PM2.5 Source Apportionment: Reconciling Receptor Models for U.S. Nonurban and Urban Long-Term Networks

Abstract

ABSTRACT Chemical mass balance (CMB) and trajectory receptor models were applied to speciated particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter ≤2.5 μm (PM2.5) measurements from Speciation Trends Network (STN; part of the Chemical Speciation Network [CSN]) and Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) monitoring network across the state of Minnesota as part of the Minnesota PM2.5 Source Apportionment Study (MPSAS). CMB equations were solved by the Unmix, positive matrix factorization (PMF), and effective variance (EV) methods, giving collective source contribution and uncertainty estimates. Geological source profiles developed from local dust materials were either incorporated into the EV-CMB model or used to verify factors derived from Unmix and PMF. Common sources include soil dust, calcium (Ca)-rich dust, diesel and gasoline vehicle exhausts, biomass burning, secondary sulfate, and secondary nitrate. Secondary sulfate and nitrate aerosols dominate PM2.5 mass (50–69%). Mobile sources outweigh area sources at urban sites, and vice versa at rural sites due to traffic emissions. Gasoline and diesel contributions can be separated using data from the STN, despite significant uncertainties. Major differences between MPSAS and earlier studies on similar environments appear to be the type and magnitude of stationary sources, but these sources are generally minor (<7%) in this and other studies. Ensemble back-trajectory analysis shows that the lower Midwestern states are the predominant source region for secondary ammoniated sulfate in Minnesota. It also suggests substantial contributions of biomass burning and soil dust from out-of-state on occasions, although a quantitative separation of local and regional contributions was not achieved in the current study. Supplemental materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association for a summary of input data, Unmix and PMF factor profiles, and additional maps. IMPLICATIONS The IMPROVE and STN data have been widely used for source apportionment by receptor models. Applying more than one model to available PM2.5 data reveals similarities and differences in source contribution estimates. The inter-model discrepancies identify areas for more focused investigation. Together, the information could lead to better-defined emission reduction strategies.