Loading…

Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site

Carbonaceous aerosol is a major contributor to the total aerosol load and being monitored by diverse measurement approaches. Here, 10 years (2005–2015) of continuous carbonaceous aerosol measurements collected at the Centre of Atmospheric Research Experiments (CARE) in Egbert, Ontario, Canada, on qu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Atmospheric measurement techniques 2019-08, Vol.12 (8), p.4543-4560
Main Authors: Chan, Tak W, Huang, Lin, Banwait, Kulbir, Zhang, Wendy, Ernst, Darrell, Wang, Xiaoliang, Watson, John G, Chow, Judith C, Green, Mark, Czimczik, Claudia I, Santos, Guaciara M, Sharma, Sangeeta, Jones, Keith
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693
container_end_page 4560
container_issue 8
container_start_page 4543
container_title Atmospheric measurement techniques
container_volume 12
creator Chan, Tak W
Huang, Lin
Banwait, Kulbir
Zhang, Wendy
Ernst, Darrell
Wang, Xiaoliang
Watson, John G
Chow, Judith C
Green, Mark
Czimczik, Claudia I
Santos, Guaciara M
Sharma, Sangeeta
Jones, Keith
description Carbonaceous aerosol is a major contributor to the total aerosol load and being monitored by diverse measurement approaches. Here, 10 years (2005–2015) of continuous carbonaceous aerosol measurements collected at the Centre of Atmospheric Research Experiments (CARE) in Egbert, Ontario, Canada, on quartz-fiber filters by three independent networks (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments, IMPROVE; Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network, CAPMoN; and Canadian Aerosol Baseline Measurement, CABM) were compared. Specifically, the study evaluated how differences in sample collection and analysis affected the concentrations of total carbon (TC), organic carbon (OC), and elemental carbon (EC). Results show that different carbonaceous fractions measured by various networks were consistent and comparable in general among the three networks over the 10-year period, even with different sampling systems/frequencies, analytical protocols, and artifact corrections. The CAPMoN TC, OC, and EC obtained from the DRI model 2001 thermal–optical carbon analyzer following the IMPROVE-TOR protocol (denoted as DRI-TOR) method were lower than those determined from the IMPROVE_A TOR method by 17 %, 14 %, and 18 %, respectively. When using transmittance for charring correction, the corresponding carbonaceous fractions obtained from the Sunset-TOT were lower by as much as 30 %, 15 %, and 75 %, respectively. In comparison, the CABM TC, OC, and EC obtained from a thermal method, EnCan-Total-900 (ECT9), were higher than the corresponding fractions from IMPROVE_A TOR by 20 %–30 %, 0 %–15 %, and 60 %–80 %, respectively. Ambient OC and EC concentrations were found to increase when ambient temperature exceeded 10 ∘C. These increased ambient concentrations of OC during summer were possibly attributed to secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation and forest fire emissions, while elevated EC concentrations were potentially influenced by forest fire emissions and increased vehicle emissions. Results also show that the pyrolyzed organic carbon (POC) obtained from the ECT9 protocol could provide additional information on SOA although more research is still needed.
doi_str_mv 10.5194/amt-12-4543-2019
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_4d999089048a46eca1819ade75e1a2c5</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A597461785</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_4d999089048a46eca1819ade75e1a2c5</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A597461785</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkk2LFDEQhhtRcF29ewx48tBr0p10J8dh8WNgUfDjHKrTld6MnWRMMqz-E3-umR1RB6QOFSpvPcULb9M8Z_RKMMVfgS8t61oueN92lKkHzQWTw9hKweXDf96Pmyc57ygdOBu7i-bnNhRMrYl-D8nlGEi0BFf0GAqsBMJMYlogOEMMpKn-e8iZeIR8SPeqTGyKnpTbhEjex1RuycZjcgYCCVBcDJWzxrC09ZAnPgZXYnJhIQHLXUxfM4FCgJjYrtFAwZlkV_Bp88jCmvHZ737ZfHnz-vP1u_bmw9vt9eamNVzSarm3VAqUMxPzOAs72V6akfFaKGZVG7Mw8c52XI449VM_KtrNOHFrhnFQ_WWzPXHnCDu9T85D-qEjOH0_qOY1pOLMiprPSikqFeUS-IAGmGQKZhwFMuiMqKwXJ9Y-xW8HzEXv4iFV_1l33agGRZno_6oWqFAXbCwJjHfZ6I1QIx_YKI-sq_-oas3onYkBravzs4WXZwtVU_B7WeCQs95--niupSetSTHnhPaPcUb1MU66xkmzTh_jpI9x6n8BQOW-MA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2279690153</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><creator>Chan, Tak W ; Huang, Lin ; Banwait, Kulbir ; Zhang, Wendy ; Ernst, Darrell ; Wang, Xiaoliang ; Watson, John G ; Chow, Judith C ; Green, Mark ; Czimczik, Claudia I ; Santos, Guaciara M ; Sharma, Sangeeta ; Jones, Keith</creator><creatorcontrib>Chan, Tak W ; Huang, Lin ; Banwait, Kulbir ; Zhang, Wendy ; Ernst, Darrell ; Wang, Xiaoliang ; Watson, John G ; Chow, Judith C ; Green, Mark ; Czimczik, Claudia I ; Santos, Guaciara M ; Sharma, Sangeeta ; Jones, Keith</creatorcontrib><description>Carbonaceous aerosol is a major contributor to the total aerosol load and being monitored by diverse measurement approaches. Here, 10 years (2005–2015) of continuous carbonaceous aerosol measurements collected at the Centre of Atmospheric Research Experiments (CARE) in Egbert, Ontario, Canada, on quartz-fiber filters by three independent networks (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments, IMPROVE; Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network, CAPMoN; and Canadian Aerosol Baseline Measurement, CABM) were compared. Specifically, the study evaluated how differences in sample collection and analysis affected the concentrations of total carbon (TC), organic carbon (OC), and elemental carbon (EC). Results show that different carbonaceous fractions measured by various networks were consistent and comparable in general among the three networks over the 10-year period, even with different sampling systems/frequencies, analytical protocols, and artifact corrections. The CAPMoN TC, OC, and EC obtained from the DRI model 2001 thermal–optical carbon analyzer following the IMPROVE-TOR protocol (denoted as DRI-TOR) method were lower than those determined from the IMPROVE_A TOR method by 17 %, 14 %, and 18 %, respectively. When using transmittance for charring correction, the corresponding carbonaceous fractions obtained from the Sunset-TOT were lower by as much as 30 %, 15 %, and 75 %, respectively. In comparison, the CABM TC, OC, and EC obtained from a thermal method, EnCan-Total-900 (ECT9), were higher than the corresponding fractions from IMPROVE_A TOR by 20 %–30 %, 0 %–15 %, and 60 %–80 %, respectively. Ambient OC and EC concentrations were found to increase when ambient temperature exceeded 10 ∘C. These increased ambient concentrations of OC during summer were possibly attributed to secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation and forest fire emissions, while elevated EC concentrations were potentially influenced by forest fire emissions and increased vehicle emissions. Results also show that the pyrolyzed organic carbon (POC) obtained from the ECT9 protocol could provide additional information on SOA although more research is still needed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1867-8548</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1867-1381</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1867-8548</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5194/amt-12-4543-2019</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Katlenburg-Lindau: Copernicus GmbH</publisher><subject>Aerosol measurements ; Aerosols ; Air monitoring ; Air pollution ; Air quality monitoring stations ; Ambient temperature ; Atmospheric research ; Carbon ; Chemical properties ; Comparative analysis ; Composition ; Corrections ; Fires ; Forest fires ; Location ; Measurement ; Networks ; Organic carbon ; Particulate organic carbon ; Precipitation ; Precipitation monitoring ; Protocol (computers) ; Secondary aerosols ; Sunset ; Vehicle emissions</subject><ispartof>Atmospheric measurement techniques, 2019-08, Vol.12 (8), p.4543-4560</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Copernicus GmbH</rights><rights>2019. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2345-7308 ; 0000-0002-8200-4632 ; 0000-0002-1752-6899 ; 0000-0003-4706-0556</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2279690153/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2279690153?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,861,2096,25734,27905,27906,36993,44571,74875</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chan, Tak W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Lin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banwait, Kulbir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ernst, Darrell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Xiaoliang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watson, John G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chow, Judith C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Czimczik, Claudia I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santos, Guaciara M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Sangeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Keith</creatorcontrib><title>Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site</title><title>Atmospheric measurement techniques</title><description>Carbonaceous aerosol is a major contributor to the total aerosol load and being monitored by diverse measurement approaches. Here, 10 years (2005–2015) of continuous carbonaceous aerosol measurements collected at the Centre of Atmospheric Research Experiments (CARE) in Egbert, Ontario, Canada, on quartz-fiber filters by three independent networks (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments, IMPROVE; Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network, CAPMoN; and Canadian Aerosol Baseline Measurement, CABM) were compared. Specifically, the study evaluated how differences in sample collection and analysis affected the concentrations of total carbon (TC), organic carbon (OC), and elemental carbon (EC). Results show that different carbonaceous fractions measured by various networks were consistent and comparable in general among the three networks over the 10-year period, even with different sampling systems/frequencies, analytical protocols, and artifact corrections. The CAPMoN TC, OC, and EC obtained from the DRI model 2001 thermal–optical carbon analyzer following the IMPROVE-TOR protocol (denoted as DRI-TOR) method were lower than those determined from the IMPROVE_A TOR method by 17 %, 14 %, and 18 %, respectively. When using transmittance for charring correction, the corresponding carbonaceous fractions obtained from the Sunset-TOT were lower by as much as 30 %, 15 %, and 75 %, respectively. In comparison, the CABM TC, OC, and EC obtained from a thermal method, EnCan-Total-900 (ECT9), were higher than the corresponding fractions from IMPROVE_A TOR by 20 %–30 %, 0 %–15 %, and 60 %–80 %, respectively. Ambient OC and EC concentrations were found to increase when ambient temperature exceeded 10 ∘C. These increased ambient concentrations of OC during summer were possibly attributed to secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation and forest fire emissions, while elevated EC concentrations were potentially influenced by forest fire emissions and increased vehicle emissions. Results also show that the pyrolyzed organic carbon (POC) obtained from the ECT9 protocol could provide additional information on SOA although more research is still needed.</description><subject>Aerosol measurements</subject><subject>Aerosols</subject><subject>Air monitoring</subject><subject>Air pollution</subject><subject>Air quality monitoring stations</subject><subject>Ambient temperature</subject><subject>Atmospheric research</subject><subject>Carbon</subject><subject>Chemical properties</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Composition</subject><subject>Corrections</subject><subject>Fires</subject><subject>Forest fires</subject><subject>Location</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Networks</subject><subject>Organic carbon</subject><subject>Particulate organic carbon</subject><subject>Precipitation</subject><subject>Precipitation monitoring</subject><subject>Protocol (computers)</subject><subject>Secondary aerosols</subject><subject>Sunset</subject><subject>Vehicle emissions</subject><issn>1867-8548</issn><issn>1867-1381</issn><issn>1867-8548</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptkk2LFDEQhhtRcF29ewx48tBr0p10J8dh8WNgUfDjHKrTld6MnWRMMqz-E3-umR1RB6QOFSpvPcULb9M8Z_RKMMVfgS8t61oueN92lKkHzQWTw9hKweXDf96Pmyc57ygdOBu7i-bnNhRMrYl-D8nlGEi0BFf0GAqsBMJMYlogOEMMpKn-e8iZeIR8SPeqTGyKnpTbhEjex1RuycZjcgYCCVBcDJWzxrC09ZAnPgZXYnJhIQHLXUxfM4FCgJjYrtFAwZlkV_Bp88jCmvHZ737ZfHnz-vP1u_bmw9vt9eamNVzSarm3VAqUMxPzOAs72V6akfFaKGZVG7Mw8c52XI449VM_KtrNOHFrhnFQ_WWzPXHnCDu9T85D-qEjOH0_qOY1pOLMiprPSikqFeUS-IAGmGQKZhwFMuiMqKwXJ9Y-xW8HzEXv4iFV_1l33agGRZno_6oWqFAXbCwJjHfZ6I1QIx_YKI-sq_-oas3onYkBravzs4WXZwtVU_B7WeCQs95--niupSetSTHnhPaPcUb1MU66xkmzTh_jpI9x6n8BQOW-MA</recordid><startdate>20190826</startdate><enddate>20190826</enddate><creator>Chan, Tak W</creator><creator>Huang, Lin</creator><creator>Banwait, Kulbir</creator><creator>Zhang, Wendy</creator><creator>Ernst, Darrell</creator><creator>Wang, Xiaoliang</creator><creator>Watson, John G</creator><creator>Chow, Judith C</creator><creator>Green, Mark</creator><creator>Czimczik, Claudia I</creator><creator>Santos, Guaciara M</creator><creator>Sharma, Sangeeta</creator><creator>Jones, Keith</creator><general>Copernicus GmbH</general><general>Copernicus Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BFMQW</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2345-7308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8200-4632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1752-6899</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4706-0556</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190826</creationdate><title>Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site</title><author>Chan, Tak W ; Huang, Lin ; Banwait, Kulbir ; Zhang, Wendy ; Ernst, Darrell ; Wang, Xiaoliang ; Watson, John G ; Chow, Judith C ; Green, Mark ; Czimczik, Claudia I ; Santos, Guaciara M ; Sharma, Sangeeta ; Jones, Keith</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Aerosol measurements</topic><topic>Aerosols</topic><topic>Air monitoring</topic><topic>Air pollution</topic><topic>Air quality monitoring stations</topic><topic>Ambient temperature</topic><topic>Atmospheric research</topic><topic>Carbon</topic><topic>Chemical properties</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Composition</topic><topic>Corrections</topic><topic>Fires</topic><topic>Forest fires</topic><topic>Location</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Networks</topic><topic>Organic carbon</topic><topic>Particulate organic carbon</topic><topic>Precipitation</topic><topic>Precipitation monitoring</topic><topic>Protocol (computers)</topic><topic>Secondary aerosols</topic><topic>Sunset</topic><topic>Vehicle emissions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chan, Tak W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Lin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banwait, Kulbir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ernst, Darrell</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Xiaoliang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Watson, John G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chow, Judith C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Green, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Czimczik, Claudia I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santos, Guaciara