Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (5) : 1     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-016-0828-z
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
Screening the emission sources of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in China by multi-effects evaluation
He NIU,Ziwei MO,Min SHAO(),Sihua LU,Shaodong XIE
State Joint Key Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Download: PDF(2143 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Guide   
Abstract

We develop a multi-effect evaluation method to assess integrated impact of VOCs.

Enable policy-makers to identify important emission sources, regions, and key species.

Solvent usage and industrial process are the most important anthropogenic sources.

Styrene, toluene, ethylene, benzene, and m/p-xylene are key species to be cut.

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) play important roles in the atmosphere via three main pathways: photochemical ozone formation, secondary organic aerosol production, and direct toxicity to humans. Few studies have integrated these effects to prioritize control measures for VOCs sources. In this study, we developed a multi-effects evaluation methodology based on updated emission inventories and source profiles, by combining the ozone formation potential (OFP), secondary organic aerosol potential (SOAP), and VOC toxicity data. We derived species-specific emission inventories for 152 sources. The OFPs, SOAPs, and toxicity of each source were estimated, the contribution and sharing of source to each of these adverse effects were calculated. Weightings were given to the three adverse effects by expert scoring, and then the integrated effect was determined. Taking 2012 as the base year, solvent use and industrial process were found to be the most important anthropogenic sources, accounting for 24.2% and 23.1% of the integrated effect, respectively, followed by biomass burning, transportation, and fossil fuel combustion, each had a similar contribution ranging from 16.7% to 18.6%. The top five industrial sources, including plastic products, rubber products, chemical fiber products, the chemical industry, and oil refining, accounted for nearly 70.0% of industrial emissions. Beijing, Chongqing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, and Guangdong were the five provinces contributing the largest integrated effects. For the VOC species from emissions showed the largest contributions were styrene, toluene, ethylene, benzene, and m/p-xylene.

Keywords Ozone formation      Secondary organic aerosol      Multi-effects evaluation      VOC abatement strategy     
This article is part of themed collection: Understanding the processes of air pollution formation (Responsible Editors: Min SHAO, Shuxiao WANG & Armistead G. RUSSELL)
Corresponding Authors: Min SHAO   
Issue Date: 09 May 2016
 Cite this article:   
He NIU,Ziwei MO,Min SHAO, et al. Screening the emission sources of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in China by multi-effects evaluation[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(5): 1.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-016-0828-z
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2016/V10/I5/1
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
He NIU
Ziwei MO
Min SHAO
Sihua LU
Shaodong XIE
species MIR/(g O3·g1 VOC) SOAPa) toxicity ?species MIR/(g O3·g1 VOC) SOAPa) toxicity
ethane 0.281 0.1 0 ?1-hexene 5.492 0 0
propane 0.489 0 0 ?ethyne 0.954 0.1 0
i-butane 1.230 0 0 ?benzene 0.721 92.9 4
n-butane 1.151 0.3 0 ?toluene 4.005 100 2
cyclopentane 2.392 0 0 ?m/p-xylene 9.750 84.5 2
i-pentane 1.446 0.2 0 ?ethylbenzene 3.038 111.6 2
n-pentane 1.313 0.3 0 ?o-xylene 7.640 95.5 2
methylcyclopentane 2.191 0 0 ?styrene 1.733 212.3 2
cyclohexane 1.250 0 0 ?1,2,3-trimethylbenzene 11.971 43.9 1
2,2-dimethylbutane 1.173 0 0 ?1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 8.872 20.6 1
2,3-dimethylbutane 0.969 0 0 ?1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 11.763 13.5 1
2-methylpentane 1.502 0 0 ?i-propylbenzene 2.516 95.5 1
3-methylpentane 1.805 0.2 0 ?m-ethyltoluene 7.391 100.6 0
n-hexane 1.244 0.1 1 ?n-propylbenzene 2.025 109.7 1
methylcyclohexane 1.698 0 0 ?o-ethyltoluene 5.586 94.8 0
2,3-dimethylPentane 1.344 0.4 0 ?p-ethyltoluene 4.444 69.7 0
2,4-dimethylpentane 1.549 0 0 ?m-diethylbenzene 7.098 0 0
2-methylhexane 1.190 0 0 ?p-diethylbenzene 4.431 0 0
3-methylhexane 1.614 0 0 ?tetrachloromethane 0.000 0 3
n-heptane 1.074 0.1 0 ?chloroform 0.022 0 3
2,2,4-trimethylpentane 1.261 0 1 ?dichloromethane 0.041 0 3
2,3,4-trimethylpentane 1.030 0 0 ?chloromethane 0.038 0 3
2-methylheptane 1.073 0 0 ?tetrachloroethylene 0.031 0 2
3-methylheptane 1.239 0 0 ?vinyl chloride 2.827 0 4
n-octane 0.899 0.8 0 ?formaldehyde 9.456 0.7 3
n-nonane 0.781 1.9 0 ?aceteldehyde 6.539 0.6 3
n-decane 0.684 7 0 ?acrolein 7.451 0 2
n-undecane 0.611 16.2 0 ?propionaldehyde 7.081 0.5 1
ethene 8.995 1.3 1 ?butyraldehyde 5.974 0 1
propene 11.665 1.6 0 ?valeraldehyde 5.082 0 0
1,3-butadiene 12.612 1.8 4 ?isovaleraldehyde 4.972 0 0
1-butene 9.727 1.2 0 ?benzaldehyde 0.000 216.1 2
cis-2-butene 14.241 3.6 0 ?hexanaldehyde 4.353 0 0
trans-2-butene 15.163 4 0 ?acetone 0.356 0.3 0
isoprene 10.607 1.9 1 ?methyl ethyl ketone 1.481 0.6 1
1-pentene 7.207 0 0 ?isopropanol 0.614 0.4 0
cis-2-pentene 10.384 3.1 0 ?ethyl acetate 0.626 0.1 0
trans-2-pentene 10.565 3.1 0
Tab.1  MIR, SOAP, and toxicity grades of 75 VOC species
Fig.1  Multi-effects evaluation method used in this work
Fig.2  Contribution of (a) each sector, (b) different industrial sectors, (c) different solvent usage sectors, (d) different transportation sources to the multi-effects and emissions of VOCs
Fig.3  Contribution of the different groups of VOCs to (a) OFP, SOAP, toxicity and the integrated effect, and (b) different VOC sources
species OFP species SOAP species toxicity species integrated effect
ethene 21.3% styrene 35.3% ethene 18.4% styrene 16.4%
propene 9.3% toluene 20.2% benzene 14.1% toluene 12.8%
toluene 7.4% benzene 12.8% formaldehyde 13.1% ethene 12.3%
m/p-xylene 7.4% ethylbenzene 8.6% vinyl chloride 9.4% benzene 8.3%
formaldehyde 5.7% m/p-xylene 7.0% toluene 8.8% m/p-xylene 6.4%
1,3-butadiene 4.6% o-xylene 4.7% aceteldehyde 6.5% ethylbenzene 4.9%
o-xylene 3.4% m-ethyltoluene 2.3% styrene 6.4% formaldehyde 4.9%
1-butene 3.3% o-ethyltoluene 1.6% 1,3-butadiene 5.9% propene 3.8%
aceteldehyde 2.9% n-propylbenzene 1.4% dichloromethane 4.3% o-xylene 3.6%
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 2.8% p-ethyltoluene 1.1% m/p-xylene 3.1% 1,3-butadiene 3.1%
Tab.2  TOP 10 VOC species whose emissions need to be reduced in China
Fig.4  (a) OFP/emissions, (b) SOAP/emissions, (c) toxicity/emissions, (d) multi-effects/emissions, (e) VOCs emissions of different regions
Fig.5  (a) VOC emissions and (b) multi-effects associated with the GDP per unit for 15 important sectors
1 Shao M, Lu S, Liu Y, Xie X, Chang C, Huang S, Chen Z.Volatile organic compounds measured in summer in Beijing and their role in ground-level ozone formation. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, 2009, 114(D2):1291–1298
https://doi.org/doi:10.1029/2008JD010863
2 Carter W P, Pierce J A, Luo D, Malkina I L. Environmental chamber study of maximum incremental reactivities of volatile organic compounds. Atmospheric Environment, 1995, 29(18): 2499–2511
https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00149-S
3 Atkinson R, Arey J. Atmospheric degradation of volatile organic compounds. Chemical Reviews, 2003, 103(12): 4605–4638
https://doi.org/10.1021/cr0206420
4 Kanakidou M, Seinfeld J H, Pandis S N, Barnes I, Dentener F J, Facchini M C, Van Dingenen R, Ervens B, Nenes A, Nielsen C J, Swietlicki E, Putaud J P, Balkanski Y, Fuzzi S, Horth J, Moortgat G K, Winterhalter R, Myhre C E L, Tsigaridis K, Vignati E, Stephanou E G, Wilson J. Organic aerosol and global climate modelling: a review. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2005, 5(4): 1053–1123
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-5-1053-2005
5 Wang S, Wu D, Wang X M, Fung J C H, Yu J Z. Relative contributions of secondary organic aerosol formation from toluene, xylenes, isoprene, and monoterpenes in Hong Kong and Guangzhou in the Pearl River Delta, China: an emission—based box modeling study. Journal of Geophysical Research, D, Atmospheres, 2013, 118(2): 507–519
https://doi.org/10.1029/2012JD017985
6 Mølhave L. Volatile organic compounds, indoor air quality and health. Indoor Air,1991, 1(4): 357–376
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.1991.00001.x
7 Zhou J, You Y, Bai Z, Hu Y, Zhang J, Zhang N. Health risk assessment of personal inhalation exposure to volatile organic compounds in Tianjin, China. Science of the Total Environment, 2011, 409(3): 452–459
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.10.022
8 Avery R J. Reactivity-based VOC control for solvent products: more efficient ozone reduction strategies. Environmental Science & Technology, 2006, 40(16): 4845–4850
https://doi.org/10.1021/es060296u
9 Derwent R, JenkinM E, Passant N R, Pilling M J. Reactivity-based strategies for photochemical ozone control in Europe. Environmental Science & Policy, 2007, 10(5): 445–453
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.01.005
10 Laurent A, M ZHauschild. Impacts of NMVOC emissions on human health in European countries for 2000–2010: use of sector-specific substance profiles. Atmospheric Environment, 2014, 85: 247–255
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.11.060
11 Shin H J, Kim J C, Lee S J, Kim Y P. Evaluation of the optimum volatile organic compounds control strategy considering the formation of ozone and secondary organic aerosol in Seoul, Korea. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2013, 20(3): 1468–1481
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-1108-5
12 Yuan B, Chen W, Shao M, Wang M, Lu S, Wang B, Liu Y, Chang C C, Wang B. Measurements of ambient hydrocarbons and carbonyls in the Pearl River Delta (PRD), China. Atmospheric Research, 2012, 116: 93–104
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2012.03.006
13 Lv Z F, Hao J M, Duan J C, Li J H. Estimate of the formation potential of secondary organic aerosol in Beijing summertime. Environmental Sciences, 2009, 30(4): 969–975 (in Chinese)
14 Bo Y, Cai H, Xie S. Spatial and temporal variation of historical anthropogenic NMVOCs emission inventories in China. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 2008, 8(23): 7297–7316
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-8-7297-2008
15 Wei W, Wang S, Hao J, Cheng S. Trends of chemical speciation profiles of anthropogenic volatile organic compounds emissions in China, 2005–2020. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2014, 8(1): 27–41
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-012-0461-4
16 Liu Y, Shao M, Fu L, Lu S, Zeng L, Tang D. Source profiles of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) measured in China: Part I. Atmospheric Environment, 2008, 42(25): 6247–6260
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.01.070
17 Wei W, Wang S, Chatani S, Klimont Z, Cofala J, Hao J. Emission and speciation of non-methane volatile organic compounds from anthropogenic sources in China. Atmospheric Environment, 2008, 42(20): 4976–4988
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.02.044
18 Lu S, Liu Y, Shao M, Huang S. Chemical speciation and anthropogenic sources of ambient volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during summer in Beijing, 2004. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering in China, 2007, 1(2): 147–152
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-007-0026-0
19 Derwent R G, Jenkin M E, Passant N R, Pilling M J. Photochemical ozone creation potentials (POCPs) for different emission sources of organic compounds under European conditions estimated with a Master Chemical Mechanism. Atmospheric Environment, 2007, 41(12): 2570–2579
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.11.019
20 Suthawaree J, Tajima Y, Khunchornyakong A, Kato S, Sharp A, Kajii Y. Identification of volatile organic compounds in suburban Bangkok, Thailand and their potential for ozone formation. Atmospheric Research, 2012, 104-105:245–254
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2011.10.019
21 Carter W P. SAPRC Atmospheric Chemical Mechanisms and VOC Reactivity Scales. 2013. Available online at<Date>(accessed March 28, 2015)</Date>
22 Pandis S N, Harley R A, Cass G R, Seinfeld J H. Secondary organic aerosol formation and transport. Atmospheric Environment. Part A, General Topics, 1992, 26(13): 2269–2282
https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-1686(92)90358-R
23 Matsumoto K, Matsumoto K, Mizuno R, Igawa M. Volatile organic compounds in ambient aerosols. Atmospheric Research, 2010, 97(1–2): 124–128
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2010.03.014
24 Kroll J H, Seinfeld J H. Chemistry of secondary organic aerosol: Formation and evolution of low-volatility organics in the atmosphere. Atmospheric Environment, 2008, 42(16): 3593–3624
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.01.003
25 Derwent R G, Jenkin M E, Utembe S R, Shallcross D E, Murrells T P, Passant N R. Secondary organic aerosol formation from a large number of reactive man-made organic compounds. Science of the Total Environment, 2010, 408(16): 3374–3381
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.04.013
26 Chang C T, Chen B Y. Toxicity assessment of volatile organic compounds and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in motorcycle exhaust. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2008, 153(3): 1262–1269
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2007.09.091
27 Ramírez N, Cuadras A, Rovira E, Borrull F, Marcé R M. Chronic risk assessment of exposure to volatile organic compounds in the atmosphere near the largest Mediterranean industrial site. Environment International, 2012, 39(1): 200–209
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2011.11.002
28 European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. Reference document on best available techniques in the large volume organic chemical industry. Sevilla, <Date>February</Date>, 2003
29 World Health Organization, International Agency for Research on Cancer. Agents classified by the IARC monographs. 2013. Available online at <Date>(accessed March 25, 2015)</Date>
30 Yang L, Wu Y, Davis J M, Hao J. Estimating the effects of meteorology on PM2.5 reduction during the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing, China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering in China, 2011, 5(3): 331–341
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-011-0307-5
31 Mancilla Y, Herckes P, Fraser M P, Mendoza A. Secondary organic aerosol contributions to PM2.5 in Monterrey, Mexico: Temporal and seasonal variation. Atmospheric Research, 2015, 153: 348–359
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2014.09.009
32 Song Y, Xie S, Zhang Y, Zeng L, Salmon L G, Zheng M. Source apportionment of PM2.5 in Beijing using principal component analysis/absolute principal component scores and UNMIX. Science of the Total Environment, 2006, 372(1): 278–286
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2006.08.041
33 Daisey J, Mahanama K, Hodgson A. Toxic volatile organic compounds in simulated environmental tobacco smoke: emission factors for exposure assessment. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, 1997, 8(3):313–334
34 St. Helen G, Jacob P, Peng M, Dempsey D A, Hammond S K, Benowitz N L. Intake of toxic and carcinogenic volatile organic compounds from secondhand smoke in motor vehicles. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2014, 23(12): 2774–2782
https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0548
[1] FSE-15055-OF-NH_suppl_1 Download
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Wei WEI, Shuxiao WANG, Jiming HAO, Shuiyuan CHENG. Trends of chemical speciation profiles of anthropogenic volatile organic compounds emissions in China, 2005–2020[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2014, 8(1): 27-41.
[2] Biwu CHU, Jiming HAO, Junhua LI, Hideto TAKEKAWA, Kun WANG, Jingkun JIANG. Effects of two transition metal sulfate salts on secondary organic aerosol formation in toluene/NOx photooxidation[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2013, 7(1): 1-9.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed