首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association >Comparing emission rates derived from a model with those estimated using a plume-based approach and quantifying the contribution of vehicle classes to on-road emissions and air quality
【24h】

Comparing emission rates derived from a model with those estimated using a plume-based approach and quantifying the contribution of vehicle classes to on-road emissions and air quality

机译:将模型得出的排放率与使用基于羽流方法估算的排放率进行比较,并量化车辆类别对道路排放和空气质量的贡献

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This study presents a comparison of fleet average emission factor (s) derived from a traffic emission model with EFs estimated using plume-based measurements, including an investigation of the contribution of vehicle classes to carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO_X), and elemental carbon (EC) along an urban corridor. To this end, a field campaign was conducted over one week in June 2016 on an arterial road in Toronto, Canada. Traffic data were collected using a traffic camera and a radar, whereas air quality was characterized using two monitoring stations: one located at ground level and another at the rooftop of a four-story building. A traffic simulation model was calibrated and validated, and second-by-second speed profiles for all vehicle trajectories were extracted to model emissions. In addition, dispersion modeling was conducted to identify the extent to which differences in emissions translate to differences in near-road concentrations. The results indicate that modeled EFs for CO and NO_x are twice as high as plume-based EFs. Besides, modeled results indicate that transit bus emissions accounted for 60% and 70% of the total emissions of NO_X and EC, respectively. Transit bus emission rates in g/ passenger-km for NO_X and EC were up to 8 and 22 times, respectively, the emission rates of passenger cars. In contrast, the Toronto streetcars, which are electrically fueled, were found to improve near-road air quality despite their negative impact on traffic speeds. Finally, we observe that the difference in estimated concentrations derived from the two methods is not as large as the difference in estimated emissions due to the influence of meteorology and of the urban background given that the study network is located in a busy downtown area. Implications: This study presents a comparison of fleet average emission factor (s) derived from a traffic emission model with EFs estimated using plume-based measurements, including an investigation of the contribution of vehicle classes to various pollutants. Besides, dispersion modeling was conducted to identify the extent to which differences in emissions translate to differences in near-road concentrations. It was observed that the difference in estimated concentrations derived from the two methods is not as large as the difference in estimated emissions due to the influence of meteorology and of the urban background, as the study network is located in a busy downtown area.
机译:这项研究比较了从交通排放模型得出的车队平均排放因子与使用基于羽流的测量结果估算的EF的比较,包括调查车辆类别对一氧化碳(CO),氮氧化物(NO_X),以及城市走廊沿线的元素碳(EC)。为此,2016年6月,在加拿大多伦多的一条主干道上进行了为期一周的野战。交通数据是使用交通摄像头和雷达收集的,而空气质量则通过两个监控站进行表征:一个位于地面,另一个位于四层建筑物的屋顶。校准并验证了交通仿真模型,并提取了所有车辆轨迹的每秒速度曲线,以模拟排放。此外,进行了扩散建模,以确定排放差异转化为近路浓度差异的程度。结果表明,针对CO和NO_x的建模EFs是基于羽状EFs的两倍。此外,模拟结果表明,公交公交车排放分别占NO_X和EC排放总量的60%和70%。 NO_X和EC的公交公交车排放量(克/客公里)分别是乘用车排放量的8倍和22倍。相比之下,使用电动燃料的多伦多有轨电车尽管对交通速度产生不利影响,但仍能改善近路空气质量。最后,由于研究网络位于繁忙的市区,由于气象学和城市背景的影响,两种方法得出的估算浓度差异不如估算排放量差异大。启示:本研究对交通排放模型得出的车队平均排放因子与基于羽状测量法估算的EF进行了比较,其中包括调查车辆类别对各种污染物的贡献。此外,进行了扩散建模,以确定排放差异转化为近路浓度差异的程度。据观察,由于研究网络位于繁忙的市区,由于气象学和城市背景的影响,两种方法得出的估算浓度差异不如估算排放量差异大。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association》 |2018年第11期|1159-1174|共16页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

    Department of Civil & Mineral Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号