Jing Cai1,2, Yihui Ge1, Huichu Li1, Changyuan Yang1, Cong Liu1, Xia Meng1, Weidong Wang1, Can Niu3, Lena Kan4, Tamara Schikowski5, Beizhan Yan6, Steven N Chillrud6, Haidong Kan1, Li Jin7,8. 1. School of Public Health, Key Lab of Public Health Safety of the Ministry of Education and Key Lab of Health Technology Assessment of the Ministry of Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 2. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Meteorology and Health, Shanghai meteorological service, shanghai, China. 3. Key Laboratory of Medicinal Chemistry and Molecular Diagnosis, College of Public Health, Hebei University, Baoding, 071002, China. 4. School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, USA. 5. Leibniz Research Institute for Environmental Medicine, Düsseldorf, Germany. 6. Division of Geochemistry, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades, NY, USA. 7. State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering and MOE Key Laboratory of Contemporary Anthropology, School of Life Sciences and Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, China. 8. CMC Institute of Health Sciences, Taizhou, Jiangsu Province, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding spatial variation of air pollution is critical for public health assessments. Land Use Regression (LUR) models have been used increasingly for modeling small-scale spatial variation in air pollution concentrations. However, they have limited application in China due to the lack of spatially resolved data. OBJECTIVE: Based on purpose-designed monitoring networks, this study developed LUR models to predict fine particulate matter (PM2.5), black carbon (BC) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) exposure and to identify their potential outdoor-origin sources within an urban/rural region, using Taizhou, China as a case study. METHOD: Two one-week integrated samples were collected at 30 PM2.5 (BC) sites and 45 NO2 sites in each two distinct seasons. Samples of 1/3 of the sites were collected simultaneously. Annual adjusted average was calculated and regressed against pre-selected GIS-derived predictor variables in a multivariate regression model. RESULTS: LUR explained 65% of the spatial variability in PM2.5, 78% in BC and 73% in NO2. Mean (±Standard Deviation) of predicted PM2.5, BC and NO2 exposure levels were 48.3 (±6.3) μg/m3, 7.5 (±1.4) μg/m3 and 27.3 (±8.2) μg/m3, respectively. Weak spatial corrections (Pearson r = 0.05-0.25) among three pollutants were observed, indicating the presence of different sources. Regression results showed that PM2.5, BC and NO2 levels were positively associated with traffic variables. The former two also increased with farm land use; and higher NO2 levels were associated with larger industrial land use. The three pollutants were correlated with sources at a scale of ≤5 km and even smaller scales (100-700m) were found for BC and NO2. CONCLUSION: We concluded that based on a purpose-designed monitoring network, LUR model can be applied to predict PM2.5, NO2 and BC concentrations in urban/rural settings of China. Our findings highlighted important contributors to within-city heterogeneity in outdoor-generated exposure, and indicated traffic, industry and agriculture may significantly contribute to PM2.5, NO2 and BC concentrations.
BACKGROUND: Understanding spatial variation of air pollution is critical for public health assessments. Land Use Regression (LUR) models have been used increasingly for modeling small-scale spatial variation in air pollution concentrations. However, they have limited application in China due to the lack of spatially resolved data. OBJECTIVE: Based on purpose-designed monitoring networks, this study developed LUR models to predict fine particulate matter (PM2.5), black carbon (BC) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) exposure and to identify their potential outdoor-origin sources within an urban/rural region, using Taizhou, China as a case study. METHOD: Two one-week integrated samples were collected at 30 PM2.5 (BC) sites and 45 NO2 sites in each two distinct seasons. Samples of 1/3 of the sites were collected simultaneously. Annual adjusted average was calculated and regressed against pre-selected GIS-derived predictor variables in a multivariate regression model. RESULTS: LUR explained 65% of the spatial variability in PM2.5, 78% in BC and 73% in NO2. Mean (±Standard Deviation) of predicted PM2.5, BC and NO2 exposure levels were 48.3 (±6.3) μg/m3, 7.5 (±1.4) μg/m3 and 27.3 (±8.2) μg/m3, respectively. Weak spatial corrections (Pearson r = 0.05-0.25) among three pollutants were observed, indicating the presence of different sources. Regression results showed that PM2.5, BC and NO2 levels were positively associated with traffic variables. The former two also increased with farm land use; and higher NO2 levels were associated with larger industrial land use. The three pollutants were correlated with sources at a scale of ≤5 km and even smaller scales (100-700m) were found for BC and NO2. CONCLUSION: We concluded that based on a purpose-designed monitoring network, LUR model can be applied to predict PM2.5, NO2 and BC concentrations in urban/rural settings of China. Our findings highlighted important contributors to within-city heterogeneity in outdoor-generated exposure, and indicated traffic, industry and agriculture may significantly contribute to PM2.5, NO2 and BC concentrations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Air pollution; Exposure assessment; Land use regression model; Spatial variation
Authors: Marloes Eeftens; Rob Beelen; Kees de Hoogh; Tom Bellander; Giulia Cesaroni; Marta Cirach; Christophe Declercq; Audrius Dėdelė; Evi Dons; Audrey de Nazelle; Konstantina Dimakopoulou; Kirsten Eriksen; Grégoire Falq; Paul Fischer; Claudia Galassi; Regina Gražulevičienė; Joachim Heinrich; Barbara Hoffmann; Michael Jerrett; Dirk Keidel; Michal Korek; Timo Lanki; Sarah Lindley; Christian Madsen; Anna Mölter; Gizella Nádor; Mark Nieuwenhuijsen; Michael Nonnemacher; Xanthi Pedeli; Ole Raaschou-Nielsen; Evridiki Patelarou; Ulrich Quass; Andrea Ranzi; Christian Schindler; Morgane Stempfelet; Euripides Stephanou; Dorothea Sugiri; Ming-Yi Tsai; Tarja Yli-Tuomi; Mihály J Varró; Danielle Vienneau; Stephanie von Klot; Kathrin Wolf; Bert Brunekreef; Gerard Hoek Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2012-10-01 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: C Arden Pope; Richard T Burnett; Michael J Thun; Eugenia E Calle; Daniel Krewski; Kazuhiko Ito; George D Thurston Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-03-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ariel Spira-Cohen; Lung Chi Chen; Michaela Kendall; Ramona Lall; George D Thurston Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2011-01-07 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Whitney J Cowell; David C Bellinger; Brent A Coull; Chris Gennings; Robert O Wright; Rosalind J Wright Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.240