基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM2.5组分解析

doi:10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.08.006

生态环境学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (8): 1214-1226.DOI: 10.16258/j.cnki.1674-5906.2024.08.006

• 研究论文【环境科学】 • 上一篇下一篇

基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM_2.5组分解析

王聪聪¹^,²(), 张小玲¹^,³^,^*(), 雷雨¹, 黄小娟¹^,⁴, 王婧怡¹, 尹黎昊¹, 王传扬¹

1.成都信息工程大学大气科学学院/高原大气与环境四川省重点实验室，四川成都 610225
2.泰安市气象局，山东泰安 271001
3.成都平原城市气象与环境四川省野外科学观测研究站，四川成都 610225
4.复旦大学环境科学与工程系/上海市大气颗粒物污染防治重点实验室，上海 200438

收稿日期:2023-10-18 出版日期:2024-08-18 发布日期:2024-09-25
通讯作者: *张小玲。E-mail: xlzhang@ium.cn
作者简介:王聪聪（1999年生），女，硕士研究生，主要从事大气物理学与大气环境研究。E-mail: 529890272@qq.com
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划课题(2023YFC3709301);国家自然科学基金项目(42205100);成都信息工程大学引进人才科研启动项目(KYTZ202127);成都信息工大学科技创新能力提升计划重大团队项目(KYTD202202)

Analysis of PM_2.5 Components During Continuous Spring Pollution in Sichuan Basin Based on WRF-CMAQ Model

WANG Congcong¹^,²(), ZHANG Xiaoling¹^,³^,^*(), LEI Yu¹, HUANG Xiaojuan¹^,⁴, WANG Jingyi¹, YIN Lihao¹, WANG Chuanyang¹

1. Plateau Atmosphere and Environment Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province/College of Atmospheric Sciences, Chengdu University of Information Technology, Chengdu 610225, P. R. China
2. Tai’an Meteorological Bureau, Tai’an 271001, P. R. China
3. Chengdu Plain Urban Meteorology and Environment Field Scientific Observation and Research Station of Sichuan Province, Chengdu 610225, P. R. China
4. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Atmospheric Particle Pollution and Prevention (LAP3)/Department of Environmental Science & Engineering/Institute of Atmospheric Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai 200438, P. R. China

Received:2023-10-18 Online:2024-08-18 Published:2024-09-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究四川盆地典型城市PM_2.5组分的污染特征及其与大气氧化性的关系，利用WRF-CMAQ模型对2020年春季一次持续O₃污染过程中PM_2.5组分进行模拟分析，并将O_{3, max}作为光化学活性指标，划分出轻、低、中3种光化学水平，对不同光化学水平下PM_2.5主要组分及贡献的变化特征。结果表明，四川盆地发生O₃污染期间，高空为稳定的天气形势或下沉气流，海平面气压场为高压，对应晴好天气，有利于光化学反应及O₃和二次气溶胶的生成。污染热点区域主要集中在成都平原和重庆西部，PM_2.5和NO₂的高浓度区与O₃污染发生的区域相吻合。污染前期，OC和NO₃⁻对PM_2.5的贡献较大；污染后期，OC和SO₄²⁻对PM_2.5的贡献较大。达州的NO₃⁻和NH₄⁺等离子在低光化学水平下浓度最高，光化学水平再升高反而出现下降的趋势。OC和SO₄²⁻与光化学水平呈较好的正相关关系。对于平均日变化情况，O₃和PM_2.5与光化学水平呈正相关，EC、NO₂和NO₃⁻的日变化情况均与PM_2.5类似，自贡夜间 $N O 3 −$ 浓度相对于其他3个城市较高，OC在中午和午后出现较高值，SO₄²⁻在轻和低光化学水平下变化不明显，浓度与光化学水平成正比。成都和达州，二次有机碳（SOC）随着光化学水平由轻到中的变化，占比不断增加。而对德阳和自贡，SOC随着光化学水平由轻到中占比先增加后减少。4个城市不同光化学水平下的氮氧化率（NOR）和硫氧化率（SOR）基本超过了0.1，说明二次转化较为明显，且SOR的值明显大于NOR，SO₂二次转化率更高。该文的研究方法和结论不仅对四川盆地的空气环境综合整治有重要价值，而且可为其它地区空气污染的预防与控制提供参考。

