Literature DB >> 34171801

Improving emissions inputs via mobile measurements to estimate fine-scale Black Carbon monthly concentrations through geostatistical space-time data fusion.

Alejandro Valencia1, Saravanan Arunachalam2, Vlad Isakov3, Brian Naess4, Marc Serre1.   

Abstract

Isolating air pollution sources in a complex transportation environment to quantify their contribution is challenging, particularly with sparse stationary measurements. Mobile measurements can add finer spatial resolution to support source apportionment, but they exhibit limitations when characterizing long term concentrations. Dispersion models can help overcome these limitations. However, they are only as reliable as their input emissions inventories. Herein, we developed an innovative method to revise emissions through inverse modeling and improve dispersion modeling predictions using stationary/mobile measurements. One specific revision estimated an adjustment factor of ~306 for warehouse emissions, indicating a significant underestimation of our initial estimates. This revised emission rate scaled up nationally would correspond to ~3.5% of the total Black Carbon emissions in the U.S. Nevertheless, domain-specific revisions only contribute to a 4% increase of area source emissions while improving R2 from monthly estimates at fixed sites by 38%. After revising emissions through inverse dispersion modeling, we combine this model with stationary/mobile measurements through Bayesian Maximum Entropy (I-DISP BME) to produce temporally coarse yet spatially fine data fusion. We compare this novel data fusion approach to BME using only measurements (Flat BME). A 10-fold conventional cross-validation (representative of months with mobile measurements) shows that all BME methods have R2 values that range from 0.787 to 0.798. A 2-fold cross-validation (representative of months with no mobile measurements) shows that the R2 for I-DISP BME increases by a factor 90 when compared to Flat BME. Furthermore, not only is our novel I-DISP BME method more accurate than the classic Flat BME method, but the area it detects as highly exposed can be up to 5 times larger than that detected by the less accurate Flat BME method.
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Black Carbon; Community-scale air quality assessment; Fine-scale dispersion modeling; Geospatial data fusion; Inverse modeling; Railyard emissions; Warehouse emissions

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34171801      PMCID: PMC8457356          DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148378

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  26 in total

1.  Traffic and meteorological impacts on near-road air quality: summary of methods and trends from the Raleigh Near-Road Study.

Authors:  Richard Baldauf; Eben Thoma; Michael Hays; Richard Shores; John Kinsey; Brian Gullett; Sue Kimbrough; Vlad Isakov; Thomas Long; Richard Snow; Andrey Khlystov; Jason Weinstein; Fu-Lin Chen; Robert Seila; David Olson; Ian Gilmour; Seung-Hyun Cho; Nealson Watkins; Patricia Rowley; John Bang
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.235

2.  Mapping urban air quality in near real-time using observations from low-cost sensors and model information.

Authors:  Philipp Schneider; Nuria Castell; Matthias Vogt; Franck R Dauge; William A Lahoz; Alena Bartonova
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 9.621

3.  Assessment of source contribution to air quality in an urban area close to a harbor: Case-study in Porto, Portugal.

Authors:  Sandra Sorte; Saravanan Arunachalam; Brian Naess; Catherine Seppanen; Vera Rodrigues; Alejandro Valencia; Carlos Borrego; Alexandra Monteiro
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 7.963

4.  Satellite-Based NO2 and Model Validation in a National Prediction Model Based on Universal Kriging and Land-Use Regression.

Authors:  Michael T Young; Matthew J Bechle; Paul D Sampson; Adam A Szpiro; Julian D Marshall; Lianne Sheppard; Joel D Kaufman
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Fine-scale spatiotemporal air pollution analysis using mobile monitors on Google Street View vehicles.

Authors:  Yawen Guan; Margaret C Johnson; Matthias Katzfuss; Elizabeth Mannshardt; Kyle P Messier; Brian J Reich; Joon Jin Song
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 5.033

6.  Development and Comparison of Air Pollution Exposure Surfaces Derived from On-Road Mobile Monitoring and Short-Term Stationary Sidewalk Measurements.

Authors:  Laura Minet; Rick Liu; Marie-France Valois; Junshi Xu; Scott Weichenthal; Marianne Hatzopoulou
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 9.028

7.  Land Use Regression Models of On-Road Particulate Air Pollution (Particle Number, Black Carbon, PM2.5, Particle Size) Using Mobile Monitoring.

Authors:  Steve Hankey; Julian D Marshall
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2015-07-20       Impact factor: 9.028

8.  A web-based screening tool for near-port air quality assessments.

Authors:  Vlad Isakov; Timothy M Barzyk; Elizabeth R Smith; Saravanan Arunachalam; Brian Naess; Akula Venkatram
Journal:  Environ Model Softw       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 5.288

9.  Predicting polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons using a mass fraction approach in a geostatistical framework across North Carolina.

Authors:  Jeanette M Reyes; Heidi F Hubbard; Matthew A Stiegel; Joachim D Pleil; Marc L Serre
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 5.563

10.  Using Low-Cost Air Quality Sensor Networks to Improve the Spatial and Temporal Resolution of Concentration Maps.

Authors:  Faraz Enayati Ahangar; Frank R Freedman; Akula Venkatram
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.