Search

This article has investigated the contribution of residential wood combustion (RWC) to the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations in the Helsinki Metropolitan Area (HMA) for six years, from 2009 to 2014. We have used the PM2.5 concentrations measured at eight air quality measurement stations. The dispersion of emissions on an urban scale was evaluated with multiple source Gaussian dispersion models UDM-FMI and CAR-FMI, and on a regional scale using the chemical transport model SILAM. The overall agreement of the predicted concentrations with measurements of PM2.5 was good or fairly good for all stations and years, e.g., at the permanent residential station the daily average values of the index of agreement ranged from 0.69 to 0.81, and the fractional bias values ranged from −0.08 to 0.11, for the considered six years. Both the measured and predicted daily averaged concentrations showed increasing trends towards the lower temperature values. The highest predicted annual averaged concentrations in the region occurred in the vicinity of major roads and streets, and the suburban residential areas, to the northwest, north and northeast of the city centre. The average concentrations attributed to RWC in winter were up to 10- or 15-fold, compared to the corresponding concentrations in summer. During the considered six-yearly period, the spatially highest predicted fractions of RWC of the annual PM2.5 concentrations ranged from 12 to 14 %. In winter, the corresponding contributions ranged from 16 to 21 %. The RWC contribution was higher than the corresponding urban vehicular traffic contribution at all the residential stations during all years. The study has highlighted new research needs for the future, in particular (i) the modelling of the RWC emissions that would be explicitly based on the actual ambient temperatures, and (ii) the modelling of the impacts of the most important holiday periods on the emissions from RWC.

