秸秆燃烧排放PM2.5特征及影响因素研究

doi:10.6023/A16010008

化学学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 74 ›› Issue (4): 356-362.DOI: 10.6023/A16010008 上一篇下一篇

研究论文

秸秆燃烧排放PM_2.5特征及影响因素研究

王玉珏^a, 胡敏^a, 王渝^a, 秦艳红^a, 陈红阳^c, 曾立民^a, 雷建容^b, 黄晓锋^b, 何凌燕^b, 张瑞芹^c, 吴志军^a

a. 环境模拟与污染控制国家重点联合实验室北京大学环境科学与工程学院北京 100871;
b. 城市人居环境科学与技术重点实验室北京大学深圳研究生院环境与能源学院深圳 518055;
c. 郑州大学化学系郑州 450001

投稿日期:2016-01-05 发布日期:2016-02-23
通讯作者: 胡敏 E-mail:minhu@pku.edu.cn
基金资助:
项目受环保部公益性行业科研专项(No. 201409010)、国家自然科学基金重大项目(Nos. 91544214, 21190052)和中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(No. XDB05010500)资助.

Characterization and Influence Factors of PM_2.5 Emitted from Crop Straw Burning

Wang Yujue^a, Hu Min^a, Wang Yu^a, Qin Yanhong^a, Chen Hongyang^c, Zeng Limin^a, Lei Jianrong^b, Huang Xiaofeng^b, He Lingyan^b, Zhang Ruiqin^c, Wu Zhijun^a

a State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871;
b Key Laboratory for Urban Habitat Environmental Science and Technology, School of Environment and Energy, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055;
c Department of Chemistry, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001

Received:2016-01-05 Published:2016-02-23
Supported by:
Project supported by the Nonprofit Research Projects of Environmental Protection Department of China (No. 201409010), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 91544214, 21190052) and the Special Fund for Strategic Pilot Technology Chinese Academy of Sciences (No. XDB05010500).

文章分享

摘要/Abstract

生物质燃烧向大气中排放大量颗粒污染物, 在中国, 收获季节大量秸秆被直接露天燃烧处理, 对区域环境质量和人体健康造成严重影响. 对我国最主要的两种粮食作物玉米和小麦秸秆的露天燃烧进行模拟, 分析颗粒物排放水平, 特征及影响因素. 玉米和小麦秸秆燃烧PM_2.5排放因子分别为1082.8和835.7~897.3 mg/kg. 有机物是颗粒物最主要组分, 总量占PM_2.5质量的42%~66%. Cl^-和K⁺分别占PM_2.5总质量的4%~15%和2%~14%, K⁺/EC值为0.5~3.8. 各物种在颗粒物中所占比例与之前研究结果一致. 秸秆含水量和燃烧温度影响PM_2.5排放水平和组成特征. 随秸秆含水量增加, PM_2.5和OC的排放因子增加; 秸秆含水量增加, 燃烧温度逐渐降低, 由生物质燃料释放进入烟气中的K⁺和Cl^-比例逐渐减小导致二者在颗粒物中的比例降低. 我国每年由玉米和小麦秸秆露天燃烧排放的PM_2.5和OC分别为92.7 Gg和47.5 Gg, 在总量中占重要比例.

关键词: 生物质燃烧, 秸秆, PM_2.5, 排放因子, 特征, 影响因素

Large quantities of particulate pollutants are emitted into the atmosphere during biomass burning processes. In China, large amounts of agricultural residues are burned in the field during harvest seasons, which influence regional air quality and human health. Corn and wheat are two major crops grown in China, whose burning was simulated in this study. The controlled laboratory simulation of straw burning was performed in the Laboratory of Biomass Burning Simulation at Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School. The burning simulation system was improved and verified. Straw burning aerosols (PM_2.5) samples were collected and measured by gravimetric method. Organic carbon (OC) and elemental carbon (EC) were measured by thermal/optical method. Water-soluble inorganic ions and organic matter were measured by ion chromatography. Emission level, characterization and influence factors of crop straw burning aerosols are discussed. PM_2.5 emission factors of corn and wheat straw burning are 1082.8 and 835.7~897.3 mg/kg, respectively. Organic matter (OM), which is calculated by multiplying organic carbon (OC) by 1.3, is the major component of PM_2.5, accounting for 42%~66% of the total mass. Nearly half (37%~50%) of OM are water soluble. Cl^- and K⁺are two major components among water-soluble inorganic ions, accounting for 4%~15% and 2%~14% of total particle mass, respectively. The K⁺/EC ratio is 0.5~3.8. The proportions of these species in PM_2.5 are comparable to previous studies. Straw moisture content and burning temperature influence the emission level and characterization of straw burning aerosols. Emission factors of PM_2.5 and OC increase with the increase of straw moisture content because of incomplete burning. With higher moisture content, more thermal energy is used for the evaporation of water, lowering the burning temperature. Then less proportion of K⁺and Cl^- are released from biomass into the smoke. Therefore, their contributions to the particle mass decrease with the increase of straw moisture content. The emissions of PM_2.5 and OC/EC by crop straw burning in the field are estimated based on the emission factors obtained in this study. Corn and wheat burning in the field yield 92.7 Gg PM_2.5 and 47.5 Gg OC every year in China, accounting for important fractions among the total mass.

Key words: biomass burning, crop straw, PM_2.5, emission factor, characterization, influence factor

引用此文

王玉珏, 胡敏, 王渝, 秦艳红, 陈红阳, 曾立民, 雷建容, 黄晓锋, 何凌燕, 张瑞芹, 吴志军. 秸秆燃烧排放PM_2.5特征及影响因素研究[J]. 化学学报, 2016, 74(4): 356-362.

Wang Yujue, Hu Min, Wang Yu, Qin Yanhong, Chen Hongyang, Zeng Limin, Lei Jianrong, Huang Xiaofeng, He Lingyan, Zhang Ruiqin, Wu Zhijun. Characterization and Influence Factors of PM_2.5 Emitted from Crop Straw Burning[J]. Acta Chim. Sinica, 2016, 74(4): 356-362.

