Abstract. Despite the progress made in the latest decades, air pollution is still the
primary environmental cause of premature death in Europe. The urban
population risks more likely to suffer to pollution related to high
concentrations of air pollutants, such as in particulate matter smaller than
10 µm (PM10). Since the composition of these particulates varies
with space and time, the understanding of the origin is essential to
determine the most efficient control strategies. A source contribution calculation allows us to provide such information and
thus to determine the geographical location of the sources (e.g. city or
country) responsible for the air pollution episodes. In this study, the
calculations provided by the regional European Monitoring and Evaluation
Programme/Meteorological Synthesizing Centre – West (EMEP/MSC-W) rv4.15 model in a forecast
mode, with a 0.25∘ longitude × 0.125∘ latitude
resolution, and based on a scenario approach, have been explored. To do so,
the work has focused on event occurring between 1 and 9 December 2016.
This source contribution calculation aims at quantifying over 34 European
cities, the “city” contribution of these PM10, i.e. from the city
itself, on an hourly basis. Since the methodology used in the model is based
on reduced anthropogenic emissions, compared to a reference run, the choice
of the percentage in the reductions has been tested by using three different
values (5 %, 15 %, and 50 %). The definition of the “city”
contribution, and thus the definition of the area defining the cities is
also an important parameter. The impact of the definition of these urban
areas, for the studied cities, was investigated (i.e. one model grid cell, nine
grid cells and the grid cells covering the definition given by the global
administrative area – GADM). Using a 15 % reduction in the emission and larger cities for
our source contribution calculation (e.g. nine grid cells and GADM) helps to
reduce the non-linearity in the concentration changes. This non-linearity is
observed in the mismatch between the total concentration and the sum of the
concentrations from different calculated sources. When this non-linearity is
observed, it impacts the NO3-, NH4+, and H2O
concentrations. However, the mean non-linearity represents only less than
2 % of the total modelled PM10 calculated by the system. During the studied episode, it was found that 20 % of the surface
predicted PM10 had been from the “city”, essentially composed of
primary components. In total, 60 % of the hourly PM10 concentrations predicted
by the model came from the countries in the regional domain, and they were
essentially composed of NO3- (by ∼ 35 %). The two
other secondary inorganic aerosols are also important components of this
“rest of Europe” contribution, since SO42- and NH4+
represent together almost 30 % of this contribution. The rest of the
PM10 was mainly due to natural sources. It was also shown that the
central European cities were mainly impacted by the surrounding countries
while the cities located a bit away from the rest of the other European
countries (e.g. Oslo and Lisbon) had larger “city” contributions. The
usefulness of the forecasting tool has also been illustrated with an example
in Paris, since the system has been able to predict the primary sources of a
local polluted event on 1–2 December 2016, as documented by local
authorities.
FEATURES OF TECHNOGENIC RADIONUCLIDES IN PRIVATE SECTOR OF SEMEY TOWN
