Fine particles sampled at an urban background site and an industrialized coastal site in Northern France—Part 2: Comparison of offline and online analyses for carbonaceous aerosols

Figures & data

Figure 1. (Top) Time series of winter PAH measurements by online AMS (averaged data; open triangles: sum of C₁₆ to C₃₄; solid triangles: sum of C₁₆ to C₂₂) and from daily PM_2.5 filter samples collected in winter (solid circles: sum of C₁₆ to C₂₂ PAHs) in DO (n = 7) and GS (n = 9). (Bottom) Scatterplots comparing C₁₆ to C₂₂ PAH concentrations between both methods at both sites, together with the corresponding linear regression fits through the data (coefficients are given with a 1σ statistical uncertainty). One outlier was excluded from the GS dataset.

Figure 2. Time series of particulate organics observed in (left) DO and (right) GS in (top) winter and (bottom) summer. Each subpanel represents, from top to bottom, [OM]_AMS measured in NR-PM₁, OM_AMS/OC_AMS ratios determined from elemental analysis (only in winter), and averaged [OM]_AMS (open triangles), [OC]_AMS (solid triangles), and [OC]_F (solid circles) measured in PM_2.5.

Figure 3. (Top) Time series of [BC]_AE and (bottom) averaged [BC]_AE (black triangles) and [EC]_F (gray circles) in PM_2.5 sampled in (from left to right) DO in summer, GS during the winter and summer.