Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of co-located refractory black carbon (rBC) and elemental carbon (EC) mass concentration measurements during field campaigns at several European sites.

Authors :
Pileci, Rosaria E.
Modini, Robin L.
Bertò, Michele
Yuan, Jinfeng
Corbin, Joel C.
Marinoni, Angela
Henzing, Bas
Moerman, Marcel M.
Putaud, Jean P.
Spindler, Gerald
Wehner, Birgit
Müller, Thomas
Tuch, Thomas
Trentini, Arianna
Zanatta, Marco
Baltensperger, Urs
Gysel-Beer, Martin
Source :
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques. 2021, Vol. 14 Issue 2, p1379-1403. 25p.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

The mass concentration of black carbon (BC) particles in the atmosphere has traditionally been quantified with two methods: as elemental carbon (EC) concentrations measured by thermal–optical analysis and as equivalent black carbon (eBC) concentrations when BC mass is derived from particle light absorption coefficient measurements. Over the last decade, ambient measurements of refractory black carbon (rBC) mass concentrations based on laser-induced incandescence (LII) have become more common, mostly due to the development of the Single Particle Soot Photometer (SP2) instrument. In this work, EC and rBC mass concentration measurements from field campaigns across several background European sites (Palaiseau, Bologna, Cabauw and Melpitz) have been collated and examined to identify the similarities and differences between BC mass concentrations measured by the two techniques. All EC concentration measurements in PM 2.5 were performed with the EUSAAR-2 thermal–optical protocol. All rBC concentration measurements were performed with SP2 instruments calibrated with the same calibration material as recommended in the literature. The observed values of median rBC-to-EC mass concentration ratios on the single-campaign level were 0.53, 0.65, 0.97, 1.20 and 1.29, respectively, and the geometric standard deviation (GSD) was 1.5 when considering all data points from all five campaigns. This shows that substantial systematic bias between these two quantities occurred during some campaigns, which also contributes to the large overall GSD. Despite considerable variability in BC properties and sources across the whole dataset, it was not possible to clearly assign reasons for discrepancies to one or the other method, both known to have their own specific limitations and uncertainties. However, differences in the particle size range covered by these two methods were identified as one likely reason for discrepancies. Overall, the observed correlation between rBC and EC mass reveals a linear relationship with a constant ratio, thus providing clear evidence that both methods essentially quantify the same property of atmospheric aerosols, whereas systematic differences in measured absolute values by up to a factor of 2 can occur. This finding for the level of agreement between two current state-of-the-art techniques has important implications for studies based on BC mass concentration measurements, for example for the interpretation of uncertainties in inferred BC mass absorption coefficient values, which are required for modeling the radiative forcing of BC. Homogeneity between BC mass determination techniques is also very important for moving towards a routine BC mass measurement for air quality regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
18671381
Volume :
14
Issue :
2
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Atmospheric Measurement Techniques
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
149150382
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-1379-2021