ABSTRACT
While anthropogenic pollutants have decreased during the lockdown imposed as an effort to contain the spread of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), changes in particulate matter (PM) do not necessarily exhibit the same tendency. This is the case for the eastern Arabian Peninsula, where in March-June 2020, and with respect to the same period in 2016-2019, a 30 % increase in PM concentration is observed. A stronger than normal nocturnal low-level jet and subtropical jet over parts of Saudi Arabia, in response to anomalous convection over the tropical Indian Ocean, promoted enhanced and more frequent episodes of Shamal winds over the Arabian Peninsula. Increased surface winds associated with the downward mixing of momentum to the surface fostered, in turn, dust lifting and increased PM concentrations. The stronger low-level winds also favoured long-range transport of aerosols, changing the PM values downstream. The competing effects of reduced anthropogenic and increased dust concentrations leave a small positive signal (<5 W m-2) in the net surface radiation flux (Rnet), with the former dominating during daytime and the latter at night. However, in parts of the Arabian Gulf, Sea of Oman and Iran Rnet increased by >20 W m-2 with respect to the baseline period, owing to a clearer environment and weaker winds. It is concluded that a reduction in anthropogenic emissions due to the lockdown does not necessarily go hand in hand with lower particulate matter concentrations. Therefore, emissions reduction strategies need to account for feedback effects in order to reach the planned long-term outcomes.
ABSTRACT
The preventive and cautionary measures taken by the UAE and Abu Dhabi governments to reduce the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and promote social distancing have led to a reduction of mobility and a modification of economic and social activities. This paper provides statistical analysis of the air quality data monitored by the Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi (EAD) during the first 10 months of 2020, comparing the different stages of the preventive measures. Ground monitoring data is compared with satellite images and mobility indicators. The study shows a drastic decrease during lockdown in the concentration of the gaseous pollutants analysed (NO2, SO2, CO, and C6H6) that aligns with the results reported in other international cities and metropolitan areas. However, particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) averaged concentrations followed a markedly different trend from the gaseous pollutants, indicating a larger influence from natural events (sand and dust storms) and other anthropogenic sources. The ozone (O3) levels increased during the lockdown, showing the complexity of O3 formation. The end of lockdown led to an increase of the mobility and the air pollution; however, air pollutant concentrations remained in lower levels than during the same period of 2019. The results in this study show the large impact of human activities on the quality of air and present an opportunity for policymakers and decision-makers to design stimulus packages to overcome the economic slow-down, with strategies to accelerate the transition to resilient, low-emission economies and societies more connected to the nature that protect human health and the environment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11869-021-01000-2.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Land-use regression (LUR) and dispersion models (DM) are commonly used for estimating individual air pollution exposure in population studies. Few comparisons have however been made of the performance of these methods. OBJECTIVES: Within the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE) we explored the differences between LUR and DM estimates for NO2, PM10 and PM2.5. METHODS: The ESCAPE study developed LUR models for outdoor air pollution levels based on a harmonised monitoring campaign. In thirteen ESCAPE study areas we further applied dispersion models. We compared LUR and DM estimates at the residential addresses of participants in 13 cohorts for NO2; 7 for PM10 and 4 for PM2.5. Additionally, we compared the DM estimates with measured concentrations at the 20-40 ESCAPE monitoring sites in each area. RESULTS: The median Pearson R (range) correlation coefficients between LUR and DM estimates for the annual average concentrations of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 were 0.75 (0.19-0.89), 0.39 (0.23-0.66) and 0.29 (0.22-0.81) for 112,971 (13 study areas), 69,591 (7) and 28,519 (4) addresses respectively. The median Pearson R correlation coefficients (range) between DM estimates and ESCAPE measurements were of 0.74 (0.09-0.86) for NO2; 0.58 (0.36-0.88) for PM10 and 0.58 (0.39-0.66) for PM2.5. CONCLUSIONS: LUR and dispersion model estimates correlated on average well for NO2 but only moderately for PM10 and PM2.5, with large variability across areas. DM predicted a moderate to large proportion of the measured variation for NO2 but less for PM10 and PM2.5.
