Publications

Skip Navigation Links.
Recently Published
Collapse per documenttypeper documenttype
Collapse ECN publicationECN publication
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1977
Expand BookBook
Expand ArticleArticle
Expand Article (scientific)Article (scientific)
Expand Conference PaperConference Paper
Expand PresentationPresentation
Expand OtherOther
Expand External memoExternal memo
Expand LeafletLeaflet
Expand per Unitper Unit
Expand per Clusterper Cluster

Search for publications:


Limit search to the fields

ECN publication
Title:
Wijkonderzoek fijn stof Nijmegen en omgeving: interimrapport resultaten eerste fase
 
Author(s):
Vermeulen, A.T.; Möls, J.J.; Erisman, J.W.
 
Published by: Publication date:
ECN 1-4-1999
 
ECN report number: Document type:
ECN-C--99-043 ECN publication
 
Number of pages: Full text:
16 Download PDF  

Abstract:
At eight locations in Nijmegen, Netherlands, and its direct surroundingswe measured 24 hour averages of PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations during three months at six day intervals. The mean concentration over all stations and measurement days was 26 mug/m3 for PM2.5 which is lower than the mean yearly average for The Netherlands. This can be explained by an unusual weather pattern during large parts of the measurement period. Often, no local influence on the PM concentrations could be traced, but at some stations and some situations a small contribution of the region could be found. In general the most southern measurement point had the lowest concentrations. At two points in the heart of the city sources of PM within the size range of 2.5 to 10 mum could be found during days with elevated mean concentrations. During one day of relatively clean conditions higher concentration were found at locations at the border of the city. Comparison of the filter measurements with continuous RIVM (National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection) TEOM measurements delivers quite good results for PM10. For PM2.5 the agreement is also good when the TEOM data is corrected with a rather high factor to compensate for losses during the warming of the sampled air. 7 refs.


Back to List