Shanmuga Priyan, Yuxuan Guo, Aonghus McNabola, Brian Broderick, Brian Caulfield, Margaret O'Mahony, John Gallagher
{"title":"检测和量化爱尔兰都柏林一个主要铁路终点站附近火车和公路交通产生的 PM2.5 和二氧化氮。","authors":"Shanmuga Priyan, Yuxuan Guo, Aonghus McNabola, Brian Broderick, Brian Caulfield, Margaret O'Mahony, John Gallagher","doi":"10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Air pollution from transport hubs is a recognised health concern for local urban inhabitants. Within the domain of transport hubs, significant attention has been given to larger airport and port settings, however concerns have been raised about emissions from urban railway hubs, especially those with diesel trains. This paper presents an approach that adopts low-cost monitoring (LCM) for fixed site monitoring (FSM) to quantify and disaggregate PM<sub>2.5</sub> and NO<sub>2</sub> contributions from railway station and road traffic on air quality in the vicinity of railway station in Dublin, Ireland. The NO<sub>2</sub> sensor showed larger discrepancies than the PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor when compared to the reference monitor. Machine learning models (XGBoost and Random Forest (RF) regression) were applied to calibrate the LCM devices, with the XGBoost model (NO<sub>2,</sub> R<sup>2</sup> = 0.8 and RSME = 9.1 μg/m<sup>3</sup> & PM<sub>2.5</sub>, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.92 and RSME = 2.2 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) deemed more appropriate than the RF model. Local wind conditions, pressure, PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations, and road traffic significantly impacted NO<sub>2</sub> model results, while raw PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor readings greatly influenced the PM<sub>2.5</sub> model output. This highlights that the NO<sub>2</sub> sensor requires more input data for accurate calibration, unlike the PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor. The monitoring results from the one-month monitoring campaign from May 25, 2023 to June 25, 2023 presented elevated NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations measured at the railway station, which translated to exceedances of the annual WHO limits (PM<sub>2.5</sub> = 5 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, NO<sub>2</sub> = 10 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) by 1.6-1.8 and 3.2-5.2 times respectively at the study site. A subsequent data filtering technique based on wind orientation, revealed that the railway station was the main PM<sub>2.5</sub> source and road traffic was the main NO<sub>2</sub> source when winds come from the railway station. This study highlights the value of LCM devices alongside robust machine learning techniques to capture air quality in urban settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":311,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Pollution","volume":" ","pages":"124903"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detecting and quantifying PM<sub>2.5</sub> and NO<sub>2</sub> contributions from train and road traffic in the vicinity of a major railway terminal in Dublin, Ireland.\",\"authors\":\"Shanmuga Priyan, Yuxuan Guo, Aonghus McNabola, Brian Broderick, Brian Caulfield, Margaret O'Mahony, John Gallagher\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124903\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Air pollution from transport hubs is a recognised health concern for local urban inhabitants. Within the domain of transport hubs, significant attention has been given to larger airport and port settings, however concerns have been raised about emissions from urban railway hubs, especially those with diesel trains. This paper presents an approach that adopts low-cost monitoring (LCM) for fixed site monitoring (FSM) to quantify and disaggregate PM<sub>2.5</sub> and NO<sub>2</sub> contributions from railway station and road traffic on air quality in the vicinity of railway station in Dublin, Ireland. The NO<sub>2</sub> sensor showed larger discrepancies than the PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor when compared to the reference monitor. Machine learning models (XGBoost and Random Forest (RF) regression) were applied to calibrate the LCM devices, with the XGBoost model (NO<sub>2,</sub> R<sup>2</sup> = 0.8 and RSME = 9.1 μg/m<sup>3</sup> & PM<sub>2.5</sub>, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.92 and RSME = 2.2 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) deemed more appropriate than the RF model. Local wind conditions, pressure, PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations, and road traffic significantly impacted NO<sub>2</sub> model results, while raw PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor readings greatly influenced the PM<sub>2.5</sub> model output. This highlights that the NO<sub>2</sub> sensor requires more input data for accurate calibration, unlike the PM<sub>2.5</sub> sensor. The monitoring results from the one-month monitoring campaign from May 25, 2023 to June 25, 2023 presented elevated NO<sub>2</sub> and PM<sub>2.5</sub> concentrations measured at the railway station, which translated to exceedances of the annual WHO limits (PM<sub>2.5</sub> = 5 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, NO<sub>2</sub> = 10 μg/m<sup>3</sup>) by 1.6-1.8 and 3.2-5.2 times respectively at the study site. A subsequent data filtering technique based on wind orientation, revealed that the railway station was the main PM<sub>2.5</sub> source and road traffic was the main NO<sub>2</sub> source when winds come from the railway station. This study highlights the value of LCM devices alongside robust machine learning techniques to capture air quality in urban settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Pollution\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"124903\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Pollution\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124903\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Pollution","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.124903","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Detecting and quantifying PM2.5 and NO2 contributions from train and road traffic in the vicinity of a major railway terminal in Dublin, Ireland.
