Asian Journal of Atmospheric Environment

Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment (한국대기환경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Source Apportionment of PM2.5 Using PMF2 and EPA PMF Version 2

  • Hwang, In-Jo (Department of Environmental Engineering, Daegu University) ;
  • Hopke, Philip K. (Department of Chemical Engineering, Clarkson University)
  • Received : 2010.09.29
  • Accepted : 2011.03.30
  • Published : 2011.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The positive matrix factorization (PMF2) and multilinear engine (ME2) models have been shown to be powerful environmental analysis techniques and have been successfully applied to the assessment of ambient particulate matter (PM) source contributions. Because these models are difficult to apply practically, the US EPA developed a more user-friendly version of the PMF. The initial version of the EPA PMF model does not provide any rotational capabilities; for this reason, the model was upgraded to include rotational functions in the EPA PMF ver. 2.0. In this study, PMF and EPA PMF modeling identified ten particulate matter sources including secondary sulfate I, vehicle gasoline, secondary sulfate II, secondary nitrate, secondary sulfate III, incinerators, aged sea salt, airborne soil particles, oil combustion, and diesel emissions. All of the source profiles determined by the two models showed excellent agreement. The calculated average concentrations of $PM_{2.5}$ were consistent between the PMF2 and EPA PMF ($17.94{\pm}0.30{\mu}g/m^3$ and $17.94{\pm}0.30\;{\mu}g/m^3$, respectively). Also, each set of estimated source contributions of the PMF2 and EPA PMF showed good agreement. The results from the new EPA PMF version applying rotational functions were consistent with those of PMF2. Therefore, the updated version of EPA PMF with rotational capabilities will provide more reasonable solutions compared with those of PMF2 and can be more widely applied to air quality management.

