| Literature DB >> 32535674 |
Bruno Siciliano1, Giovanna Carvalho1, Cleyton Martins da Silva1,2, Graciela Arbilla3.
Abstract
As COVID-19 spread all over the world, most of the countries adopted some kind of restrictions to avoid the collapse of health systems. In Brazil, São Paulo and Rio the Janeiro, the two most populated cities in the country, were the first to determine social distancing. In this study, the impact of the social distancing measures on the concentrations of the three main primary air pollutants (PM10, NO2 and CO) was analyzed. CO levels showed the most significant reductions (up to 100%) since it is related to light-duty vehicular emissions. NO2 also showed reductions (9.1%-41.8%) while PM10 levels were only reduced in the 1st lockdown week. The decrease of pollutants was not directly proportional to the vehicular flux reduction, because it depends on other factors such as the transport of air masses from industrial and rural areas. The differences observed can be explained considering the fleet characteristics in the two cities and the response of the population to the social distancing recommendations.Entities:
Keywords: Atmospheric pollutants; Brazil; COVID-19; Lockdown; Social distancing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32535674 PMCID: PMC7293178 DOI: 10.1007/s00128-020-02907-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bull Environ Contam Toxicol ISSN: 0007-4861 Impact factor: 2.151
Fig. 1Monitoring stations in Rio de Janeiro: Copacabana (C), Tijuca (T), Irajá (I), Bangu (B), Campo Grande (CG) and in São Paulo: Cerqueira Cesar (CC), Pinheiros (P), Parque Dom Pedro II (PP), Itaim Paulista (IP), Grajau (G)
Monitored pollutants, main sources and developmental status of sampling locations in Rio de Janeiro (RJ) and São Paulo (SP), Brazil
| Monitoring station | Monitored primary pollutants | Main emission sources | Economic and social development |
|---|---|---|---|
| Copacabana (C), RJ (SMAC) | PM10, CO | Vehicular | Very high |
| Tijuca (T), RJ (SMAC) | PM10, CO | Vehicular | High |
| Irajá(I), RJ (SMAC) | PM10, NO2 | Vehicular, industrial | High |
| Bangu (B), RJ (SMAC) | PM10, CO, NO2 | Vehicular, industrial | Medium |
| Campo Grande (CG), RJ (SMAC) | PM10, CO | Vehicular, industrial | Medium |
| Cerqueira César (CC), SP (CETESB) | PM10, CO, NO2 | Vehicular | Very high |
| Pinheiros (P), SP (CETESB) | PM10, NO2 | Vehicular | Very high |
| Parque D. Pedro II (PP), SP (CETESB) | PM10, NO2 | Vehicular | High |
| Itaim Paulista (IP), SP (CETESB) | PM10, NO2 | Vehicular, industrial | Medium |
| Grajau (G), SP (CETESB) | PM10, CO | Vehicular, industrial | Medium |
Characteristics of the studied periods
| Group | Period | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| Reference period | 2/16/2020–3/15/2020 | Normal activities |
| A period with some restrictions | 3/16/2020–3/22/2020 | Schools and universities were closed, public events were cancelled |
| Partial lockdown (“quarantine”) | 3/23/2020–4/3/2020 | Bars, restaurants, beaches, shopping centers and all non-essential business were closed, and public transport was limited. More than 50% social mobility restrictions |
| “Relaxed” partial lockdown | 4/4/2020–4/16/2020 | Less than 50% social mobility restrictions |
Fig. 2Boxplots for PM10 concentrations calculated for (1) before the lockdown (2/16/2020–3/15/2020); (2) a period with some restrictions (3/16/2020–3/22/2020); (3) partial lockdown (3/23/2020–4/3/2020); (4) “relaxed” partial lockdown (4/4/2020–4/16/2020). a Monitoring stations in Rio de Janeiro; b monitoring stations in São Paulo
Fig. 3Boxplots for NO2 concentrations calculated for (1) before the lockdown (2/16/2020–3/15/2020); (2) a period with some restrictions (3/16/2020–3/22/2020); (3) partial lockdown (3/23/2020–4/3/2020); (4) “relaxed” partial lockdown (4/4/2020–4/16/2020). a Monitoring stations in Rio de Janeiro; b monitoring stations in São Paulo
Fig. 4Boxplots for CO concentrations calculated for (1) before the lockdown (2/16/2020–3/15/2020); (2) a period with some restrictions (3/16/2020–3/22/2020); (3) partial lockdown (3/23/2020–4/3/2020); (4) “relaxed” partial lockdown (4/4/2020–4/16/2020). a Monitoring stations in Rio de Janeiro; b monitoring stations in São Paulo. Values for Copacabana (RJ) were not plotted since most of the values were < LOQ
Differences (%) between each period of time and the reference period (from 02/16/2020 to 03/15/2020)
| Monitoring station | 03/16/20–03/22/20* | 03/23/20–04/03/20** | 04/04/20–04/16/20*** |
|---|---|---|---|
| PM10 (24-h mean) (industrial and natural emissions; buses and trucks: diesel) | |||
| Copacabana (RJ) | − 1.6% | − 14.8% | + 5.27% |
| Tijuca (RJ) | + 25.6% | − 37.7% | + 13.7% |
| Irajá (RJ) | + 32.9% | − 19.2% | + 20.7% |
| Campo Grande (RJ) | + 23.4% | − 2.8% | − 1.9% |
| Cerqueira César (SP) | 0% | − 5.3% | − 10.5% |
| Parque Dom Pedro II (SP) | − 14.3% | − 4.8% | + 4.8% |
| Itaim Paulista (SP) | + 2.6% | + 5.1% | + 10.3% |
| Grajau (SP) | − 20.8% | − 10.4% | − 14.6% |
| NO2 (maximum value, 1-h mean) (industrial emissions; buses and trucks: diesel) | |||
| Irajá (RJ) | + 27.4% | − 27.4% | − 9.1% |
| Bangu (RJ) | + 10.4% | − 27.3% | − 28.9% |
| Cerqueira César (SP) | + 34.2% | − 20.3% | − 41.8% |
| Parque Dom Pedro II (SP) | + 47.4% | − 14.5% | − 34.2% |
| Pinheiros (SP) | − 7.3% | − 32.9% | − 34.1% |
| Itaim Paulista (SP) | + 20% | − 20% | − 26% |
| CO (maximum value, 8-h mean) (light-duty vehicles and motorcycles: gasoline, ethanol) | |||
| Copacabana (RJ) | 0% | − 100% | − 100% |
| Tijuca (RJ) | − 20% | − 60% | − 40% |
| Bangu (RJ) | 0% | − 30% | − 40% |
| Campo Grande (RJ) | 0% | − 33.3% | − 33.3% |
| Cerqueira César (SP) | 0% | − 40% | − 50% |
| Parque Dom Pedro II (SP) | + 33.3% | − 33.3% | − 50% |
| Pinheiros (SP) | + 40% | − 40% | − 50% |
| Grajau (SP) | + 40% | − 30% | − 30% |
Differences were calculated using median values
*Schools and universities were closed; gatherings were prohibited; **partial lockdown; ***partial lockdown was relaxed