Air pollution from transport hubs is a recognised health concern for local urban inhabitants. Within the domain of transport hubs, significant attention has been given to larger airport and port settings, however concerns have been raised about emissions from urban railway hubs, especially those with diesel trains. This paper presents an approach that adopts low-cost monitoring (LCM) for fixed site monitoring (FSM) to quantify and disaggregate PM2.5 and NO2 contributions from railway station and road traffic on air quality in the vicinity of railway station in Dublin, Ireland. The NO2 sensor showed larger discrepancies than the PM2.5 sensor when compared to the reference monitor. Machine learning models (XGBoost and Random Forest (RF) regression) were applied to calibrate the LCM devices, with the XGBoost model (NO2, R2 = 0.8 and RSME = 9.1 μg/m3 & PM2.5, R2 = 0.92 and RSME = 2.2 μg/m3) deemed more appropriate than the RF model. Local wind conditions, pressure, PM2.5 concentrations, and road traffic significantly impacted NO2 model results, while raw PM2.5 sensor readings greatly influenced the PM2.5 model output. This highlights that the NO2 sensor requires more input data for accurate calibration, unlike the PM2.5 sensor. The monitoring results from the one-month monitoring campaign from May 25, 2023 to June 25, 2023 presented elevated NO2 and PM2.5 concentrations measured at the railway station, which translated to exceedances of the annual WHO limits (PM2.5 = 5 μg/m3, NO2 = 10 μg/m3) by 1.6-1.8 and 3.2-5.2 times respectively at the study site. A subsequent data filtering technique based on wind orientation, revealed that the railway station was the main PM2.5 source and road traffic was the main NO2 source when winds come from the railway station. This study highlights the value of LCM devices alongside robust machine learning techniques to capture air quality in urban settings.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Pollution is an international peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality research papers and review articles covering all aspects of environmental pollution and its impacts on ecosystems and human health.
Subject areas include, but are not limited to:
• Sources and occurrences of pollutants that are clearly defined and measured in environmental compartments, food and food-related items, and human bodies;
• Interlinks between contaminant exposure and biological, ecological, and human health effects, including those of climate change;
• Contaminants of emerging concerns (including but not limited to antibiotic resistant microorganisms or genes, microplastics/nanoplastics, electronic wastes, light, and noise) and/or their biological, ecological, or human health effects;
• Laboratory and field studies on the remediation/mitigation of environmental pollution via new techniques and with clear links to biological, ecological, or human health effects;
• Modeling of pollution processes, patterns, or trends that is of clear environmental and/or human health interest;
• New techniques that measure and examine environmental occurrences, transport, behavior, and effects of pollutants within the environment or the laboratory, provided that they can be clearly used to address problems within regional or global environmental compartments.