Keywords

References

  1. Alander, T., Antikainen, E., Raunemaa, T., Elonen, E., Rautiola, A., Torkkell, K. (2005) Particle emissions from a small two-stroke engine: Effects of fuel, lubricating oil, and exhaust aftertreatment on particle characteristics. Aerosol Science and Technology 39, 151-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/027868290910224
  2. Begum, B.A., Hopke, P.K., Zhao, W. (2005) Source identification of fine particles in Washington, DC, by expended factor analysis modeling. Environmental Science and Technology 39, 1129-1137. https://doi.org/10.1021/es049804v
  3. Buset, K.C., Evans, G.J., Leaitch, W.R., Brook, J.R., Toom-Sauntry, D. (2006) Use of advanced receptor modeling for analysis of an intensive 5-week aerosol sampling campaign. Atmospheric Environment 40, S482-S499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.12.074
  4. Chow, J.C., Watson, J.G., Crow, D., Lowenthal, D.H. (2001) Comparison of IMPROVE and NIOSH carbon measurements. Aerosol Science and Technology 34, 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820119073
  5. Chueinta, W., Hopke, P.K., Paatero, P. (2004) Multilinear model for spatial pattern analysis of the measurement of haze and visual effects project. Environmental Science and Technology 38, 544-554. https://doi.org/10.1021/es026356n
  6. Eberly, S.I. (2005) EPA PMF 1.1 user's guide. US Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.
  7. Hopke, P.K. (1985) Receptor Modeling in Environmental Chemistry. John Willy & Sons, New York.
  8. Hopke, P.K. (2000) A guide to positive matrix factorization, in workshop on UNMIX and PMF as applied to PM2.5. Edited by Willis, R.D., RTP, NC, EPA 600/A-00/048.
  9. Hopke, P.K., Paatero, P., Eberly, S.I. (2006) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency version of positive matrix factorization. In proceeding of 7th International Aerosol Conference, St. Paul, MN, Sep., pp. 566-567.
  10. Hwang, I.J., Hopke, P.K. (2006) Comparison of source apportionments of $PM_{2.5}$ at two San Jose STN sites. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 56, 1287-1300. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2006.10464586
  11. Hwang, I.J., Hopke, P.K. (2007) Estimation of source apportionment and potential source locations of $PM_{2.5}$ at a west costal IMPROVE site. Atmospheric Environment 41, 506-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.08.043
  12. Kim, E., Hopke, P.K. (2004) Source apportionment of fine particles in Washington, DC, utilizing temperature-resolved carbon fractions. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 54, 773-785. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2004.10470948
  13. Kim, E., Hopke, P.K. (2006) Characterization of fine particle sources in the Great Smoky Mountains area. Science of the Total Environment 368, 781-794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.02.048
  14. Kim, E., Hopke, P.K. (2007) Source identifications of airborne fine particles using positive matrix factorization and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency positive matrix factorization. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 57(7), 811-819. https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.57.7.811
  15. Kim, E., Hopke, P.K., Edgerton, E.S. (2004) Improving source identification of Atlanta aerosol using temperature resolved carbon fractions in positive matrix factorization. Atmospheric Environment 38, 3349-3362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.03.012
  16. Kim, E., Hopke, P.K., Larson, T.V., Maykut, N.N., Lewtas, J. (2004a) Factor analysis of Seattle fine particles. Aerosol Science and Technology 38, 724-738. https://doi.org/10.1080/02786820490490119
  17. Lee, E., Chan, C.K., Paatero, P. (1999) Application of positive matrix factorization in source apportionment of particulate pollutants in Hong Kong. Atmospheric Environment 33, 3201-3212. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00113-2
  18. Liu, D., Wenzel, R.J., Prather, K.A. (2003) Aerosol timeof-flight mass spectrometry during the Atlanta Supersite experiment: 1. Measurements. Journal of Geophysical Research 108(D7), 8426. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001562
  19. Ogulei, D., Hopke, P.K., Zhou, L., Paatero, P., Park, S.S., Ondov, J.M. (2005) Receptor modeling for multiple time resolved species: The Baltimore supersite. Atmospheric Environment 39, 3751-3762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.03.012
  20. Paatero, P. (1997) Least squares formulation of robust nonnegative factor analysis. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 37, 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7439(96)00044-5
  21. Paatero, P. (1999) The multilinear engine-a table-driven least squares program for solving multilinear problems, including the n-way parallel factor analysis model. Journal of Computational Graphical Statistics 8, 854-888. https://doi.org/10.2307/1390831
  22. Paatero, P. (2007) End User's Guide to Multilinear Engine Applications. University of Helsinki.
  23. Paatero, P. (2007a) Extended factor analysis, enhanced with error estimation of composition factors and with PMF2-style FPEAK rotations. University of Helsinki.
  24. Paatero, P., Hopke, P.K. (2009) Rotational tools for factor analytic models. Journal of Chemometrics 23, 91-100. https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.1197
  25. Poirot, R.L., Wishinski, P.R., Hopke, P.K., Polissar, A.V. (2001) Comparative application of multiple receptor methods to identify aerosol sources in Northren Vermont. Environmental Science and Technology 35, 4622-4636. https://doi.org/10.1021/es010588p
  26. Qin, Y., Oduyemi, K. (2003) Atmospheric aerosol source identification and estimates of source contributions to air pollution in Dundee, UK. Atmospheric Environment 37, 1799-1809. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00078-5
  27. Ramadan, Z., Eickhout, B., Song, X.H., Buydens, L.M.C., Hopke, P.K. (2003) Comparison of positive matrix factorization and multilinear engine for the source apportionment of particulate pollutants. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 66, 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7439(02)00160-0
  28. Seinfeld, J.H., Pandis, S.N. (1998) Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, from Air Pollution to Climate Change. Wiley, New York.
  29. Song, X.H., Polissar, A.V., Hopke, P.K. (2001) Source of fine particle composition in the northeastern US. Atmospheric Environment 35, 5277-5286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(01)00338-7
  30. Wåhlin, P., Berkowicz, R., Palmgren, F. (2006) Characterisation of traffic-generated particulate matter in Copenhagen. Atmospheric Environment 40, 2151-2159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.11.049
  31. Xie, Y.L., Hopke, P.K., Paatero, P., Barrie, L.A., Li, S.M. (1999) Identification of source nature and seasonal variations of Arctic aerosol by the multilinear engine. Atmospheric Environment 33, 2549-2562. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00196-4
  32. Yli-Tuomi, T., Hopke, P.K., Paatero, P., Basunia, M.S., Landsberger, S., Viisanen, Y., Paatero, J. (2003) Atmospheric aerosol over Finnish Arctic: source analysis by the multilinear engine and the potential source contribution function. Atmospheric Environment 37, 4381-4392. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(03)00569-7
  33. Zhao, W., Hopke, P.K. (2006) Source identification for fine aerosols in Mammoth Cave National Park. Atmospheric Research 80, 309-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2005.10.002
  34. Zhou, L., Hopke, P.K., Paatero, P., Ondov, J.M., Pancras, J.P., Pekney, N.J., Davidson, C.I. (2004) Advanced factor analysis for multiple time resolution aerosol composition data. Atmospheric Environment 38, 4909-4920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.05.040

Cited by

  1. in Seoul Metropolitan Area in 2010 vol.27, pp.6, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5572/KOSAE.2011.27.6.711
  2. in Seoul, Korea vol.8, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5572/ajae.2014.8.3.115
  3. 강하분진의 침적 특성파악을 위한 통계학적 해석과 공간분포 분석 vol.28, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5572/kosae.2012.28.3.294
  4. Chemical Characteristics of Ambient PM2.5 at Industrial Complex in Gyeongbuk Area vol.35, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5572/kosae.2019.35.3.336
  5. Application of Positive Matrix Factorization Receptor Model for Source Identification of PM10 in the City of Sofia, Bulgaria vol.11, pp.9, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11090890
  6. Estimation of Source Apportionment for Filter-based PM2.5 Data using the EPA-PMF Model at Air Pollution Monitoring Supersites vol.36, pp.5, 2011, https://doi.org/10.5572/kosae.2020.36.5.620
  7. Source Apportionment of Aerosol at a Coastal Site and Relationships with Precipitation Chemistry: A Case Study over the Southeast United States vol.11, pp.11, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11111212