Advertisement

Three-dimensional analysis of ozone and PM2.5 distributions obtained by observations of tethered balloon and unmanned aerial vehicle in Shanghai, China

  • Xiao-Bing Li
  • Dongfang Wang
  • Qing-Chang Lu
  • Zhong-Ren Peng
  • Qingyan Fu
  • Xiao-Ming Hu
  • Juntao Huo
  • Guangli Xiu
  • Bai Li
  • Chao Li
  • Dong-Sheng Wang
  • Hanyu Wang
Original Paper

Abstract

A lightweight unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and a tethered balloon platform were jointly used to investigate three-dimensional distributions of ozone and PM2.5 concentrations within the lower troposphere (1000 m) at a localized coastal area in Shanghai, China. Eight tethered balloon soundings and three UAV flights were conducted on May 25, 2016. Generalized additive models (GAMs) were used to quantitatively describe the relationships between air pollutants and other obtained parameters. Field observations showed that large variations were captured both in the vertical and horizontal distributions of ozone and PM2.5 concentrations. Significant stratified layers of ozone and PM2.5 concentrations as well as wind directions were observed throughout the day. Estimated bulk Richardson numbers indicate that the vertical mixing of air masses within the lower troposphere were heavily suppressed throughout the day, leading to much higher concentrations of ozone and PM2.5 in the planetary boundary layer (PBL). The NO and NO2 concentrations in the experimental field were much lower than that in the urban area of Shanghai and demonstrated totally different vertical distribution patterns from that of ozone and PM2.5. This indicates that aged air masses of different sources were transported to the experimental field at different heights. Results derived from the GAMs showed that the aggregate impact of the selected variables for the vertical variations can explain 94.3% of the variance in ozone and 94.5% in PM2.5. Air temperature, relative humidity and atmospheric pressure had the strongest effects on the variations of ozone and PM2.5. As for the horizontal variations, the GAMs can explain 56.3% of the variance in ozone and 57.6% in PM2.5. The strongest effect on ozone was related to air temperature, while PM2.5 was related to relative humidity. The output of GAMs also implied that fine aerosol particles were in the stage of growth in the experimental field, which is different from ozone (aged air parcels of ozone). Geographical parameters influenced the horizontal variations of ozone and PM2.5 concentrations by changing underlying surface types. The differences of thermodynamic properties between land and sea resulted in quick changes of PBL height, air temperature and dew point over the coastal area, which was linked to the extent of vertical mixing at different locations. The results of GAMs can be used to analyze the sources and formation mechanisms of ozone and PM2.5 pollutions at a localized area.

Keywords

UAS Air pollution Generalized additive model Lower tropospheric ozone Fine aerosol particles 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was Funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2016YFC0200500), the Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau (No. 2014-8) and the National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science (No. 16ZDA048). We express our sincere appreciation to the Second Surveying and Mapping Institute of Zhejiang Province for their help in flying the UAV. We are very grateful for the help from No. 38 institute of China Electronics Technology Group Company in operating the tethered balloon platform.

Supplementary material

477_2018_1524_MOESM1_ESM.docx (7.9 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 8107 kb)

References

  1. Aneja VP, Mathur R, Arya SP, Li Y, Murray GC, Manuszak TL (2000) Coupling the vertical distribution of ozone in the atmospheric boundary layer. Environ Sci Technol 34(11):2324–2329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aruffo E, Carlo PD, Dari-Salisburgo C, Biancofiore F, Giammaria F, Busilacchio M, Lee J, Moller S, Hopkins J, Punjabi S, Bauguitte S, O’Sullivan D, Percival C, Breton ML, Muller J, Jones R, Forster G, Reeves C, Heard D, Walker H, Ingham T, Vaughan S, Stone D (2014) Aircraft observations of the lower troposphere above a megacity: alkyl nitrate and O3 chemistry. Atmos Environ 94:479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates TS, Quinn PK, Johnson JE, Corless A, Brechtel FJ, Stalin SE, Meining C, Burkhart JF (2013) Measurements of atmospheric aerosol vertical distributions above Svalbard, Norway, using unmanned aerial systems (UAS). Atmos Meas Tech 6(8):2115–2120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchard CL (2000) Ozone process insights from field experiments—part III: extent of reaction and ozone formation. Atmos Environ 34(12):2035–2043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brady JM, Stokes MD, Bonnardel J, Bertram TH (2016) Characterization of a quadrotor unmanned aircraft system for aerosol particle concentration measurements. Environ Sci Technol 50(3):1376–1383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Camalier L, Cox W, Dolwick P (2007) The effects of meteorology on ozone in urban areas and their use in assessing ozone trends. Atmos Environ 41(33):7127–7137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carslaw DC, Beevers SD, Tate JE (2007) Modelling and assessing trends in traffic-related emissions using a generalised additive modelling approach. Atmos Environ 41(26):5289–5299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Castelluccio DM, Cisbani E, Frullani S (2007) SNIFFER system: a multipurpose aerial platform for large area radiological surveillance, emergency management and air pollution monitoring. Rep Natl Inst Health Rapporti ISTISAN 7:33Google Scholar
  9. Corrigan CE, Roberts GC, Ramana MV, Kim D, Ramanathan V (2008) Capturing vertical profiles of aerosols and black carbon over the Indian Ocean using autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles. Atmos Chem Phys 8:737–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Day DE, Malm WC (2001) Aerosol light scattering measurements as a function of relative humidity: a comparison between measurements made at three different sites. Atmos Environ 35(30):5169–5176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ding AJ, Wang T, Xue LK, Gao J, Stohl A, Lei H, Jin D, Ren Y, Wang X, Wei X, Qi Y, Liu J, Zhang X (2009) Transport of north China air pollution by midlatitude cyclones: case study of aircraft measurements in summer 2007. J Geophys Res Atmos 114:D08304Google Scholar
  12. Dominici F, McDermott A, Zeger SL, Samet JM (2002) On the use of generalized additive models in time-series studies of air pollution and health. Am J Epidemiol 156(3):193–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doran JC, Berkowitz CM, Coulter RL, Shaw WJ, Spicer CW (2003) The 2001 Phoenix Sunrise experiment: vertical mixing and chemistry during the morning transition in Phoenix. Atmos Environ 37(17):2365–2377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elston J, Argrow B, Stachura M, Weibel D, Lawrence D, Pope D (2015) Overview of small fixed-wing unmanned aircraft for meteorological sampling. J Atmos Ocean Technol 32(1):97–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emmons LK, Deeter MN, Gille JC, Edwards DP, Attié J-L, Warner J, Ziskin D, Francis G, Khattatov B, Yudin V, Lamarque J-F, Ho S-P, Mao D, Chen JS, Drummond J, Novelli P, Sachse G, Coffey MT, Hannigan JW, Gerbig C, Kawakami S, Kondo Y, Takegawa N, Schlager H, Baehr J, Ziereis H (2004) Validation of measurements of pollution in the troposphere (MOPITT) CO retrievals with aircraft in situ profiles. J Geophys Res Atmos 109:D03309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ganguly ND (2009) Surface ozone pollution during the festival of Diwali, New Delhi, India. Earth Sci India 2(2):224–229Google Scholar
  17. Gao HO (2007) Day of week effects on diurnal ozone/NOx cycles and transportation emissions in Southern California. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ 12(4):292–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Geng F, Zhang Q, Tie X, Huang M, Ma X, Deng Z, Quan J, Zhao C (2009) Aircraft measurements of O3, NOx, CO, VOCs, and SO2 in the Yangtze River Delta region. Atmos Environ 43(3):584–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenberg JP, Guenther AB, Turnipseed A (2009) Tethered balloon-based soundings of ozone, aerosols, and solar radiation near Mexico City during MIRAGE-MEX. Atmos Environ 43:2672–2677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guo S, Hu M, Zamora ML, Peng J, Shang D, Zheng J, Du Z, Wu Z, Shao M, Zeng L, Molina M, Zhang R (2014) Elucidating severe urban haze formation in China. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(49):17373–17378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haas P, Balistreri C, Pontelandolfo P, Triscone G, Pekoz H, Pignatiello A (2014) Development of an unmanned aerial vehicle UAV for air quality measurements in urban areas In: Proceedings of the 32nd AIAA applied aerodynamics conference; American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Atlanta, GA, USA pp 16–20Google Scholar