导出引用 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

分享此文

参考文献

[1] Simoneit, B. R. T. Appl. Geochem. 2002, 17, 129.
[2] Anderson, B. E.; Grant, W. B.; Gregory, G. L.; Browell, E. V.; Collins, J. E.; Sachse, G. W.; Bagwell, D. R.; Hudgins, C. H.; Blake, D. R.; Blake, N. J. J. Geophys. Res. 1996, 101, 24117.
[3] Cheng, Y.; Engling, G.; He, K. B.; Duan, F. K.; Ma, Y. L.; Du, Z. Y.; Liu, J. M.; Zheng, M.; Weber, R. J. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2013, 13, 7765.
[4] Khan, A. A.; de Jong, W.; Jansens, P. J.; Spliethoff, H. Fuel Process. Technol. 2009, 90, 21.
[5] Radzi bin Abas, M.; Oros, D. R.; Simoneit, B. R. Chemosphere 2004, 55, 1089.
[6] Andreae, M. O.; Merlet, P. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 2001, 15, 955.
[7] Iinuma, Y.; Brüggemann, E.; Gnauk, T.; Müller, K.; Andreae, M. O.; Helas, G.; Parmar, R.; Herrmann, H. J. Geophys. Res. 2007, 112.
[8] Streets, D. G.; Yarber, K. F.; Woo, J. H.; Carmichael, G. R. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 2003, 17, 1099.
[9] Cao, G. L.; Zhang, X. Y.; Zheng, F. C. Atmos. Environ. 2006, 40, 6516.
[10] Yan, X. Y.; Ohara, T.; Akimoto, H. Atmos. Environ. 2006, 40, 5262.
[11] Li, X.; Wang, S.; Duan, L.; Hao, J.; Li, C.; Chen, Y.; Yang, L. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, 6052.
[12] Hays, M. D.; Fine, P. M.; Geron, C. D.; Kleeman, M. J.; Gullett, B. K. Atmos. Environ. 2005, 39, 6747.
[13] Turn, S. Q.; Jenkins, B. M.; Chow, J. C.; Pritchett, L. C.; Campbell, D.; Cahill, T.; Whalen, S. A. J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos. 1997, 102, 3683.
[14] Li, J. F.; Song, Y.; Mao, Y.; Mao, Z. C.; Wu, Y. S.; Li, M. M.; Huang, X.; He, Q. C.; Hu, M. Atmos. Environ. 2014, 92, 442.
[15] Sanchis, E.; Ferrer, M.; Calvet, S.; Coscollà, C.; Yusà, V.; Cambra-López, M. Atmos. Environ. 2014, 98, 25.
[16] Shen, G.; Xue, M.; Wei, S.; Chen, Y.; Wang, B.; Wang, R.; Shen, H.; Li, W.; Zhang, Y.; Huang, Y.; Chen, H.; Wei, W.; Zhao, Q.; Li, B.; Wu, H.; Tao, S. J. Environ. Sci. 2013, 25, 511.
[17] Lu, H.; Zhu, L.; Zhu, N. Atmos. Environ. 2009, 43, 978.
[18] Ortiz de Zárate, I.; Ezcurra, A.; Lacaux, J. P.; Van Dinh, P. Atmos. Environ. 2000, 34, 3183.
[19] Nguyen, B. C.; Putaud, J. P.; Mihalopoulos, N.; Bonsang, B.; Doan, C. Environ. Monit. Assess. 1994, 31, 131.
[20] Levin, E. J. T.; McMeeking, G. R.; Carrico, C. M.; Mack, L. E.; Kreidenweis, S. M.; Wold, C. E.; Moosmüller, H.; Arnott, W. P.; Hao, W. M.; Collett, J. L.; Malm, W. C. J. Geophys. Res. 2010, 115.
[21] Dhammapala, R.; Claiborn, C.; Corkill, J.; Gullett, B. Atmos. Environ. 2006, 40, 1007.
[22] Guo, S.; Hu, M.; Guo, Q.; Shang, D. Acta Chim. Sinica 2014, 72, 658. (郭松, 胡敏, 郭庆丰, 尚冬杰, 化学学报, 2014, 72, 658.)
[23] Bae, M.-S.; Park, S.-S. Asian J. Atmos. Environ. 2013, 7, 95.
[24] Chen, L. W. A.; Verburg, P.; Shackelford, A.; Zhu, D.; Susfalk, R.; Chow, J. C.; Watson, J. G. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2010, 10, 6617.
[25] Bjorkman, E.; Stromberg, B. Energy Fuels 1997, 11, 1026.
[26] Jensen, P. A.; Frandsen, F. J.; Dam-Johansen, K.; Sander, B. Energy Fuels 2000, 14, 1280.
[27] Knudsen, J. N.; Jensen, P. A.; Dam-Johansen, K. Energy Fuels 2004, 18, 1385.
[28] He, L. Y.; Lin, Y.; Huang, X. F.; Guo, S.; Xue, L.; Su, Q.; Hu, M.; Luan, S. J.; Zhang, Y. H. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2010, 10, 11535.
[29] Guo, S.; Hu, M.; Wang, Z. B.; Slanina, J.; Zhao, Y. L. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2010, 10, 947.
[30] Huan, N.; Zeng, L. M.; Shao, M.; Cui, L.; Mao, J. T.; Zhou, N.; Dong, H. B.; Yu, Z. Y.; Luo, Z. M. Acta Sci. Nat. Univ. Pekinensis 2006, 42, 265 (in Chinese). (郇宁, 曾立民, 邵敏, 崔良, 毛节泰, 周楠, 董华斌, 俞仲英, 罗志明, 北京大学学报(自然科学版), 2006, 42, 265.)
[31] Koopmans, A.; Koppejan, J. Regional Consultation on Modern Applications of Biomass Energy 1997, 6.
[32] Hao, W. M.; Liu, M. H. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 1994, 8, 495.

秸秆燃烧排放PM_2.5特征及影响因素研究

Characterization and Influence Factors of PM_2.5 Emitted from Crop Straw Burning

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用此文

分享此文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

相关统计

本文评价

[1]	倪雪, 辛凯莉, 胡正利, 蒋翠玲, 万永菁, 应佚伦, 龙亿涛. 一种时序信号分类算法在纳米孔道离子电流信号识别中的应用^★[J]. 化学学报, 2023, 81(8): 912-919.
[2]	雷冬, 陆丹. 介电松弛谱法用于高分子链动力学行为的研究[J]. 化学学报, 2018, 76(8): 605-616.
[3]	楚婉怡, 唐笑, 李振, 林景诚, 钱觉时. 液相合成超薄TiO₂纳米片微结构影响因素研究[J]. 化学学报, 2018, 76(7): 549-555.
[4]	林瑶, 应佚伦, 高瑞, 王慧锋, 龙亿涛. 单个体矢量性特征的固体纳米孔道分析研究[J]. 化学学报, 2017, 75(7): 675-678.
[5]	贾云生, 王火焰, 赵雪松, 刘晓伟, 王一柳, 范群龙, 周健民. CaAl类水滑石的磷酸根吸附性能及其影响因素研究[J]. 化学学报, 2015, 73(11): 1207-1213.
[6]	杨慧, 彭娟, 邱枫. PI-b-P2VP两嵌段共聚物环状形貌的影响因素研究[J]. 化学学报, 2013, 71(08): 1141-1148.
[7]	张凌怡, 朱亚仙, 张维冰. 动态磁涂覆混合纳米固定相毛细管电色谱中芳香酸的输运特征研究[J]. 化学学报, 2013, 71(01): 62-68.
[8]	顾大明, 张传明, 顾硕, 张音, 王余, 强亮生. 锂-空气电池性能的影响因素及研究进展[J]. 化学学报, 2012, 70(20): 2115-2122.
[9]	刘建飞, 曹妍, 杨茂华, 李会泉, 邢建民. 微波辅助DMSO/AmimCl复合溶剂预处理玉米秸秆的酶解影响[J]. 化学学报, 2012, 70(18): 1950-1956.
[10]	曹根庭, 胥倩, 倪哲明. 含水Mg₃Al-LDH-Cl的电子结构与成键特征[J]. 化学学报, 2011, 69(24): 2947-2954.
[11]	赵海泉, 洪法水. 纳米氧化钛与小鼠乙酰胆碱酯酶的作用关系[J]. 化学学报, 2011, 69(03): 298-304.
[12]	李婷, 孟子晖, 王鹏, 王伯周, 王康, 葛忠学, 覃光明, 李华. 多元曲线分辨等方法和红外光谱用于二硝基五亚甲基四胺的合成反应机理研究[J]. 化学学报, 2010, 68(20): 2104-2110.
[13]	张东, 王敏, 谭玉玲. 基于秸秆模板法制备多孔纳米钛酸锶钡及其对重金属的吸附性能[J]. 化学学报, 2010, 68(16): 1641-1648.
[14]	宋凤瑞,闫存玉,刘宁,刘志强,刘淑莹. 利用电喷雾质谱研究单链寡聚核苷酸与人参皂苷的相互作用[J]. 化学学报, 2009, 67(10): 1103-1108.
[15]	贺莉娟, 梁逸曾, 赵晨曦^{,. 唇形科植物挥发油化学成分的GC/MS研究[J]. 化学学报, 2007, 65(3): 227-232.}

秸秆燃烧排放PM2.5特征及影响因素研究

Characterization and Influence Factors of PM2.5 Emitted from Crop Straw Burning

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用此文

分享此文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

相关统计

本文评价

秸秆燃烧排放PM_2.5特征及影响因素研究

Characterization and Influence Factors of PM_2.5 Emitted from Crop Straw Burning