English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

PM2.5 was collected during a winter campaign at two southern Englandsites, urban background North Kensington (NK) and rural Harwell (HAR), inJanuary–February 2012. Multiple organic and inorganic source tracers wereanalysed and used in a Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model, which apportionedseven separate primary sources, that explained on average 53% (NK) and56% (HAR) of the organic carbon (OC), including traffic, woodsmoke, foodcooking, coal combustion, vegetative detritus, natural gas and dust/soil.With the addition of source tracers for secondary biogenic aerosol at the NKsite, 79% of organic carbon was accounted for. Secondary biogenic sourceswere represented by oxidation products of α-pinene and isoprene, butonly the former made a substantial contribution to OC. Particle sourcecontribution estimates for PM2.5 mass were obtained by the conversionof the OC estimates and combining with inorganic components ammoniumnitrate, ammonium sulfate and sea salt. Good mass closure was achieved with81% (92% with the addition of the secondary biogenic source) and83% of the PM2.5 mass explained at NK and HAR respectively, with theremainder being secondary organic matter. While the most important sourcesof OC are vehicle exhaust (21 and 16%) and woodsmoke (15 and28%) at NK and HAR respectively, food cooking emissions are alsosignificant, particularly at the urban NK site (11% of OC), in additionto the secondary biogenic source, only measured at NK, which representedabout 26%. In comparison, the major source components for PM2.5 atNK and HAR are inorganic ammonium salts (51 and 56%), vehicle exhaustemissions (8 and 6%), secondary biogenic (10% measured at NKonly), woodsmoke (4 and 7%) and sea salt (7 and 8%), whereasfood cooking (4 and 1%) showed relatively smaller contributions toPM2.5. Results from the CMB model were compared with sourcecontribution estimates derived from the AMS-PMF method. The overall mass oforganic matter accounted for is rather similar for the two methods. However,appreciably different concentrations were calculated for the individualprimary organic matter contributions, although for most source categoriesthe CMB and AMS-PMF results were highly correlated (r2 = 0.69–0.91).In comparison with the CMB model, the AMS appears to overestimate thebiomass burning/coal and food cooking sources by a factor of around 1.5 to 2while estimates of the traffic source are rather similar for each model. Thelargest divergence is in the primary/secondary organic matter split, withthe AMS estimating an appreciably smaller secondary component. Possiblereasons for these discrepancies are discussed, but despite these substantialdivergences, the strong correlation of the two methods gives some confidencein their application

Receptor modelling of fine particles in southern England using CMB including comparison with AMS-PMF factors