Loading…

Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China

Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) are an important anthropogenic mercury (Hg) source in China, and it is crucial to understand the environmental impacts of this detrimental element emitted from this source. In the present study, field experiments were conducted for measuring Hg in ambient atmosphere a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental science and pollution research international 2021-07, Vol.28 (25), p.33146-33157
Main Authors: Li, Zhonggen, Chen, Xufeng, Liu, Wenli, Li, Taishan, Qiu, Guangle, Yan, Haiyu, Wang, Mingmeng, Chen, Ji, Sun, Guangyi, Wang, Qingfeng, Feng, Xinbin
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-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73
container_end_page 33157
container_issue 25
container_start_page 33146
container_title Environmental science and pollution research international
container_volume 28
creator Li, Zhonggen
Chen, Xufeng
Liu, Wenli
Li, Taishan
Qiu, Guangle
Yan, Haiyu
Wang, Mingmeng
Chen, Ji
Sun, Guangyi
Wang, Qingfeng
Feng, Xinbin
description Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) are an important anthropogenic mercury (Hg) source in China, and it is crucial to understand the environmental impacts of this detrimental element emitted from this source. In the present study, field experiments were conducted for measuring Hg in ambient atmosphere and upland agricultural soils within a radius of 10 km surrounding a large scale coal-fired power plant (1550 MW) in Tangshan, Hebei province. Short-term (20 min) average of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM or Hg 0 ) in ambient air varying from 1.5 to 9.0 ng/m 3 and total Hg (THg) in surface agricultural soil (0–20 cm) varying from 9.2 to 43.5 μg/kg at different sites were observed. THg in two soil cores decreased with depth, with concentrations being 2–2.5 times higher in the surface layer than that in the deep layer (50–60 cm), indicating the possibility of the atmospheric input of Hg. Based on the information of the total atmospheric Hg emission since this CFPP’s operation in 1970s and the increased THg in nearby soils, it was estimated that about 3.9% discharged Hg has accumulated in the nearby agricultural soils. The low retention rate of the total emitted Hg by soils is a result of high proportion of Hg 0 (79.5%) in stack gas emission and potential loss of Hg from soil surface reemission. The positive shifting (~ 0.5‰) of Hg isotopic signature (δ 202 Hg) from deep soil to surface soil reflected Hg deposition from nearby CFPP emissions that are featured with much heavier Hg isotopic signatures inherited from feed coal (δ 202 Hg: –0.50‰) and different combustion products (δ 202 Hg: –0.95 to 3.71‰) compared with that in deep soil layer (δ 202 Hg: ca –1.50‰). Overall, this study demonstrated that this CFPP has a slight but distinguishable effect on the elevation of ambient GEM and agricultural soil THg in the local environment. Graphical abstract
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11356-021-12842-9
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2546402558</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2546402558</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PGzEQhq2KqoS0f6AHZImzW3973RuKgCIhODR3a2J7G6PsOti7Qvn3NQ2FWy8zh3k_NA9CXxn9xig13ytjQmlCOSOMd5IT-wEtmGaSGGntCVpQKyVhQspTdFbrI6WcWm4-oVMhtFBSqwUafuW0wzAGDMMmxXHCkAoeYvFzOWCo7YTTGJKHKRece-wz7EifSgx4n59jwfsdNFccUq0pj_UHBuyhRlynORyaF9_nMm3xaptG-Iw-9rCr8cvrXqL19dV69ZPcPdzcri7viBdGTaRTvWSWd4r5DryWRgcTeQBvN1QD51RIGsCYDiITFoJtU3NtFeskAyOW6OIYuy_5aY51co95LmNrdLy9LSlXqmsqflT5kmstsXf7kgYoB8eoewHsjoBdA-z-Ana2mc5fo-fNEMOb5R_RJhBHQW2n8Xcs793_if0DEp2E4g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2546402558</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China</title><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Li, Zhonggen ; Chen, Xufeng ; Liu, Wenli ; Li, Taishan ; Qiu, Guangle ; Yan, Haiyu ; Wang, Mingmeng ; Chen, Ji ; Sun, Guangyi ; Wang, Qingfeng ; Feng, Xinbin</creator><creatorcontrib>Li, Zhonggen ; Chen, Xufeng ; Liu, Wenli ; Li, Taishan ; Qiu, Guangle ; Yan, Haiyu ; Wang, Mingmeng ; Chen, Ji ; Sun, Guangyi ; Wang, Qingfeng ; Feng, Xinbin</creatorcontrib><description>Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) are an important anthropogenic mercury (Hg) source in China, and it is crucial to understand the environmental impacts of this detrimental element emitted from this source. In the present study, field experiments were conducted for measuring Hg in ambient atmosphere and upland agricultural soils within a radius of 10 km surrounding a large scale coal-fired power plant (1550 MW) in Tangshan, Hebei province. Short-term (20 min) average of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM or Hg 0 ) in ambient air varying from 1.5 to 9.0 ng/m 3 and total Hg (THg) in surface agricultural soil (0–20 cm) varying from 9.2 to 43.5 μg/kg at different sites were observed. THg in two soil cores decreased with depth, with concentrations being 2–2.5 times higher in the surface layer than that in the deep layer (50–60 cm), indicating the possibility of the atmospheric input of Hg. Based on the information of the total atmospheric Hg emission since this CFPP’s operation in 1970s and the increased THg in nearby soils, it was estimated that about 3.9% discharged Hg has accumulated in the nearby agricultural soils. The low retention rate of the total emitted Hg by soils is a result of high proportion of Hg 0 (79.5%) in stack gas emission and potential loss of Hg from soil surface reemission. The positive shifting (~ 0.5‰) of Hg isotopic signature (δ 202 Hg) from deep soil to surface soil reflected Hg deposition from nearby CFPP emissions that are featured with much heavier Hg isotopic signatures inherited from feed coal (δ 202 Hg: –0.50‰) and different combustion products (δ 202 Hg: –0.95 to 3.71‰) compared with that in deep soil layer (δ 202 Hg: ca –1.50‰). Overall, this study demonstrated that this CFPP has a slight but distinguishable effect on the elevation of ambient GEM and agricultural soil THg in the local environment. Graphical abstract</description><identifier>ISSN: 0944-1344</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1614-7499</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-12842-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33635465</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Agricultural land ; Anthropogenic factors ; Aquatic Pollution ; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution ; Coal ; Coal-fired power plants ; Combustion products ; Cores ; Depth indicators ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Ecotoxicology ; Elevation ; Emissions ; Environment ; Environmental Chemistry ; Environmental Health ; Environmental impact ; Environmental science ; Field tests ; Human influences ; Industrial plant emissions ; Mercury ; Mercury (metal) ; Power plants ; Research Article ; Soil layers ; Soil surfaces ; Soils ; Stack emissions ; Surface layers ; Waste Water Technology ; Water Management ; Water Pollution Control</subject><ispartof>Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021-07, Vol.28 (25), p.33146-33157</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature 2021</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of Springer Nature 2021.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7400-6294</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2546402558/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2546402558?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,11668,27903,27904,36039,44342,74642</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33635465$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Li, Zhonggen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xufeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Wenli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Taishan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qiu, Guangle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yan, Haiyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Mingmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Ji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, Guangyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Qingfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Xinbin</creatorcontrib><title>Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China</title><title>Environmental science and pollution research international</title><addtitle>Environ Sci Pollut Res</addtitle><addtitle>Environ Sci Pollut Res Int</addtitle><description>Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) are an important anthropogenic mercury (Hg) source in China, and it is crucial to understand the environmental impacts of this detrimental element emitted from this source. In the present study, field experiments were conducted for measuring Hg in ambient atmosphere and upland agricultural soils within a radius of 10 km surrounding a large scale coal-fired power plant (1550 MW) in Tangshan, Hebei province. Short-term (20 min) average of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM or Hg 0 ) in ambient air varying from 1.5 to 9.0 ng/m 3 and total Hg (THg) in surface agricultural soil (0–20 cm) varying from 9.2 to 43.5 μg/kg at different sites were observed. THg in two soil cores decreased with depth, with concentrations being 2–2.5 times higher in the surface layer than that in the deep layer (50–60 cm), indicating the possibility of the atmospheric input of Hg. Based on the information of the total atmospheric Hg emission since this CFPP’s operation in 1970s and the increased THg in nearby soils, it was estimated that about 3.9% discharged Hg has accumulated in the nearby agricultural soils. The low retention rate of the total emitted Hg by soils is a result of high proportion of Hg 0 (79.5%) in stack gas emission and potential loss of Hg from soil surface reemission. The positive shifting (~ 0.5‰) of Hg isotopic signature (δ 202 Hg) from deep soil to surface soil reflected Hg deposition from nearby CFPP emissions that are featured with much heavier Hg isotopic signatures inherited from feed coal (δ 202 Hg: –0.50‰) and different combustion products (δ 202 Hg: –0.95 to 3.71‰) compared with that in deep soil layer (δ 202 Hg: ca –1.50‰). Overall, this study demonstrated that this CFPP has a slight but distinguishable effect on the elevation of ambient GEM and agricultural soil THg in the local environment. Graphical abstract</description><subject>Agricultural land</subject><subject>Anthropogenic factors</subject><subject>Aquatic Pollution</subject><subject>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</subject><subject>Coal</subject><subject>Coal-fired power plants</subject><subject>Combustion products</subject><subject>Cores</subject><subject>Depth indicators</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Ecotoxicology</subject><subject>Elevation</subject><subject>Emissions</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Chemistry</subject><subject>Environmental Health</subject><subject>Environmental impact</subject><subject>Environmental science</subject><subject>Field tests</subject><subject>Human influences</subject><subject>Industrial plant emissions</subject><subject>Mercury</subject><subject>Mercury (metal)</subject><subject>Power plants</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Soil layers</subject><subject>Soil surfaces</subject><subject>Soils</subject><subject>Stack emissions</subject><subject>Surface layers</subject><subject>Waste Water Technology</subject><subject>Water Management</subject><subject>Water Pollution Control</subject><issn>0944-1344</issn><issn>1614-7499</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1PGzEQhq2KqoS0f6AHZImzW3973RuKgCIhODR3a2J7G6PsOti7Qvn3NQ2FWy8zh3k_NA9CXxn9xig13ytjQmlCOSOMd5IT-wEtmGaSGGntCVpQKyVhQspTdFbrI6WcWm4-oVMhtFBSqwUafuW0wzAGDMMmxXHCkAoeYvFzOWCo7YTTGJKHKRece-wz7EifSgx4n59jwfsdNFccUq0pj_UHBuyhRlynORyaF9_nMm3xaptG-Iw-9rCr8cvrXqL19dV69ZPcPdzcri7viBdGTaRTvWSWd4r5DryWRgcTeQBvN1QD51RIGsCYDiITFoJtU3NtFeskAyOW6OIYuy_5aY51co95LmNrdLy9LSlXqmsqflT5kmstsXf7kgYoB8eoewHsjoBdA-z-Ana2mc5fo-fNEMOb5R_RJhBHQW2n8Xcs793_if0DEp2E4g</recordid><startdate>20210701</startdate><enddate>20210701</enddate><creator>Li, Zhonggen</creator><creator>Chen, Xufeng</creator><creator>Liu, Wenli</creator><creator>Li, Taishan</creator><creator>Qiu, Guangle</creator><creator>Yan, Haiyu</creator><creator>Wang, Mingmeng</creator><creator>Chen, Ji</creator><creator>Sun, Guangyi</creator><creator>Wang, Qingfeng</creator><creator>Feng, Xinbin</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7400-6294</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210701</creationdate><title>Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China</title><author>Li, Zhonggen ; Chen, Xufeng ; Liu, Wenli ; Li, Taishan ; Qiu, Guangle ; Yan, Haiyu ; Wang, Mingmeng ; Chen, Ji ; Sun, Guangyi ; Wang, Qingfeng ; Feng, Xinbin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Agricultural land</topic><topic>Anthropogenic factors</topic><topic>Aquatic Pollution</topic><topic>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</topic><topic>Coal</topic><topic>Coal-fired power plants</topic><topic>Combustion products</topic><topic>Cores</topic><topic>Depth indicators</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Ecotoxicology</topic><topic>Elevation</topic><topic>Emissions</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Chemistry</topic><topic>Environmental Health</topic><topic>Environmental impact</topic><topic>Environmental science</topic><topic>Field tests</topic><topic>Human influences</topic><topic>Industrial plant emissions</topic><topic>Mercury</topic><topic>Mercury (metal)</topic><topic>Power plants</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Soil layers</topic><topic>Soil surfaces</topic><topic>Soils</topic><topic>Stack emissions</topic><topic>Surface layers</topic><topic>Waste Water Technology</topic><topic>Water Management</topic><topic>Water Pollution Control</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Li, Zhonggen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xufeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Wenli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Taishan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qiu, Guangle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yan, Haiyu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Mingmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Ji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, Guangyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Qingfeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Xinbin</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Environmental science and pollution research international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Li, Zhonggen</au><au>Chen, Xufeng</au><au>Liu, Wenli</au><au>Li, Taishan</au><au>Qiu, Guangle</au><au>Yan, Haiyu</au><au>Wang, Mingmeng</au><au>Chen, Ji</au><au>Sun, Guangyi</au><au>Wang, Qingfeng</au><au>Feng, Xinbin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China</atitle><jtitle>Environmental science and pollution research international</jtitle><stitle>Environ Sci Pollut Res</stitle><addtitle>Environ Sci Pollut Res Int</addtitle><date>2021-07-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>25</issue><spage>33146</spage><epage>33157</epage><pages>33146-33157</pages><issn>0944-1344</issn><eissn>1614-7499</eissn><abstract>Coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) are an important anthropogenic mercury (Hg) source in China, and it is crucial to understand the environmental impacts of this detrimental element emitted from this source. In the present study, field experiments were conducted for measuring Hg in ambient atmosphere and upland agricultural soils within a radius of 10 km surrounding a large scale coal-fired power plant (1550 MW) in Tangshan, Hebei province. Short-term (20 min) average of gaseous elemental mercury (GEM or Hg 0 ) in ambient air varying from 1.5 to 9.0 ng/m 3 and total Hg (THg) in surface agricultural soil (0–20 cm) varying from 9.2 to 43.5 μg/kg at different sites were observed. THg in two soil cores decreased with depth, with concentrations being 2–2.5 times higher in the surface layer than that in the deep layer (50–60 cm), indicating the possibility of the atmospheric input of Hg. Based on the information of the total atmospheric Hg emission since this CFPP’s operation in 1970s and the increased THg in nearby soils, it was estimated that about 3.9% discharged Hg has accumulated in the nearby agricultural soils. The low retention rate of the total emitted Hg by soils is a result of high proportion of Hg 0 (79.5%) in stack gas emission and potential loss of Hg from soil surface reemission. The positive shifting (~ 0.5‰) of Hg isotopic signature (δ 202 Hg) from deep soil to surface soil reflected Hg deposition from nearby CFPP emissions that are featured with much heavier Hg isotopic signatures inherited from feed coal (δ 202 Hg: –0.50‰) and different combustion products (δ 202 Hg: –0.95 to 3.71‰) compared with that in deep soil layer (δ 202 Hg: ca –1.50‰). Overall, this study demonstrated that this CFPP has a slight but distinguishable effect on the elevation of ambient GEM and agricultural soil THg in the local environment. Graphical abstract</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>33635465</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11356-021-12842-9</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7400-6294</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0944-1344
ispartof Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021-07, Vol.28 (25), p.33146-33157
issn 0944-1344
1614-7499
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2546402558
source ABI/INFORM Global; Springer Nature
subjects Agricultural land
Anthropogenic factors
Aquatic Pollution
Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution
Coal
Coal-fired power plants
Combustion products
Cores
Depth indicators
Earth and Environmental Science
Ecotoxicology
Elevation
Emissions
Environment
Environmental Chemistry
Environmental Health
Environmental impact
Environmental science
Field tests
Human influences
Industrial plant emissions
Mercury
Mercury (metal)
Power plants
Research Article
Soil layers
Soil surfaces
Soils
Stack emissions
Surface layers
Waste Water Technology
Water Management
Water Pollution Control
title Soil and ambient air mercury as an indicator of coal-fired power plant emissions: a case study in North China
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T17%3A27%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Soil%20and%20ambient%20air%20mercury%20as%20an%20indicator%20of%20coal-fired%20power%20plant%20emissions:%20a%20case%20study%20in%20North%20China&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20science%20and%20pollution%20research%20international&rft.au=Li,%20Zhonggen&rft.date=2021-07-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=25&rft.spage=33146&rft.epage=33157&rft.pages=33146-33157&rft.issn=0944-1344&rft.eissn=1614-7499&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11356-021-12842-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2546402558%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-85f4192851c8ac6476d7e2dac9b06a220340da778ae139ad9139626951841a73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2546402558&rft_id=info:pmid/33635465&rfr_iscdi=true