This global study, which has been coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization Global Atmospheric Watch (WMO/GAW) programme, aims to understand the behaviour of key air pollutant species during the COVID-19 pandemic period of exceptionally low emissions across the globe. We investigated the effects of the differences in both emissions and regional and local meteorology in 2020 compared with the period 2015–2019. By adopting a globally consistent approach, this comprehensive observational analysis focuses on changes in air quality in and around cities across the globe for the following air pollutants PM2.5, PM10, PMC (coarse fraction of PM), NO2, SO2, NOx, CO, O3 and the total gaseous oxidant (OX = NO2 + O3) during the pre-lockdown, partial lockdown, full lockdown and two relaxation periods spanning from January to September 2020. The analysis is based on in situ ground-based air quality observations at over 540 traffic, background and rural stations, from 63 cities and covering 25 countries over seven geographical regions of the world. Anomalies in the air pollutant concentrations (increases or decreases during 2020 periods compared to equivalent 2015–2019 periods) were calculated and the possible effects of meteorological conditions were analysed by computing anomalies from ERA5 reanalyses and local observations for these periods. We observed a positive correlation between the reductions in NO2 and NOx concentrations and peoples’ mobility for most cities. A correlation between PMC and mobility changes was also seen for some Asian and South American cities. A clear signal was not observed for other pollutants, suggesting that sources besides vehicular emissions also substantially contributed to the change in air quality. As a global and regional overview of the changes in ambient concentrations of key air quality species, we observed decreases of up to about 70% in mean NO2 and between 30% and 40% in mean PM2.5 concentrations over 2020 full lockdown compared to the same period in 2015–2019. However, PM2.5 exhibited complex signals, even within the same region, with increases in some Spanish cities, attributed mainly to the long-range transport of African dust and/or biomass burning (corroborated with the analysis of NO2/CO ratio). Some Chinese cities showed similar increases in PM2.5 during the lockdown periods, but in this case, it was likely due to secondary PM formation. Changes in O3 concentrations were highly heterogeneous, with no overall change or small increases (as in the case of Europe), and positive anomalies of 25% and 30% in East Asia and South America, respectively, with Colombia showing the largest positive anomaly of ~70%. The SO2 anomalies were negative for 2020 compared to 2015–2019 (between ~25 to 60%) for all regions. For CO, negative anomalies were observed for all regions with the largest decrease for South America of up to ~40%. The NO2/CO ratio indicated that specific sites (such as those in Spanish cities) were affected by biomass burning plumes, which outweighed the NO2 decrease due to the general reduction in mobility (ratio of ~60%). Analysis of the total oxidant (OX = NO2 + O3) showed that primary NO2 emissions at urban locations were greater than the O3 production, whereas at background sites, OX was mostly driven by the regional contributions rather than local NO2 and O3 concentrations. The present study clearly highlights the importance of meteorology and episodic contributions (e.g., from dust, domestic, agricultural biomass burning and crop fertilizing) when analysing air quality in and around cities even during large emissions reductions. There is still the need to better understand how the chemical responses of secondary pollutants to emission change under complex meteorological conditions, along with climate change and socio-economic drivers may affect future air quality. The implications for regional and global policies are also significant, as our study clearly indicates that PM2.5 concentrations would not likely meet the World Health Organization guidelines in many parts of the world, despite the drastic reductions in mobility. Consequently, revisions of air quality regulation (e.g., the Gothenburg Protocol) with more ambitious targets that are specific to the different regions of the world may well be required., World Meteorological Organization Global Atmospheric Watch programme is gratefully acknowledged for initiating and coordinating this study and for supporting this publication. We acknowledge the following projects for supporting the analysis contained in this article: Air Pollution and Human Health for an Indian Megacity project PROMOTE funded by UK NERC and the Indian MOES, Grant reference number NE/P016391/1; Regarding project funding from the European Commission, the sole responsibility of this publication lies with the authors. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. This project has received funding from the European Commission’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 874990 (EMERGE project). European Regional Development Fund (project MOBTT42) under the Mobilitas Pluss programme; Estonian Research Council (project PRG714); Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap project Estonian Environmental Observatory (KKOBS, project 2014-2020.4.01.20-0281). European network for observing our changing planet project (ERA-PLANET, grant agreement no. 689443) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program, Estonian Ministry of Sciences projects (grant nos. P180021, P180274), and the Estonian Research Infrastructures Roadmap project Estonian Environmental Observatory (3.2.0304.11-0395). Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East—Climate and Atmosphere Research (EMME-CARE) project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant agreement no. 856612) and the Government of Cyprus. INAR acknowledges support by the Russian government (grant number 14.W03.31.0002), the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (agreement 14.W0331.0006), and the Russian Ministry of Education and Science (14.W03.31.0008). We are grateful to to the following agencies for providing access to data used in our analysis: A.M. Obukhov Institute of Atmospheric Physics Russian Academy of Sciences; Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente della Campania (ARPAC); Air Quality and Climate Change, Parks and Environment (MetroVancouver, Government of British Columbia); Air Quality Monitoring & Reporting, Nova Scotia Environment (Government of Nova Scotia); Air Quality Monitoring Network (SIMAT) and Emission Inventory, Mexico City Environment Secretariat (SEDEMA); Airparif (owner & provider of the Paris air pollution data); ARPA Lazio, Italy; ARPA Lombardia, Italy; Association Agréée de Surveillance de la Qualité de l’Air en Île-de-France AIRPARIF / Atmo-France; Bavarian Environment Agency, Germany; Berlin Senatsverwaltung für Umwelt, Verkehr und Klimaschutz, Germany; California Air Resources Board; Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), India; CETESB: Companhia Ambiental do Estado de São Paulo, Brazil. China National Environmental Monitoring Centre; Chandigarh Pollution Control Committee (CPCC), India. DCMR Rijnmond Environmental Service, the Netherlands. Department of Labour Inspection, Cyprus; Department of Natural Resources Management and Environmental Protection of Moscow. Environment and Climate Change Canada; Environmental Monitoring and Science Division Alberta Environment and Parks (Government of Alberta); Environmental Protection Authority Victoria (Melbourne, Victoria, Australia); Estonian Environmental Research Centre (EERC); Estonian University of Life Sciences, SMEAR Estonia; European Regional Development Fund (project MOBTT42) under the Mobilitas Pluss programme; Finnish Meteorological Institute; Helsinki Region Environmental Services Authority; Haryana Pollution Control Board (HSPCB), IndiaLondon Air Quality Network (LAQN) and the Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN) supported by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government; Madrid Municipality; Met Office Integrated Data Archive System (MIDAS); Meteorological Service of Canada; Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques (Gouvernement du Québec); Ministry of Environment and Energy, Greece; Ministry of the Environment (Chile) and National Weather Service (DMC); Moscow State Budgetary Environmental Institution MOSECOMONITORING. Municipal Department of the Environment SMAC, Brazil; Municipality of Madrid public open data service; National institute of environmental research, Korea; National Meteorology and Hydrology Service (SENAMHI), Peru; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment; Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, Canada; Public Health Service of Amsterdam (GGD), the Netherlands. Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB), India. Réseau de surveillance de la qualité de l'air (RSQA) (Montréal); Rosgydromet. Mosecomonitoring, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Russia; Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project 20–05–00254) SAFAR-IITM-MoES, India; São Paulo State Environmental Protection Agency, CETESB; Secretaria de Ambiente, DMQ, Ecuador; Secretaría Distrital de Ambiente, Bogotá, Colombia. Secretaria Municipal de Meio Ambiente Rio de Janeiro; Mexico City Atmospheric Monitoring System (SIMAT); Mexico City Secretariat of Environment, Secretaría del Medio Ambiente (SEDEMA); SLB-analys, Sweden; SMEAR Estonia station and Estonian University of Life Sciences (EULS); SMEAR stations data and Finnish Center of Excellence; South African Weather Service and Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries through SAAQIS; Spanish Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge (MITECO); University of Helsinki, Finland; University of Tartu, Tahkuse air monitoring station; Weather Station of the Institute of Astronomy, Geophysics and Atmospheric Science of the University of São Paulo; West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB).

A mathematical model called BUOYANT has previously been developed for the evaluation of the dispersion of positively buoyant plumes originating from major warehouse fires. The model addresses the variations of the cross-plume integrated properties (i.e., the average properties along a trajectory) of a rising plume in a vertically varying atmosphere and the atmospheric dispersion after the plume rise regime. We have described in this article an extension of the BUOYANT model to include a detailed treatment of the early evolution of the fire plumes before the plume rise and atmospheric dispersion regimes. The input and output of the new module consist of selected characteristics of forest or pool fires and the properties of a source term for the plume rise module, respectively. The main structure of this source term module is based on the differential equations for low-momentum releases of buoyant material, which govern the evolution of the plume radius, as well as velocity and density differences. The source term module is also partially based on various experimental results on fire plumes. We have evaluated the refined BUOYANT model by comparing the model predictions against the experimental field-scale data from the Prescribed Fire Combustion and Atmospheric Dynamics Research Experiment, RxCADRE. The predicted concentrations of CO2 agreed fairly well with the aircraft measurements conducted in the RxCADRE campaign. We have also compiled an operational version of the model. The operational model can be used for emergency contingency planning and the training of emergency personnel in case of major forest and pool fires.

This review provides a community’s perspective on air quality research focusing mainly on developments over the past decade. The article provides perspectives on current and future challenges as well as research needs for selected key topics. While this paper is not an exhaustive review of all research areas in the field of air quality, we have selected key topics that we feel are important from air quality research and policy perspectives. After providing a short historical overview, this review focuses on improvements in characterizing sources and emissions of air pollution, new air quality observations and instrumentation, advances in air quality prediction and forecasting, understanding interactions of air quality with meteorology and climate, exposure and health assessment, and air quality management and policy. In conducting the review, specific objectives were (i) to address current developments that push the boundaries of air quality research forward, (ii) to highlight the emerging prominent gaps of knowledge in air quality research, and (iii) to make recommendations to guide the direction for future research within the wider community. This review also identifies areas of particular importance for air quality policy. The original concept of this review was borne at the International Conference on Air Quality 2020 (held online due to the COVID 19 restrictions during 18–26 May 2020), but the article incorporates a wider landscape of research literature within the field of air quality science. On air pollution emissions the review highlights, in particular, the need to reduce uncertainties in emissions from diffuse sources, particulate matter chemical components, shipping emissions, and the importance of considering both indoor and outdoor sources. There is a growing need to have integrated air pollution and related observations from both ground-based and remote sensing instruments, including in particular those on satellites. The research should also capitalize on the growing area of low-cost sensors, while ensuring a quality of the measurements which are regulated by guidelines. Connecting various physical scales in air quality modelling is still a continual issue, with cities being affected by air pollution gradients at local scales and by long-range transport. At the same time, one should allow for the impacts from climate change on a longer timescale. Earth system modelling offers considerable potential by providing a consistent framework for treating scales and processes, especially where there are significant feedbacks, such as those related to aerosols, chemistry, and meteorology. Assessment of exposure to air pollution should consider the impacts of both indoor and outdoor emissions, as well as application of more sophisticated, dynamic modelling approaches to predict concentrations of air pollutants in both environments. With particulate matter being one of the most important pollutants for health, research is indicating the urgent need to understand, in particular, the role of particle number and chemical components in terms of health impact, which in turn requires improved emission inventories and models for predicting high-resolution distributions of these metrics over cities. The review also examines how air pollution management needs to adapt to the abovementioned new challenges and briefly considers the implications from the COVID-19 pandemic for air quality. Finally, we provide recommendations for air quality research and support for policy.

Feedbacks between air pollutants and meteorology play a crucial role in the direction of the response of future climate and air pollution. These feedbacks are important to understand and quantify the potential impact of adaptation and mitigation policies setup for protecting the population against air pollution and heat stress. We review the interactions between climate and air pollution, with special focus on the projections of air pollution under different future climate scenarios and time horizons, based on a literature review of research articles and reports from the last decade. The assessment focuses on 1) the specific impacts of climate change on air pollution and natural particle and precursor emissions in Europe in the near future (2030), by mid-century (2050) and by end of the century (2100), 2) impacts on air pollution due to changes in emissions vs. changes in climate, 3) feedbacks from air pollution on climate, 4) impacts of climate change on wildland fires and air pollutant levels, and 5) the role of adaptation and mitigation policies on climate change and air pollution. Available literature to a large extent suggests that ozone concentrations will likely increase in the second half of the century by up to 9 ppb [−4 + 9.3], while in the first half of the century, changes are much smaller and are up to ±1.5 ppb. These changes are mainly attributed to increased temperatures and emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds, but also depends on the models and scenarios used in these studies. On the other hand, the predicted changes in particle concentrations and chemical composition are uncertain and much smaller. Similar to ozone, larger changes in the particle concentrations are projected in the second half of the century. The main conclusion from this review is that the estimated changes in pollutant levels in the future vary significantly depending on the applied model systems, as well as the different emission or meteorological scenarios used in the different studies. Nevertheless, studies generally agree on the overall trend of the changes in pollutant levels due to climate change, in particular in the second half of the century.