Assessment of source apportionment by Positive Matrix Factorization analysis on fine and coarse urban aerosol size fractions
This study was conducted in order to investigate the differences observed in source profiles in the urban environment, when chemical composition parameters from different aerosol size fractions are subjected to factor analysis. Source apportionment was performed in an urban area where representative types of emission sources are present. PM10 and PM2 samples were collected within the Athens Metropolitan area and analysed for trace elements, inorganic ions and black carbon. Analysis by two-way and three-way Positive Matrix Factorization was performed, in order to resolve sources from data obtained for the fine and coarse aerosol fractions. A difference was observed: seven factors describe the best solution in PMF3 while six factors in PMF2. Six factors derived from PMF3 analysis correspond to those described by the PMF2 solution for the fine and coarse particles separately. These sources were attributed to road dust, marine aerosol, soil, motor vehicles, biomass burning, and oil combustion. The additional source resolved by PMF3 was attributed to a different type of road dust. Combustion sources (oil combustion and biomass burning) were correctly attributed by PMF3 solely to the fine fraction and the soil source to the coarse fraction. However, a motor vehicle's contribution to the coarse fraction was found only by three-way PMF. When PMF2 was employed in PM10 concentrations the optimum solution included six factors. Four source profiles corresponded to the previously identified as vehicles, road dust, biomass burning and marine aerosol, while two could not be clearly identified. Source apportionment by PMF2 analysis based solely on PM10 aerosol composition data, yielded unclear results, compared to results from PMF2 and PMF3 analyses on fine and coarse aerosol composition data. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | artículo biblioteca |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2009-07-01
|
| Subjects: | Urban aerosol, Athens Greece, Emission sources, Fine and coarse aerosol fractions, PMF, Receptor modeling, Source apportionment, Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable, |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/344640 https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/66349098792 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This study was conducted in order to investigate the differences observed in source profiles in the urban environment, when chemical composition parameters from different aerosol size fractions are subjected to factor analysis. Source apportionment was performed in an urban area where representative types of emission sources are present. PM10 and PM2 samples were collected within the Athens Metropolitan area and analysed for trace elements, inorganic ions and black carbon. Analysis by two-way and three-way Positive Matrix Factorization was performed, in order to resolve sources from data obtained for the fine and coarse aerosol fractions. A difference was observed: seven factors describe the best solution in PMF3 while six factors in PMF2. Six factors derived from PMF3 analysis correspond to those described by the PMF2 solution for the fine and coarse particles separately. These sources were attributed to road dust, marine aerosol, soil, motor vehicles, biomass burning, and oil combustion. The additional source resolved by PMF3 was attributed to a different type of road dust. Combustion sources (oil combustion and biomass burning) were correctly attributed by PMF3 solely to the fine fraction and the soil source to the coarse fraction. However, a motor vehicle's contribution to the coarse fraction was found only by three-way PMF. When PMF2 was employed in PM10 concentrations the optimum solution included six factors. Four source profiles corresponded to the previously identified as vehicles, road dust, biomass burning and marine aerosol, while two could not be clearly identified. Source apportionment by PMF2 analysis based solely on PM10 aerosol composition data, yielded unclear results, compared to results from PMF2 and PMF3 analyses on fine and coarse aerosol composition data. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. |
|---|