the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The Role of Naphthalene and Its Derivatives in the Formation of Secondary Organic Aerosols in the Yangtze River Delta Region, China
Abstract. Naphthalene (Nap) and its derivatives, including 1-methylnaphthalene (1-MN) and 2-methylnaphthalene (2-MN), serve as prominent intermediate volatile organic compounds (IVOCs) contributing to the formation of secondary organic carbon (SOC). In this study, the Community Multi-Scale Air Quality (CMAQ) model coupled with detailed emissions and reactions of these compounds was utilized to examine their roles in the formation of SOC and other secondary pollutants in the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region during summer. Remarkably, significant underestimations of Nap and MN concentrations (by 79 % and 85 %) were observed at the Taizhou site. To better capture the temporal variations of Nap and MN, their emissions in the YRD region were scaled up by a factor of 5 and 7, respectively, with constraints based on field measurements. After adjusting their emissions, Nap concentrations reached 27 ppt in the YRD, accounting for 4.1 % and 9.1 % (up to 13.7 %) of total aromatics emissions and aromatic-derived SOC, respectively. 1-MN and 2-MN were relatively low, with an average of 3 and 6 ppt in the YRD, and contributed 3.1 % of aromatic-derived SOC. The influences of Nap and MN oxidation on ozone and radicals might be trivial on a regional scale but were not negligible when considering daily fluctuations, particularly in Shanghai and Suzhou. This study emphasizes the high SOC formation potentials of Nap and MN, which may pose environmental risks and adverse health.
-
Notice on discussion status
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
-
Preprint
(1892 KB)
-
Supplement
(4798 KB)
-
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1892 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4798 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-3042', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Jan 2024
Summary:
Naphthalene (Nap) and its derivatives are important intermediate volatile organic compounds (IVOCs) contributing to the formation of secondary organic carbon (SOC). This manuscript uses the CMAQ model to investigate the impacts of Nap and methylnaphthalene (MN) on the formation of SOC and other secondary pollutants in the YRD region. Overall, the manuscript is well written and easy to follow. The results are interesting and meaningful. I recommend accepting this manuscript after some minor revisions.
Â
Minor comments:
- Lines 29-30: Does the 3.1% contribution refer to total methylnaphthalene?
- Lines 154-156: Why only the anthropogenic emissions of Nap and MN were scaled in the emis-adjust case? According to Figure S3, the Nap and MN emissions in the YRD regions are much lower than those in other regions. Could you please show the difference between the MEIC and the YRD emission inventories, and add a brief discussion about such uncertainty?
- Lines 160-161: Is the total Nap and MN emission rate over the YRD region 0.9 kg day-1? Please verify the numbers.
- Lines 195-196: Could you clarify the meaning of "the original settings" mentioned here?
- Lines 199-200: It is recommended to change the units for 1.40E-2 ppb and 1.50E-2 ppb to ppt.
- Lines 201-202: According to Figure 1, the simulated concentrations of OC and PM5 were nearly identical for both cases. Therefore, the term "improved" may not be appropriate here.
- Lines 269-272: There is no significant difference in the simulated OC concentrations between case-1product and case-2products.
- Lines 294-302: I’m curious about the diurnal variations in O3 and radicals. Could you provide more details?
- Figure 4: Please check the line length in the colorbar ticks.
Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3042-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-3042', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jan 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-3042', Anonymous Referee #1, 22 Jan 2024
Summary:
Naphthalene (Nap) and its derivatives are important intermediate volatile organic compounds (IVOCs) contributing to the formation of secondary organic carbon (SOC). This manuscript uses the CMAQ model to investigate the impacts of Nap and methylnaphthalene (MN) on the formation of SOC and other secondary pollutants in the YRD region. Overall, the manuscript is well written and easy to follow. The results are interesting and meaningful. I recommend accepting this manuscript after some minor revisions.
Â
Minor comments:
- Lines 29-30: Does the 3.1% contribution refer to total methylnaphthalene?
- Lines 154-156: Why only the anthropogenic emissions of Nap and MN were scaled in the emis-adjust case? According to Figure S3, the Nap and MN emissions in the YRD regions are much lower than those in other regions. Could you please show the difference between the MEIC and the YRD emission inventories, and add a brief discussion about such uncertainty?
- Lines 160-161: Is the total Nap and MN emission rate over the YRD region 0.9 kg day-1? Please verify the numbers.
- Lines 195-196: Could you clarify the meaning of "the original settings" mentioned here?
- Lines 199-200: It is recommended to change the units for 1.40E-2 ppb and 1.50E-2 ppb to ppt.
- Lines 201-202: According to Figure 1, the simulated concentrations of OC and PM5 were nearly identical for both cases. Therefore, the term "improved" may not be appropriate here.
- Lines 269-272: There is no significant difference in the simulated OC concentrations between case-1product and case-2products.
- Lines 294-302: I’m curious about the diurnal variations in O3 and radicals. Could you provide more details?
- Figure 4: Please check the line length in the colorbar ticks.
Â
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-3042-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2023-3042', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Jan 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-RC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2024/egusphere-2023-3042/egusphere-2023-3042-AC2-supplement.pdf
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Jingyi Li, 18 Mar 2024
Peer review completion
Journal article(s) based on this preprint
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
398 | 121 | 24 | 543 | 50 | 17 | 18 |
- HTML: 398
- PDF: 121
- XML: 24
- Total: 543
- Supplement: 50
- BibTeX: 17
- EndNote: 18
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Fei Ye
Yaqin Gao
Hongli Wang
Jingyu An
Cheng Huang
Keding Lu
Kangjia Gong
Haowen Zhang
Momei Qin
Jianlin Hu
The requested preprint has a corresponding peer-reviewed final revised paper. You are encouraged to refer to the final revised version.
- Preprint
(1892 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(4798 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
- Final revised paper