Spatial and temporal variability of atmospheric mercury concentrations emitted from a coal-fired power plant in Mexico

References

• Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme/United Nations Environment Programme (AMAP/UNEP). 2013a. Technical background report for the global mercury assessment. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, Oslo, Norway, and UNEP Chemicals Branch, Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.amap.no/documents/doc/technical-background-report-for-the-global-mercury-assessment-2013/848 (accessed November 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme/United Nations Environment Programme (AMAP/UNEP). 2013b. Geospatially distributed mercury emissions dataset 2010v1. http://www.amap.no/mercury-emissions/datasets ( accessed December 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, D.H., T.E. McKone, J.S. Evans, W.W. Nazaroff, M.D. Margni, O. Jolliet, and K.R. Smith. 2002. Defining intake fraction. Environ. Sci. Technol. 36:207A–11A. doi:10.1021/es0222770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergan T., L. Gallardo, and H. Rodhe. 1999. Mercury in the global troposphere: A three-dimensional model study. Atmos. Environ. 33:1575–85. doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00370-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bieser, J., F. De Simone, C. Gencarelli, B. Geyer, I. Hedgecock, V. Matthias, O. Travnikov, and A. Weigelt. 2014 A diagnostic evaluation of modeled mercury wet depositions in Europe using atmospheric speciated highresolution observations, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21:9995–10012. doi:10.1007/s11356-014-2863-2, 2014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, M.D., R.R. Draxler, R.S. Artz, M. Gustin, Y.-J. Han, T.M. Holsen, D. Jaffe, P. Kelley, H. Lei, C. Loughner, et al. 2016. Modeling the global atmospheric transport and deposition of mercury to the Great Lakes. Elementa Sci. Anthropocene 4:000118. doi:10.12952journal.elementa.999118.
   Google Scholar
• Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). 2013. An assessment of primary and secondary mercury supplies in Mexico. Montreal, QC, Canada: Commission for Environmental Cooperation. http://www.cec.org (accessed November 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Dastoor, A., A. Ryzhkov, D. Durnford, I. Lehnherr, A. Steffen, and H. Morrison. 2015. Atmospheric mercury in the Canadian Arctic. Part II. Insight from modeling. Sci. Total Environ. 509–510:16–27. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.10.112.
   Google Scholar
• De la Rosa, D.A., T. Volke-Sepúlveda, G. Solórzano, C. Green, R. Tordon, and S. Beachamp. 2004. Survey of atmospheric total gaseous mercury in Mexico. Atmos Environ. 38:4839–46. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.06.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Simone, F., C.N. Gencarelli, I.M. Hedgecock, and N. Pirrone. 2014. Global atmospheric cycle of mercury: a model study on the impact of oxidation mechanisms. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21:4110–23. doi:10.1007/s11356-013-2451-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gencarelli, C.N., F. De Simone, I.M. Hedgecock, F. Sprovieri, and N. Pirrone. 2014. Development and application of a regional-scale atmospheric mercury model based on WRF/Chem: A Mediterranean area investigation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21:4095–109. doi:10.1007/s11356-013-2162-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, A.M., and D.A. Gay. 2013. Observations of mercury wet deposition in Mexico. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 20:8316–25. doi:10.1007/s11356-013-2012-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). 2003. Concise international chemical assessment document 50. Elemental mercury and inorganic mercury compounds: human health aspects, Geneva. http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/cicad/en/cicad50.pdf (accessed December 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Jung, G., I.M. Hedgecock, and N. Pirrone. 2009. ECHMERIT V1.0—A new global fully coupled mercury-chemistry and transport model. Geosci. Model Dev. 2:175–95. doi:10.5194/gmd-2-175-2009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, D.S., E. Nemitz, D. Fowler, and R.D. Kingdon. 2001. Modeling atmospheric mercury transport and deposition across Europe and the UK. Atmos. Environ. 35:5455–66. doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(01)00284-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, J., and J. Hao. 2003. Application of intake fraction to population exposure estimates in Hunan Province of China, J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 38(6):1041–54. doi:10.1081/ESE-120019862.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mugica, V., M.A. Amador, M. Torres, and J. Figueroa. 2003. Mercurio y metales pesados tóxicos en cenizas provenientes de procesos de combustión e incineración. Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient 19(2):93–100. http://www.revistascca.unam.mx/rica/index.php/rica/article/viewFile/25141/23637 ( accessed August 2014).
   Google Scholar
• National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP). 2016. http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu (accessed January 2016).
   Google Scholar
• National Centers for Environmental Prediction. 2016. NCEP FNL Operational Model Global Tropospheric Analyses, continuing from July 1999. http://rda.ucar.edu/datasets/ds083.2 ( accessed August 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Petersen, G., R. Bloxam, S. Wong, J. Munthe, O. Krüger, S.R. Schmolke, and A.V. Kumar. 2001. A comprehensive Eulerian modeling framework for airborne mercury species: Model development and applications in Europe. Atmos. Environ. 35:3063–74. doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(01)00110-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pirrone, N., S. Cinnirella, X. Feng, R.B. Finkelman, H.R. Friedli, J. Leaner, R. Mason, A.B. Mukherjee, G.B. Stracher, D.G. Streets, and K. Telmer. 2010. Global mercury emissions to the atmosphere from anthropogenic and natural sources. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 10:5951–64. doi:10.5194/acp-10-5951-2010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prestbo, E.M., and D.A. Gay. 2009. Wet deposition of mercury in the US and Canada, 1996–2005: Results and analysis of the NADP mercury deposition network (MDN). Atmos. Environ. 43(27):4223–33. doi:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.05.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryaboshapko, A., R. Bullock, J. Christensen, M. Cohen, A. Dastoor, I. Ilyin, G. Petersen, D. Syrakov, R. Artz, D. Davignon, R. Draxer, and J. Munthe. 2007. Intercomparison study of atmospheric mercury models, 1. Comparison of models with short-term measurements. Sci. Total Environ. 376:228–40. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.01.072.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryaboshapko A., R. Bullock, R. Ebinghaus, I. Ilyin, K. Lohman, J. Munthe, G. Petersen, C. Seigneur, and I. Wängberg. 2002. Comparison of mercury chemistry models. Atmos. Environ. 36:3881–98. doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(02)00351-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schroeder, W.H., G. Yarwood, and H. Nikki. 1991. Transformation processes involving mercury species in the atmosphere. Water Air Soil Pollut. 56:653–66. doi:10.1007/BF00342307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scire, J.S., D.G. Strimaitis, and R.J. Yamartino. 2000. A user’s guide for the CALPUFF dispersion model (version 5.0). Earth Tech, Inc., Concord, MA. http://www.src.com/calpuff/download/CALPUFF_UsersGuide.pdf (accessed February 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Seigneur, C., J. Wrobel, and E. Constantinou. 1994. A chemical kinetic mechanism for atmospheric inorganic mercury. Environ. Sci. Technol. 28:1589–97. doi:10.1021/es00058a009
   Google Scholar
• Seigneur, C., P. Karamchandani, K. Lohman, and K. Vijayaraghavan. 2001. Multiscale modeling of the atmospheric fate and transport of mercury. J. Geophys. Res. 106:27795–809. doi:10.1029/2000JD000273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selin, N.E., D.J. Jacob, R.M. Yantosca, S. Strode, L. Jaeglé, and E.M. Sunderland. 2008. Global 3-D land–ocean–atmosphere model for mercury: Present-day versus preindustrial cycles and anthropogenic enrichment factors for deposition. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22. doi:10.1029/2007GB003040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Servicio Geológico Mexicano (SGM). 2016. http://www.gob.mx/sgm ( accessed November 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Secretaría del Trabajo y Previsión Social (STPS). 2016. NOM-010-STPS-2014: Agentes Químicos Contaminantes del Ambiente Laboral. Ciudad de México. http://asinom.stps.gob.mx:8145/upload/nom/.pdf ( accessed January 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Travnikov, O., and L. Ilyin. 2009. The EMEP/MSC-E mercury modeling system. In Mercury fate and transport in the global atmosphere: Emissions, measurements, and models, ed. N. Pirrone and R.P. Mason, 571–87. New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-93958-2_20.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2016. Minamata Convention. www.unep.org and www.mercuryconvention.org (accessed January 2016).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (U.S. DHHS). 1999. Toxicological profile for mercury. Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp46.pdf ( accessed September 2015).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1997. Environmental Protection Agency. Locating and estimating air emissions from sources of mercury and mercury compounds. December. http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/le/mercury.pdf (accessed March 1, 2015).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2002. Control of mercury emissions from coal-fired electric utility boilers: Interim report. EPA-600/R-01-109.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2005. Rules and regulations. Revision to the guideline on air quality models. 40 CFR, Federal Register part 51, vol. 70, no. 216. http://www3.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf ( accessed August 2014).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011. Electric generating utility mercury speciation profiles for the Clean Air Mercury Rule. EPA-454/R11-010.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2015. Bituminous and subbituminous coal combustion. In Compilation of air pollutant emission factors (AP-42), Vol. I, 5th ed., chap. I. www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42 (accessed January 2015).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016a. Mercury. www.epa.gov/mercury (accessed January 2016).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016b. National emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants compliance monitoring. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/188polls.html (accessed January 2016).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2016c. Technology transfer network support center for regulatory atmospheric modeling. http://www.epa.gov/scram001 (accessed January 2016)
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (WHO). 2000. Air quality guidelines for Europe. Copenhagen, Denmark: WHO.
   Google Scholar
• Xu X., X. Yang, D.R. Miller, J.J. Helble, and R.J. Carley. 2000. A regional scale modeling study of atmospheric transport and transformation of mercury. I. Model development and evaluation. Atmos. Environ. 34:4933–44. doi:10.1016/S1352-2310(00)00228-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L., P. Blanchard, D.A. Gay, E.M. Prestbo, M.R. Risch, D. Johnson, J. Narayan, R. Zsolway, T.M. Holsen, E.K. Miller, et al. 2012. Estimation of speciated and total mercury dry deposition at monitoring locations in eastern and central North America. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 12:4327–40. doi:10.5194/acp-12-4327-2012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar