Suppr超能文献

移动化石燃料和生物质燃烧源的颗粒物排放因子。

Particulate emission factors for mobile fossil fuel and biomass combustion sources.

机构信息

Desert Research Institute, 2215 Raggio Parkway, Reno, NV 89512, United States.

出版信息

Sci Total Environ. 2011 May 15;409(12):2384-96. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.02.041. Epub 2011 Apr 1.

Abstract

PM emission factors (EFs) for gasoline- and diesel-fueled vehicles and biomass combustion were measured in several recent studies. In the Gas/Diesel Split Study (GD-Split), PM(2.5) EFs for heavy-duty diesel vehicles (HDDV) ranged from 0.2 to ~2 g/mile and increased with vehicle age. EFs for HDDV estimated with the U.S. EPA MOBILE 6.2 and California Air Resources Board (ARB) EMFAC2007 models correlated well with measured values. PM(2.5) EFs measured for gasoline vehicles were ~two orders of magnitude lower than those for HDDV and did not correlate with model estimates. In the Kansas City Study, PM(2.5) EFs for gasoline-powered vehicles (e.g., passenger cars and light trucks) were generally <0.03 g/mile and were higher in winter than summer. EMFAC2007 reported higher PM(2.5) EFs than MOBILE 6.2 during winter, but not during summer, and neither model captured the variability of the measured EFs. Total PM EFs for heavy-duty diesel military vehicles ranged from 0.18±0.03 and 1.20±0.12 g/kg fuel, corresponding to 0.3 and 2 g/mile, respectively. These values are comparable to those of on-road HDDV. EFs for biomass burning measured during the Fire Laboratory at Missoula Experiment (FLAME) were compared with EFs from the ARB Emission Estimation System (EES) model. The highest PM(2.5) EFs (76.8±37.5 g/kg) were measured for wet (>50% moisture content) Ponderosa Pine needles. EFs were generally <20 g/kg when moisture content was <20%. The EES model agreed with measured EFs for fuels with low moisture content but underestimated measured EFs for fuel with moisture content >40%. Average EFs for dry chamise, rice straw, and dry grass were within a factor of three of values adopted by ARB in California's San Joaquin Valley (SJV). Discrepancies between measured and modeled emission factors suggest that there may be important uncertainties in current PM(2.5) emission inventories.

摘要

在最近的几项研究中,测量了汽油和柴油燃料车辆以及生物质燃烧的 PM 排放因子 (EF)。在 Gas/Diesel Split Study (GD-Split) 中,重型柴油车辆 (HDDV) 的 PM(2.5)EF 范围为 0.2 至 ~2 g/英里,并随车辆年龄的增长而增加。使用美国 EPA MOBILE 6.2 和加利福尼亚空气资源委员会 (ARB) EMFAC2007 模型估算的 HDDV 的 EF 与实测值相关性良好。测量的汽油车辆的 PM(2.5)EF 低 ~2 个数量级,与模型估算值不相关。在堪萨斯城研究中,汽油动力车辆(例如乘用车和轻型卡车)的 PM(2.5)EF 通常 <0.03 g/英里,冬季高于夏季。冬季 EMFAC2007 报告的 PM(2.5)EF 高于 MOBILE 6.2,但夏季并非如此,而且两个模型都无法捕捉到实测 EF 的可变性。重型柴油军用车辆的总 PM EF 范围为 0.18±0.03 和 1.20±0.12 g/kg 燃料,分别对应 0.3 和 2 g/英里。这些值与道路上的 HDDV 相当。在 Missoula Experiment 的 Fire Laboratory at Missoula Experiment (FLAME) 测量的生物质燃烧 EF 与 ARB Emission Estimation System (EES) 模型的 EF 进行了比较。湿 (>50%水分含量) 狐尾松针叶的 PM(2.5)EF 最高 (76.8±37.5 g/kg)。当水分含量 <20%时,EF 通常 <20 g/kg。EES 模型与低水分含量燃料的实测 EF 一致,但低估了水分含量 >40%的燃料的实测 EF。干 Chamise、稻秸和干草的平均 EF 与 ARB 在加利福尼亚圣华金谷 (SJV) 采用的值相差一个数量级。实测和模型化排放因子之间的差异表明,当前 PM(2.5)排放清单可能存在重要的不确定性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验