关键词: 持续臭氧污染, PM_2.5组分, 大气氧化性, 数值模拟, 气象条件, 四川盆地

Abstract:

To investigate the pollution characteristics of PM_2.5 components and their relationship with atmospheric oxidation in typical cities in the Sichuan Basin, this study used the WRF-CMAQ model to simulate and analyze the PM_2.5 components during a sustained O₃ pollution process in the spring of 2020. O_{3, max} was used as an indicator to classify the photochemical activity as light, low, and medium photochemical levels to analyze the characteristics of PM_2.5 components and their contributions to PM_2.5at different photochemical levels. The results showed that high-level air was dominated by either stable weather conditions or downwelling airflow during the O₃ pollution period in the Sichuan Basin, and that the sea-level pressure was high, which corresponded to sunny weather. This is beneficial for photochemical reactions, and facilitates the generation of O₃ and secondary aerosols. Pollution hotspots were mainly concentrated in the Chengdu Plain and western Chongqing. The high concentration areas of PM_2.5, and NO₂ coincided with areas of O₃ pollution. In the early stage of pollution, OC and NO₃⁻ contributed the most to PM_2.5, whereas in the late stage, OC and SO₄²⁻ contributed the most to PM_2.5. In Dazhou, NO₃⁻ and NH₄⁺ concentrations reached their highest levels at low photochemical levels, and then decreased with increasing photochemical levels. OC and SO₄²⁻ showed strong positive correlations with photochemical levels. For the daily averaged variations, O₃ and PM_2.5 were positively correlated with photochemical levels, and the daily changes in EC, NO₂, and NO₃⁻ showed similar variations to those of PM_2.5. The concentration of NO₃⁻ at night was higher in Zigong than that in the other three cities. OC had a higher concentration at noon, and later, the concentration of SO₄²⁻ did not show significant variation at light and low photochemical levels, but was directly proportional to the photochemical level. In Chengdu and Dazhou, the proportion of Secondary Organic Carbon (SOC) increased with changes in photochemical levels from light to medium. In Deyang and Zigong, the proportion of SOC switched from increasing to decreasing when photochemical levels ranged from light to medium. The nitrogen oxidation rate (NOR) and sulfur oxidation rate (SOR) at different photochemical levels in the four cities exceeded 0.1, indicating that secondary conversion became remarkable. The SOR value was significantly greater than that of NOR, and the secondary conversion rate of SO₂ was higher. The methods and conclusions of this study are not only valuable for comprehensive air environment remediation in the Sichuan Basin but can also provide a reference for the prevention and control of air pollution in other regions.

Key words: persistent ozone pollution, PM_2.5 components, atmospheric oxidation, numerical simulation, meteorological condition, Sichuan Basin

中图分类号:

王聪聪, 张小玲, 雷雨, 黄小娟, 王婧怡, 尹黎昊, 王传扬. 基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM_2.5组分解析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(8): 1214-1226.

WANG Congcong, ZHANG Xiaoling, LEI Yu, HUANG Xiaojuan, WANG Jingyi, YIN Lihao, WANG Chuanyang. Analysis of PM_2.5 Components During Continuous Spring Pollution in Sichuan Basin Based on WRF-CMAQ Model[J]. Ecology and Environment, 2024, 33(8): 1214-1226.

图/表 10

图1 模式模拟区域和四川盆地18个城市分布以及海拔高度中国地图依据自然资源部标准底图（审图号：GS (2019) 1697号）绘制而成

Figure 1 Model simulation area and distribution and elevation of 18 cities in Sichuan Basin

图2 2020年4月20日-5月10日4个城市逐时O3质量浓度观测（黑线）和模拟（红线）结果

Figure 2 Results of hourly O3 concentration observation (black line) and simulation (red line) in four cities from April 20 to May 10, 2020

图3 2020年4月20日-5月10日4个城市逐时PM2.5质量浓度观测（黑线）和模拟（红线）结果

Figure 3 Results of hourly PM2.5 concentration observation (black line) and simulation (red line) in four cities from April 20 to May 10, 2020

图4 四川盆地污染过程期间模拟的地面O3_8h和PM2.5质量浓度图中黑色圆点代表成都市，黑色三角代表重庆市

Figure 4 Simulated surface O3_8h and PM2.5 during the pollution process in Sichuan Basin

图5 4个城市4月20日-5月10日O3、PM2.5和PM2.5组分质量浓度的时间序列

Figure 5 Time series of O3, PM2.5 and PM2.5 components in four cities from April 20 to May 10

图6 4个城市不同光化学水平下PM2.5的组分质量浓度及占比特征

Figure 6 Components and proportion characteristics of PM2.5 in four cities at different photochemical levels

图7 不同光化学水平下各个污染物质量浓度的平均日变化

Figure 7 Average daily changes of each pollutant at different photochemical levels

表1 4个城市不同光化学水平下OC/EC的比值

Table 1 Ratio of OC/EC at different photochemical levels in four cities

光化学水平	OC/EC的比值
光化学水平	成都	德阳	自贡	达州
轻		3.12	2.19	0.77
低	1.97	3.28	3.21	1.45
中	2.48	3.08	3.07	2.60

图8 4个城市不同光化学水平下PM2.5的碳组分（EC、POC、SOC）质量浓度及占比特征

Figure 8 The concentration and proportion characteristics of PM2.5 carbon components (EC, POC, SOC) at different photochemical levels in four cities

图9 4个城市不同光化学水平下氮氧化率（NOR）和硫氧化率（SOR）的特征

Figure 9 Characteristics of nitrogen oxidation rate (NOR) and sulfur oxidation rate (SOR) at different photochemical levels in four cities

参考文献 58

[1]	PIO C, CERQUEIRA M, HARRISON R M, et al., 2011. OC/EC ratio observations in Europe: Re-thinking the approach for apportionment between primary and secondary organic carbon[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 45(34): 6121-6132.
[2]	CASTRO L M, PIO C A, HARRISON R M, et al., 1999. Carbonaceous aerosol in urban and rural European atmospheres: Estimation of secondary organic carbon concentrations[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 33(17): 2771-2781.
[3]	CHEN Y J, ZHI G R, FENG Y L, et al., 2006. Measurements of emission factors for primary carbonaceous particles from residential raw‐coal combustion in China[J]. Geophysical Research Letters, 33(20): 20815-1-20815-4.
[4]	CHU B W, MA Q X, LIU J, et al., 2020. Air pollutant correlations in China: Secondary air pollutant responses to NO_x and SO₂ control[J]. Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 7(10): 695-700.
[5]	CHUANG M T, CHEN Y C, LEE C T, et al., 2016. Apportionment of the sources of high fine particulate matter concentration events in a developing aerotropolis in Taoyuan, Taiwan[J]. Environmental Pollution, 214: 273-281.
[6]	DAI H B, LIAO H, LI K, et al., 2023. Composited analyses of the chemical and physical characteristics of co-polluted days by ozone and PM_2.5 over 2013-2020 in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 23(1): 23-39.
[7]	DESHMUKH D K, DEB M K, MKOMA S L., 2013. Size distribution and seasonal variation of size-segregated particulate matter in the ambient air of Raipur city, India[J]. Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health, 6(1): 259-276.
[8]	FU J S, HSU N C, GAO Y, et al., 2012. Evaluating the influences of biomass burning during 2006 BASE-ASIA: A regional chemical transport modeling[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 12(9): 3837-3855.
[9]	HORNE J R, DONALD D., 2017. Impact of global climate change on ozone, particulate matter, and secondary organic aerosol concentrations in California: A model perturbation analysis[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 153: 1-17.
[10]	HU J L, CHEN J J, YING Q, et al., 2016. One-year simulation of ozone and particulate matter in China using WRF/CMAQ modeling system[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 16(16): 10333-10350.
[11]	HUANG R J, ZHANG Y L, CARLO B, et al., 2014. High secondary aerosol contribution to particulate pollution during haze events in China[J]. Nature, 514(7521): 218-222.
[12]	LEI Y, WU K, ZHANG X L, et al., 2023. Role of meteorology-driven regional transport on O₃ pollution over the Chengdu Plain, southwestern China[J]. Atmospheric Research, 285: 106619.
[13]	LI K, JACOB D J, LIAO H, et al., 2019. A two-pollutant strategy for improving ozone and particulate air quality in China[J]. Nature Geoscience, 12(11): 906-910.
[14]	LI X R, WANG L L, JI D S, et al., 2013. Characterization of the size-segregated water-soluble inorganic ions in the Jing-Jin-Ji urban agglomeration: Spatial/temporal variability, size distribution and sources[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 77: 250-259.
[15]	LI X R, WANG Y S, GUO X Q, et al., 2013. Seasonal variation and source apportionment of organic and inorganic compounds in PM_2.5 and PM₁₀ particulates in Beijing, China[J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 25(4): 741-750.
[16]	LU K, FUCHS H, HOFZUMAHAUS A, et al., 2019. Fast photochemistry in wintertime haze: Consequences for pollution mitigation strategies[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 53(18): 10676-10684. DOI PMID
[17]	MA J Z, XU X B, ZHAO C S, et al., 2012. A review of atmospheric chemistry research in China: Photochemical smog, haze pollution, and gas-aerosol interactions[J]. Advances in Atmospheric Sciences, 29(5): 1006-1026.
[18]	PANDIS S N, HARLEY R A, CASS G R, et al., 1992. Secondary organic aerosol formation and transport[J]. Atmospheric Environment. Part A. General Topics, 26(13): 2269-2282.
[19]	QIN Y, LI J Y, GONG K J, et al., 2021. Double high pollution events in the Yangtze River Delta from 2015 to 2019: Characteristics, trends, and meteorological situations[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 792: 148349.
[20]	SCHAUER J J, KLEEMAN M J, CASS G R, et al., 2002. Measurement of emissions from air pollution sources 5 C1 - C32 organic compounds from gasoline-powered motor vehicles[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 36(6): 1169-1180.
[21]	TIE X X, GENG F H, PENG L, et al., 2009. Measurement and modeling of O₃ variability in Shanghai, China: Application of the WRF-Chem model[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 43(28): 4289-4302.
[22]	TURPIN B J, HUNTZICKER J J, 1995. Identification of secondary organic aerosol episodes and quantitation of primary and secondary organic aerosol concentrations during SCAQS[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 29(23): 3527-3544.
[23]	WANG J D, ZHAO B, WANG S X, et al., 2017. Particulate matter pollution over China and the effects of control policies[J]. Science of The Total Environment, 584-585: 426-447.
[24]	WANG Y, ZHUANG G S, TANG A H, et al., 2005. The ion chemistry and the source of PM_2.5 aerosol in Beijing[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 39(21): 3771-3784.
[25]	WIOLETTA R K, KRZYSZTOF K, PATRYCJA R K, et al., 2012. A Study on the Seasonal Mass Closure of Ambient Fine and Coarse Dusts in Zabrze, Poland[J]. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 88(5): 722-729.
[26]	WU B, LIU C Q, ZHANG J, et al., 2021. The multifractal evaluation of PM_2.5-O₃ coordinated control capability in China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 129: 107877.
[27]	XIU G L, ZHANG D N, CHEN J Z, et al., 2004. Characterization of major water-soluble inorganic ions in size-fractionated particulate matters in Shanghai campus ambient air[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 38(2): 227-236.
[28]	YANG L X, ZHOU X H, WANG Z, et al., 2012. Airborne fine particulate pollution in Jinan, China: Concentrations, chemical compositions and influence on visibility impairment[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 55: 506-514.
[29]	YANG X Y, WU K, LU Y Q, et al., 2021. Origin of regional springtime ozone episodes in the Sichuan Basin, China: Role of synoptic forcing and regional transport[J]. Environmental Pollution, 278: 116845.
[30]	ZHANG X Y, ZHAO X, JI G X, et al., 2019. Seasonal variations and source apportionment of water-soluble inorganic ions in PM_2.5 in Nanjing, a megacity in southeastern China[J]. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, 76(1): 73-88.
[31]	ZHENG B, ZHANG Q, ZHANG Y, et al., 2015. Heterogeneous chemistry: A mechanism missing in current models to explain secondary inorganic aerosol formation during the January 2013 haze episode in North China[J]. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 15(4): 2031-2049.
[32]	ZHENG Y X, TAO X, QIANG Z, et al., 2017. Air quality improvements and health benefits from China's clean air action since 2013[J]. Environmental Research Letters, 12(11): 114020.
[33]	ZHU J, CHEN L, LIAO H, et al., 2019. Correlations between PM_2.5 and ozone over China and associated underlying reasons[J]. Atmosphere, 10(7): 352.
[34]	曹庭伟, 吴锴, 康平, 等, 2018. 成渝城市群臭氧污染特征及影响因素分析[J]. 环境科学学报, 38(4): 1275-1284.
	CAO T W, WU K, KANG P, et al., 2018. Ozone pollution characteristics and influencing factors in Chengdu-Chongqing urban agglomeration[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 38(4): 1275-1284.
[35]	陈瑶瑶, 廖彤, 汪宇, 等, 2022. 2016-2020年广东省臭氧污染特征[J]. 生态环境学报, 31(12): 2374-2381. DOI
	CHEN Y Y, LIAO T, WANG Y, et al., 2022. Characteristics of ozone pollution in Guangdong province from 2016 to 2020[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 31(12): 2374-2381.
[36]	高丽波, 王体健, 崔金梦, 等, 2019. 2016年夏季南京大气污染特征观测分析[J]. 中国环境科学, 39(1): 1-12.
	GAO L B, WANG T J, CUI J M, et al., 2019. Observation and analysis of air pollution characteristics over Nanjing in summer 2016[J]. China Environmental Science, 39(1): 1-12.
[37]	环境保护部, 国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 2012. 环境空气质量标准: GB 3095—2012[S]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社.
	Ministry of Environmental Protection, General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine, 2012. Ambient air quality standards: GB 3095-2012[S]. Beijing: China Environmental Press.
[38]	贾海鹰, 李矛, 程兵芬, 等, 2017. 长沙市城区臭氧浓度特征研究[J]. 环境科学与技术, 40(2): 168-173.
	JIA H Y, LI M, CHENG B F, et al., 2017. Study on the characteristics of ozone concentration in the urban area of Changsha city[J]. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(2): 168-173
[39]	康平, 侯静雯, 冯浩鹏, 等, 2022. 成都市PM_2.5和O₃复合污染特征及相互作用研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 42(10): 80-90.
	KANG P, HOU J W, FENG H P, et al., 2022. Study on the characteristics and interaction of PM_2.5 and O₃ combined pollution in Chengdu[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 42(10): 80-90.
[40]	赖安琪, 陈晓阳, 刘一鸣, 等, 2017. 珠江三角洲PM_2.5和O₃复合污染过程的数值模拟[J]. 中国环境科学, 37(11): 4022-4031.
	LAI A Q, CHEN X Y, LIU Y M, et al., 2017. Numerical simulation of PM_2.5 and O₃ combined pollution processes in the Pearl River Delta[J]. China Environmental Science, 37(11): 4022-4031.
[41]	赖安琪, 陈晓阳, 刘一鸣, 等, 2018. 珠江三角洲高质量浓度PM_2.5和O₃复合污染特征[J]. 中山大学学报(自然科学版), 57(4): 30-36.
	LAI A Q, CHEN X Y, LIU Y M, et al., 2018. Characteristics of high mass concentration PM_2.5 and O₃ combined pollution in the Pearl River Delta[J]. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis SunYatseni, 57(4): 30-36.
[42]	雷雨, 张小玲, 杨凯晴, 等, 2021. 川南城市群空气污染特征及气象影响因素分析[J]. 成都信息工程大学学报, 36(1): 101-109.
	LEI Y, ZHANG X L, YANG K Q, et al., 2021. Air pollution characteristics and meteorological influencing factors in southern Sichuan urban agglomeration[J]. Journal of Chengdu University of Information Technology, 36(1): 101-109.
[43]	李红丽, 王杨君, 黄凌, 等, 2020. 中国典型城市臭氧与二次气溶胶的协同增长作用分析[J]. 环境科学学报, 40(12): 4368-4379.
	LI H L, WANG Y J, HUANG L, et al., 2020. Analysis of synergistic growth of ozone and secondary aerosols in typical cities in China[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 40(12): 4368-4379.
[44]	李雪梅, 牟玲, 田妹, 等, 2020. 山西大学城PM_2.5中元素特征、来源及健康风险评估[J]. 环境科学, 41(11): 4825-4831.
	LI X M, MOU L, TIAN M, et al., 2020. Characteristics, sources and health risk assessment of PM_2.5 in Shanxi University Town[J]. Environmental Science, 41(11): 4825-4831.
[45]	罗琼, 冯淼, 宋丹林, 等, 2022. 成都春季复合污染下PM_2.5的化学消光贡献[J]. 大气与环境光学学报, 17(1): 148-159.
	LUO Q, FENG M, SONG D L, et al., 2022. Chemical extinction contribution of PM_2.5 under combined pollution in Chengdu in spring[J]. Journal of Atmospheric and Environmental Optics, 17(1): 148-159.
[46]	彭颖蓓, 刘国彬, 田霄, 等, 2019. 典型城市PM_2.5的污染特征、来源及影响因素分析[C]// 《环境工程》2019年全国学术年会论文集. 中国北京: 171-174.
	PENG Y B, LIU G B, TIAN X, et al., 2019. Analysis of pollution characteristics, sources and influencing factors of PM_2.5 in typical cities[C]// Proceedings of the 2019 National Academic Conference of Environmental Engineering. Beijing, China: 171-174.
[47]	秦思达, 王帆, 王堃, 等, 2021. 基于WRF-CMAQ模型的辽宁中部城市群PM_2.5化学组分特征[J]. 环境科学研究, 34(6): 1277-1286.
	QIN S D, WANG F, WANG K, et al., 2021. Chemical composition characteristics of PM_2.5 in urban agglomeration of Central Liaoning Province based on WRF-CMAQ model[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 34(6): 1277-1286.
[48]	任秀龙, 胡伟, 吴春苗, 等, 2022. 华北南部重污染城市周边区域二次气溶胶的化学特征及来源解析[J]. 环境科学, 43(3): 1159-1169.
	REN X L, HU W, WU C M, et al., 2022. Chemical characteristics and source analysis of secondary aerosols in the vicinity of heavily polluted cities in southern north China[J]. Environmental Science, 43(3): 1159-1169.
[49]	石慧斌, 黄艺, 程馨, 等, 2021. 成都市冬季PM_2.5中碳组分污染特征及来源解析[J]. 生态环境学报, 30(7): 1420-1427. DOI
	SHI H B, HUANG Y, CHENG X, et al., 2021. Pollution characteristics and sources of carbonaceous components in PM_2.5 during winter in Chengdu[J]. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 30(7): 1420-1427.
[50]	田赐, 何军, 张巍, 等, 2023. 2020年自贡市主城区PM_2.5污染特征及来源解析[J]. 四川环境, 42(1): 75-79.
	TIAN C, HE J, ZHANG W, et al., 2023. Characteristics and sources of PM_2.5 pollution in Zigong City in 2020[J]. Sichuan Environment, 42(1): 75-79.
[51]	王聪聪, 张小玲, 卢宁生, 2023. 2019-2021年四川盆地污染天气客观分型及典型污染个例研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 43(5): 2182-2197.
	WANG C C, ZHANG X L, LU N S, 2019. Objective classification of pollution weather and typical pollution cases in Sichuan Basin from 2019 to 2021[J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Sciences, 43(5): 2182-2197.
[52]	王君悦, 刘朝顺, 2022. 基于WRF-Chem的长三角地区PM_2.5和O₃污染协同控制研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 42(7): 32-42.
	WANG J Y, LIU C S, 2022. Study on coordinated control of PM_2.5 and O₃ pollution in Yangtze River Delta based on WRF-Chem[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 42(7): 32-42.
[53]	王文兴, 柴发合, 任阵海, 等, 2019. 新中国成立70年来我国大气污染防治历程、成就与经验[J]. 环境科学研究, 32(10): 1621-1635.
	WANG W X, CHAI F H, REN Z H, et al., 2019. History, achievements and experience of air pollution control in China since the founding of New China 70 years ago[J]. Research of Environmental Sciences, 32(10): 1621-1635.
[54]	王鑫, 安俊琳, 苏筱倩, 等, 2020. 南京北郊水溶性离子污染特征及其光学特性[J]. 中国环境科学, 40(2): 506-512.
	WANG X, AN J L, SU X Q, et al., 2020. Characteristics and optical properties of water-soluble ion pollution in the northern suburbs of Nanjing[J]. China Environmental Science, 40(2): 506-512.
[55]	吴锴, 康平, 王占山, 等, 2017. 成都市臭氧污染特征及气象成因研究[J]. 环境科学学报, 37(11): 4241-4252.
	WU K, KANG P, WANG Z S, et al., 2017. Characteristics and meteorological causes of ozone pollution in Chengdu[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 37(11): 4241-4252.
[56]	吴明, 吴丹, 夏俊荣, 等, 2019. 成都冬季PM_2.5化学组分污染特征及来源解析[J]. 环境科学, 40(1): 76-85.
	WU M, WU D, XIA J R, et al., 2019. Pollution characteristics and sources of PM_2.5 chemical components in Chengdu in winter[J]. Environmental Science, 40(1): 76-85.
[57]	肖伟, 何友江, 孟凡, 等, 2018. 空气质量模型中大气化学机理的发展与比较[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 8(1): 12-22.
	XIAO W, HE Y J, MENG F, et al., 2018. Development and comparison of atmospheric chemical mechanisms in air quality models[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 8(1): 12-22.
[58]	赵云卿, 陈善莉, 朱彬, 等, 2018. 南京北郊早春霾污染过程及硫酸盐形成研究[J]. 中国环境科学, 38(7): 2438-2444.
	ZHAO Y Q, CHEN S L, ZHU B, et al., 2018. Study on haze pollution process and sulfate formation in early spring in northern suburbs of Nanjing[J]. China Environmental Science, 38(7): 2438-2444.

基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM_2.5组分解析

Analysis of PM_2.5 Components During Continuous Spring Pollution in Sichuan Basin Based on WRF-CMAQ Model

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 58

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王薇, 伍君奇. 公共建筑入口形式对室内气溶胶扩散的影响研究[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(8): 1227-1235.
[2]	何沐全, 石艳军, 王晨茜, 罗祖红, 张少通. 广东省植被生态质量演变与气象条件贡献分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(5): 679-688.
[3]	王传扬, 张小玲, 兰琳惠, 潘婕. 2022年夏季高温干旱对四川盆地污染物浓度变化的影响分析[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(1): 80-91.
[4]	蒋伯琪, 浮天, 程昳璇, 苏枞枞, 沈建东, 于谨铖, 于兴娜. 沈阳市臭氧污染特征及其影响因素[J]. 生态环境学报, 2024, 33(1): 72-79.
[5]	王薇, 代萌萌. 基于颗粒物时空分布的街道峡谷空间形态研究——以合肥市同安街道为例[J]. 生态环境学报, 2023, 32(9): 1632-1643.

基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM2.5组分解析

Analysis of PM2.5 Components During Continuous Spring Pollution in Sichuan Basin Based on WRF-CMAQ Model

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 58

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

基于WRF-CMAQ模型的四川盆地春季持续臭氧污染过程中PM_2.5组分解析

Analysis of PM_2.5 Components During Continuous Spring Pollution in Sichuan Basin Based on WRF-CMAQ Model