  22. Hastie TJ, Tibshirani RJ (1990) Generalized additive models. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 43Google Scholar
  23. He HD, Lu WZ (2012) Urban aerosol particulates on Hong Kong roadsides: size distribution and concentration levels with time. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 26(2):177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hu XM, Klein PM, Xue M, Shapiro A, Nallapareddy A (2013) Enhanced vertical mixing associated with a nocturnal cold front passage and its impact on near-surface temperature and ozone concentration. J Geophys Res-Atmos 118(7):2714–2728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Illingworth S, Allen G, Percival C, Hollingsworth P, Gallagher M, Ricketts H, Hayes H, Ładosz P, Crawley D, Roberts G (2014) Measurement of boundary layer ozone concentrations on-board a Skywalker unmanned aerial vehicle. Atmos Sci Lett 15(4):252–258Google Scholar
  26. Johnson BJ, Helmig D, Oltmans SJ (2008) Evaluation of ozone measurements from a tethered balloon-sampling platform at South Pole Station in December 2003. Atmos Environ 42(12):2780–2787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knapp KG, Jensen ML, Balsley BB, Bognar JA, Oltmans SJ, Smith TW, Birks JW (1998) Vertical profiling using a complementary kite and tethered balloon platform at Ferryland Downs, Newfoundland, Canada: observation of a dry, ozone-rich plume in the free troposphere. J Geophys Res Atmos 103:13389–13397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee SM, Fernando HJ, Princevac M, Zajic D, Sinesi M, McCulley JL, Anderson J (2003) Transport and diffusion of ozone in the nocturnal and morning planetary boundary layer of the Phoenix valley. Environ Fluid Mech 3(4):331–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li J, Fu Q, Huo J, Wang D, Yang W, Bian Q, Duan Y, Zhang Y, Pan J, Lin Y, Huang K, Bai Z, Wang S-H, Fu JS, Louie PKK (2015) Tethered balloon-based black carbon profiles within the lower troposphere of Shanghai in the 2013 East China smog. Atmos Environ 123:327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Li XB, Wang DS, Lu QC, Peng ZR, Lu SJ, Li B, Li C (2017) Three-dimensional investigation of ozone pollution in the lower troposphere using an unmanned aerial vehicle platform. Environ Pollut 224:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Li XB, Wang DS, Lu QC, Peng ZR, Wang ZY (2018) Investigating vertical distribution patterns of lower tropospheric PM2.5 using unmanned aerial vehicle measurements. Atmos Environ 173:62–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lin CH, Lai CH, Wu YL, Lai HC, Lin PH (2007) Vertical ozone distributions observed using tethered ozonesondes in a coastal industrial city, Kaohsiung, in southern Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess 127(1–3):253–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ma Z, Zhang X, Xu J, Zhao X, Meng W (2011) Characteristics of ozone vertical profile observed in the boundary layer around Beijing in autumn. J Environ Sci 23(8):1316–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ma ZQ, Xu HH, Meng W, Zhang XL, Xu J, Liu Q, Wang YS (2013) Vertical ozone characteristics in urban boundary layer in Beijing. Environ Monit Assess 185(7):5449–5460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ma Z, Xu J, Quan W, Zhang Z, Lin W, Xu X (2016) Significant increase of surface ozone at a rural site, north of eastern China. Atmos Chem Phys 16(6):3969–3977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marcazzan GM, Vaccaro S, Valli G, Vecchi R (2001) Characterisation of PM10 and PM25 particulate matter in the ambient air of Milan (Italy). Atmos Environ 35(27):4639–4650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McKee DJ (1994) Tropospheric ozone United States. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  38. Meng ZY, Ding GA, Xu XB, Xu XD, Yu HQ, Wang SF (2008) Vertical distributions of SO2 and NO2 in the lower atmosphere in Beijing urban areas, China. Sci Total Environ 390:456–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Neumann PP, Asadi S, Lilienthal AJ, Bartholmai M, Schiller JH (2012) Autonomous gas-sensitive microdrone: wind vector estimation and gas distribution mapping. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 19(1):50–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parrish DD, Trainer M, Holloway JS, Yee JE, Warshawsky MS, Fehsenfeld FC, Forbes GL, Moody JL (1998) Relationships between ozone and carbon monoxide at surface sites in the North Atlantic region. J Geophys Res Atmos 103(D11):13357–13376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pearce JL, Beringer J, Nicholls N, Hyndman RJ, Tapper NJ (2011) Quantifying the influence of local meteorology on air quality using generalized additive models. Atmos Environ 45(6):1328–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peng ZR, Wang D, Wang Z, Gao Y, Lu S (2015) A study of vertical distribution patterns of PM 25 concentrations based on ambient monitoring with unmanned aerial vehicles: a case in Hangzhou, China. Atmos Environ 123:357–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pisano JT, McKendry I, Steyn DG, Hastie DR (1997) Vertical nitrogen dioxide and ozone concentrations measured from a tethered balloon in the Lower Fraser Valley. Atmos Environ 31(14):2071–2078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ramanathan V, Ramana MV, Roberts G, Kim D, Corrigan C, Chung C, Winker D (2007) Warming trends in Asia amplified by brown cloud solar absorption. Nature 448(7153):575–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schlink U, Herbarth O, Richter M, Dorling S, Nunnari G, Cawley G, Pelikan E (2006) Statistical models to assess the health effects and to forecast ground-level ozone. Environ Modell Softw 21(4):547–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shindell DT, Rind D, Lonergan P (1998) Increased polar stratospheric ozone losses and delayed eventual recovery owing to increasing greenhouse-gas concentrations. Nature 392(6676):589–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sun Y, Zhuang G, Tang A, Wang Y, An Z (2006) Chemical characteristics of PM2.5 and PM10 in haze-fog episodes in Beijing. Environ Sci Technol 40(10):3148–3155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thompson ML, Reynolds J, Cox LH, Guttorp P, Sampson PD (2001) A review of statistical methods for the meteorological adjustment of tropospheric ozone. Atmos Environ 35(3):617–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tiwari S, Srivastava AK, Bisht DS, Bano T, Singh S, Behura S, Srivastava MK, Chate DM, Padmanabhamurty B (2009) Black carbon and chemical characteristics of PM10 and PM2.5 at an urban site of North India. J Atmos Chem 62(3):193–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Villa TF, Salimi F, Morton K, Morawska L, Gonzalez F (2016) Development and validation of a UAV based system for air pollution measurements. Sensors 16(12):2202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang J, Christopher SA (2003) Intercomparison between satellite-derived aerosol optical thickness and PM2.5 mass: implications for air quality studies. Geophys Res Lett 30(21):2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang T, Cheung VT, Anson M, Li YS (2001) Ozone and related gaseous pollutants in the boundary layer of eastern China: overview of the recent measurements at a rural site. Geophys Res Lett 28(12):2373–2376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Watson JG, Chow JC, Houck JE (2001) PM2.5 chemical source profiles for vehicle exhaust, vegetative burning, geological material, and coal burning in Northwestern Colorado during 1995. Chemosphere 43(8):1141–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wei F, Teng E, Wu G, Hu W, Wilson WE, Chapman RS, Pau JC, Zhang J (1999) Ambient concentrations and elemental compositions of PM10 and PM2.5 in four Chinese cities. Environ Sci Technol 33(23):4188–4193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilson KL, Birks JW (2006) Mechanism and elimination of a water vapor interference in the measurement of ozone by UV absorbance. Environ Sci Technol 40(20):6361–6367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yerramilli A, Challa VS, Indracanti J, Dasari H, Baham J, Patrick C, Young J, Hughes R, White LD, Hardy MG, Swanier S (2008) Some observational and modeling studies of the atmospheric boundary layer at Mississippi Gulf Coast for air pollution dispersion assessment. Int J Environ Res Public Health 5(5):484–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang YH, Su H, Zhong LJ, Cheng YF, Zeng LM, Wang XS, Xiang YR, Wang JL, Gao DF, Shao M, Fan SJ, Liu SC (2008) Regional ozone pollution and observation-based approach for analyzing ozone-precursor relationship during the PRIDE-PRD2004 campaign. Atmos Environ 42(25):6203–6262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhang J, Ji Y, Zhao J, Zhao J (2017a) Optimal location of a particulate matter sampling head outside an unmanned aerial vehicle. Particuology 32:153–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang K, Wang D, Bian Q, Duan Y, Zhao M, Fei D, Xiu G, Fu Q (2017b) Tethered balloon-based particle number concentration, and size distribution vertical profiles within the lower troposphere of Shanghai. Atmos Environ 154:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiao-Bing Li
    • 1
  • Dongfang Wang
    • 2
  • Qing-Chang Lu
    • 1
  • Zhong-Ren Peng
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • Qingyan Fu
    • 2
  • Xiao-Ming Hu
    • 5
  • Juntao Huo
    • 2
  • Guangli Xiu
    • 6
  • Bai Li
    • 1
  • Chao Li
    • 1
  • Dong-Sheng Wang
    • 1
  • Hanyu Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Shanghai Environmental Monitoring CenterShanghaiChina
  3. 3.China Institute for Urban GovernanceShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  4. 4.Department of Urban and Regional PlanningUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  5. 5.Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms, and School of MeteorologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  6. 6.Research Center of Risk Assessment and Control of Hazardous Chemical MaterialsEast China University of Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations