2021
DOI: 10.1039/d0fd00095g
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An evaluation of source apportionment of fine OC and PM2.5by multiple methods: APHH-Beijing campaigns as a case study

Abstract: This study aims to critically evaluate the source apportionment of fine particles by multiple receptor modelling approaches, including carbon mass balance modelling of filter-based Radiocarbon (14C) data, Chemical Mass Balance...

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, difficulties have been reported when using AMS datasets to separate cooking from other source emissions (Crippa et al, 2014;Mohr et al, 2009;Xu et al, 2015). Therefore, in order to minimise the uncertainties resulting from AMS source apportionment linked to cooking emissions, the development of new source emissions profiles for cooking activities to be used in the CMB method is essential (Dall'Osto et al, 2015;Reyes-Villegas et al, 2018;Xu et al, 2021;Yin et al, 2015). It must be taken into account that the emission profiles obtained with continuous instruments, such as AMS, cannot be used as input to source apportionment models when they are applied to long-term environmental databases based on the collection of PM on filters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, difficulties have been reported when using AMS datasets to separate cooking from other source emissions (Crippa et al, 2014;Mohr et al, 2009;Xu et al, 2015). Therefore, in order to minimise the uncertainties resulting from AMS source apportionment linked to cooking emissions, the development of new source emissions profiles for cooking activities to be used in the CMB method is essential (Dall'Osto et al, 2015;Reyes-Villegas et al, 2018;Xu et al, 2021;Yin et al, 2015). It must be taken into account that the emission profiles obtained with continuous instruments, such as AMS, cannot be used as input to source apportionment models when they are applied to long-term environmental databases based on the collection of PM on filters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The time series of CCOC-CMB and CCOC-AMS in Fig. 8 shows a similar trend with a relatively good correlation of R 2 = 0.71, but coal combustion estimated by the CMB model was consistently higher than by AMS-PMF probably because AMS-PMF only resolved the sources of NR-PM 1 , and some coal combustion particles are larger (Xu et al, 2011). The correlation coefficients (R 2 ) of CCOC-AMS with Cl − and NR-Cl − were 0.49 and 0.65, respectively, in the winter data.…”
Section: Comparison With Source Apportionment Results From Ams-pmfmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Six OA factors were identified including fossil-fuel-related OA (FFOA), cooking OA (COA), biomass burning OA (BBOA), oxidized primary OA (OPOA), oxygenated OA (OOA), and aqueous-phase OOA (aqOOA). Detailed information on the processing of HR-AMS data can be found in a related paper during the same campaign (Xu et al, 2019).…”
Section: Ams Data Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%