Literature DB >> 33746528

Gaseous Oxidized Mercury Dry Deposition Measurements in the Four Corners Area, U.S.A., after Large Power Plant Mercury Emission Reductions.

Mark E Sather1, Shaibal Mukerjee2, Luther Smith3, Johnson Mathew4, Clarence Jackson4, Michael Flournoy5.   

Abstract

Gaseous oxidized mercury (GOM) dry deposition measurements using surrogate surface passive samplers were collected at six sites in the Four Corners area, U.S.A., for the two-year period August, 2017-August, 2019, after the implementation of large power plant mercury emission reductions across the U.S.A. Two-year baseline GOM dry deposition measurements at the same six sites in the Four Corners area, taken before the implementation of U.S.A. power plant mercury control regulations, were conducted earlier from August, 2009-August, 2011. The GOM dry deposition rate estimate decreased at the Four Corners area high elevation remote mountain site of Molas Pass, Colorado (3249 m asl) from 0.4 ng/m2h for August, 2009-August, 2011 to 0.3 ng/m2h for August, 2017-August, 2019. In contrast, GOM dry deposition rate estimates for the remaining five sites increased for August, 2017-August, 2019, ranging from 0.8-1.3 ng/m2h, up from the August, 2009-August, 2011 range of 0.6-1.0 ng/m2h. Comparisons of median GOM dry deposition values showed a statistically significant decrease of 17 ng/m2 at the Molas Pass site between August, 2009-August, 2011 and August, 2017-August, 2019, and a statistically significant increase of 66 ng/m2 and 64 ng/m2, respectively, at the Mesa Verde National Park and Farmington Substation sites between August, 2009-August, 2011 and August, 2017-August, 2019. For the four years of GOM dry deposition data collected in the Four Corners area annual GOM dry deposition levels ranged from 2237 ng/m2yr (at the Molas Pass high elevation remote mountain site) to 11542 ng/m2yr (at the Mesa Verde National Park site), and the estimates were generally higher in magnitude in the spring and summer compared to the fall and winter. In light of the unexpected increases in GOM dry deposition rates at the non-remote sites, it is suggested that large regional wildfires and local anthropogenic mercury emission sources from cities and oil/gas production areas are possible notable contributors to the GOM dry deposition measurements collected in the Four Corners area.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Air Pollution; Arid Area; Dry Deposition; Gaseous Oxidized Mercury; Surrogate Surface Passive Sampling

Year:  2021        PMID: 33746528      PMCID: PMC7970455          DOI: 10.1016/j.apr.2020.08.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atmos Pollut Res            Impact factor:   4.352


  18 in total

1.  Source attribution for mercury deposition in the contiguous United States: regional difference and seasonal variation.

Authors:  Che-Jen Lin; Suraj K Shetty; Li Pan; Pruek Pongprueksa; Carey Jang; Hsing-Wei Chu
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.235

2.  Testing and application of surrogate surfaces for understanding potential gaseous oxidized mercury dry deposition.

Authors:  Seth N Lyman; Mae S Gustin; Eric M Prestbo; Philip I Kilner; Eric Edgerton; Ben Hartsell
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2009-08-15       Impact factor: 9.028

3.  Memory effects on adsorption tubes for mercury vapor measurement in ambient air: elucidation, quantification, and strategies for mitigation of analytical bias.

Authors:  Richard J C Brown; Yarshini Kumar; Andrew S Brown; Ki-Hyun Kim
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2011-08-26       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  Use of passive sampling methods and models to understand sources of mercury deposition to high elevation sites in the Western United States.

Authors:  Jiaoyan Huang; Mae Sexauer Gustin
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Dry deposition of gaseous oxidized mercury in Western Maryland.

Authors:  Mark S Castro; Chris Moore; John Sherwell; Steve B Brooks
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 7.963

6.  An updated review of atmospheric mercury.

Authors:  Seth N Lyman; Irene Cheng; Lynne E Gratz; Peter Weiss-Penzias; Leiming Zhang
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 7.963

7.  An evaluation of direct measurement techniques for mercury dry deposition.

Authors:  Soon-Onn Lai; Jiaoyan Huang; Philip K Hopke; Thomas M Holsen
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2011-01-22       Impact factor: 7.963

8.  Effectiveness of Emission Controls to Reduce the Atmospheric Concentrations of Mercury.

Authors:  Mark S Castro; John Sherwell
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 9.028

Review 9.  Mercury toxicity and treatment: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Robin A Bernhoft
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2011-12-22

10.  Gaseous oxidized mercury dry deposition measurements in the southwestern USA: a comparison between Texas, eastern Oklahoma, and the Four Corners area.

Authors:  Mark E Sather; Shaibal Mukerjee; Kara L Allen; Luther Smith; Johnson Mathew; Clarence Jackson; Ryan Callison; Larry Scrapper; April Hathcoat; Jacque Adam; Danielle Keese; Philip Ketcher; Robert Brunette; Jason Karlstrom; Gerard Van der Jagt
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-04-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.