F Marsik, J Lu, L Poissant, M Pilote, K M Zhang.   

Abstract

Three sets of model predicted values for speciated mercury concentrations and dry deposition fluxes over the Great Lakes region were assessed using field measurements and model intercomparisons. The model predicted values were produced by the Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System for the year 2002 (CMAQ2002) and for the year 2005 (CMAQ2005) and by the Global/Regional Atmospheric Heavy Metals Model for the year 2005 (GRAHM2005). Median values of the surface layer ambient concentration of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM) from all three models were generally within 30% of measurements. However, all three models overpredicted surface-layer concentrations of gaseous oxidized mercury (GOM) and particulate bound mercury (PBM) by a factor of 2-10 at the majority of the 15 monitoring locations. For dry deposition of GOM plus PBM, CMAQ2005 showed a clear gradient with the highest deposition in Pennsylvania and its surrounding areas while GRAHM2005 showed no such gradient in this region; however, GRAHM2005 had more hot spots than those of CMAQ2005. Predicted dry deposition of GOM plus PBM from these models should be treated as upper-end estimates over some land surfaces in this region based on the tendencies of all the models to overpredict GOM and PBM concentrations when compared to field measurements. Model predicted GEM dry deposition was found to be as important as GOM plus PBM dry deposition as a contributor to total dry deposition. Predicted total annual mercury dry deposition were mostly lower than 5 μg m(-2) to the surface of the Great lakes, between 5 and 15 μg m(-2) to the land surface north of the US/Canada border, and between 5 and 40 μg m(-2) to the land surface south of the US/Canada border. Predicted dry deposition from different models differed from each other by as much as a factor of 2 at regional scales and by a greater extent at local scales. Crown
Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21705119     DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Pollut        ISSN: 0269-7491            Impact factor:   8.071


  5 in total

1.  Development and application of a regional-scale atmospheric mercury model based on WRF/Chem: a Mediterranean area investigation.

Authors:  Christian Natale Gencarelli; Francesco De Simone; Ian Michael Hedgecock; Francesca Sprovieri; Nicola Pirrone
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  A diagnostic evaluation of modeled mercury wet depositions in Europe using atmospheric speciated high-resolution observations.

Authors:  J Bieser; F De Simone; C Gencarelli; B Geyer; I Hedgecock; V Matthias; O Travnikov; A Weigelt
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-04-25       Impact factor: 4.223

3.  Mercury in the Great Lakes region: bioaccumulation, spatiotemporal patterns, ecological risks, and policy.

Authors:  David C Evers; James G Wiener; Niladri Basu; R A Bodaly; Heather A Morrison; Kathryn A Williams
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2011-09-11       Impact factor: 2.823

4.  Global atmospheric cycle of mercury: a model study on the impact of oxidation mechanisms.

Authors:  F De Simone; C N Gencarelli; I M Hedgecock; N Pirrone
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2014-01-15       Impact factor: 4.223

5.  Modeling and mapping of atmospheric mercury deposition in adirondack park, new york.

Authors:  Xue Yu; Charles T Driscoll; Jiaoyan Huang; Thomas M Holsen; Bradley D Blackwell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-25       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.