M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Sangeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Keith</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Continental Europe Database</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Atmospheric measurement techniques</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chan, Tak W</au><au>Huang, Lin</au><au>Banwait, Kulbir</au><au>Zhang, Wendy</au><au>Ernst, Darrell</au><au>Wang, Xiaoliang</au><au>Watson, John G</au><au>Chow, Judith C</au><au>Green, Mark</au><au>Czimczik, Claudia I</au><au>Santos, Guaciara M</au><au>Sharma, Sangeeta</au><au>Jones, Keith</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site</atitle><jtitle>Atmospheric measurement techniques</jtitle><date>2019-08-26</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>4543</spage><epage>4560</epage><pages>4543-4560</pages><issn>1867-8548</issn><issn>1867-1381</issn><eissn>1867-8548</eissn><abstract>Carbonaceous aerosol is a major contributor to the total aerosol load and being monitored by diverse measurement approaches. Here, 10 years (2005–2015) of continuous carbonaceous aerosol measurements collected at the Centre of Atmospheric Research Experiments (CARE) in Egbert, Ontario, Canada, on quartz-fiber filters by three independent networks (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments, IMPROVE; Canadian Air and Precipitation Monitoring Network, CAPMoN; and Canadian Aerosol Baseline Measurement, CABM) were compared. Specifically, the study evaluated how differences in sample collection and analysis affected the concentrations of total carbon (TC), organic carbon (OC), and elemental carbon (EC). Results show that different carbonaceous fractions measured by various networks were consistent and comparable in general among the three networks over the 10-year period, even with different sampling systems/frequencies, analytical protocols, and artifact corrections. The CAPMoN TC, OC, and EC obtained from the DRI model 2001 thermal–optical carbon analyzer following the IMPROVE-TOR protocol (denoted as DRI-TOR) method were lower than those determined from the IMPROVE_A TOR method by 17 %, 14 %, and 18 %, respectively. When using transmittance for charring correction, the corresponding carbonaceous fractions obtained from the Sunset-TOT were lower by as much as 30 %, 15 %, and 75 %, respectively. In comparison, the CABM TC, OC, and EC obtained from a thermal method, EnCan-Total-900 (ECT9), were higher than the corresponding fractions from IMPROVE_A TOR by 20 %–30 %, 0 %–15 %, and 60 %–80 %, respectively. Ambient OC and EC concentrations were found to increase when ambient temperature exceeded 10 ∘C. These increased ambient concentrations of OC during summer were possibly attributed to secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation and forest fire emissions, while elevated EC concentrations were potentially influenced by forest fire emissions and increased vehicle emissions. Results also show that the pyrolyzed organic carbon (POC) obtained from the ECT9 protocol could provide additional information on SOA although more research is still needed.</abstract><cop>Katlenburg-Lindau</cop><pub>Copernicus GmbH</pub><doi>10.5194/amt-12-4543-2019</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2345-7308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8200-4632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1752-6899</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4706-0556</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1867-8548
ispartof Atmospheric measurement techniques, 2019-08, Vol.12 (8), p.4543-4560
issn 1867-8548
1867-1381
1867-8548
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_4d999089048a46eca1819ade75e1a2c5
source Publicly Available Content Database; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
subjects Aerosol measurements
Aerosols
Air monitoring
Air pollution
Air quality monitoring stations
Ambient temperature
Atmospheric research
Carbon
Chemical properties
Comparative analysis
Composition
Corrections
Fires
Forest fires
Location
Measurement
Networks
Organic carbon
Particulate organic carbon
Precipitation
Precipitation monitoring
Protocol (computers)
Secondary aerosols
Sunset
Vehicle emissions
title Inter-comparison of elemental and organic carbon mass measurements from three North American national long-term monitoring networks at a co-located site
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T22%3A06%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inter-comparison%20of%20elemental%20and%20organic%20carbon%20mass%20measurements%20from%20three%20North%20American%20national%20long-term%20monitoring%20networks%20at%20a%20co-located%20site&rft.jtitle=Atmospheric%20measurement%20techniques&rft.au=Chan,%20Tak%20W&rft.date=2019-08-26&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=4543&rft.epage=4560&rft.pages=4543-4560&rft.issn=1867-8548&rft.eissn=1867-8548&rft_id=info:doi/10.5194/amt-12-4543-2019&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA597461785%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-13f085e8d15d7d5fbf38c714141e5d91411fab42f2487eb3b37902deb4fc67693%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2279690153&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A597461785&rfr_iscdi=true