Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles
Gasoline vehicles significantly contribute to urban particulate matter (PM) pollution. Gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines, known for their higher fuel efficiency than that of port fuel injection (PFI) engines, have been increasingly employed in new gasoline vehicles. However, the impact of...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2018-06-01
|
| Series: | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| Online Access: | https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/18/9011/2018/acp-18-9011-2018.pdf |
| _version_ | 1819231126164602880 |
|---|---|
| author | Z. Du M. Hu M. Hu J. Peng J. Peng W. Zhang J. Zheng F. Gu Y. Qin Y. Yang M. Li Y. Wu M. Shao S. Shuai |
| author_facet | Z. Du M. Hu M. Hu J. Peng J. Peng W. Zhang J. Zheng F. Gu Y. Qin Y. Yang M. Li Y. Wu M. Shao S. Shuai |
| author_sort | Z. Du |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Gasoline vehicles significantly contribute to urban particulate
matter (PM) pollution. Gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines, known for
their higher fuel efficiency than that of port fuel injection (PFI) engines,
have been increasingly employed in new gasoline vehicles. However, the impact
of this trend on air quality is still poorly understood. Here, we
investigated both primary emissions and secondary organic aerosol (SOA)
formation from a GDI and a PFI vehicle under an urban-like driving condition,
using combined approaches involving chassis dynamometer measurements and
an environmental chamber simulation. The PFI vehicle emits slightly more
volatile organic compounds, e.g., benzene and toluene, whereas the GDI
vehicle emits more particulate components, e.g., total PM, elemental
carbon, primary organic aerosols and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
Strikingly, we found a much higher SOA production (by a factor of
approximately 2.7) from the exhaust of the GDI vehicle than that of the PFI
vehicle under the same conditions. More importantly, the higher SOA
production found in the GDI vehicle exhaust occurs concurrently with lower
concentrations of traditional SOA precursors, e.g., benzene and toluene,
indicating a greater contribution of intermediate volatility organic
compounds and semi-volatile organic compounds in the GDI vehicle exhaust to
the SOA formation. Our results highlight the considerable potential
contribution of GDI vehicles to urban air pollution in the future. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-23T11:40:00Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5749e7329c53464e86d8b5d815201b95 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1680-7316 1680-7324 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-23T11:40:00Z |
| publishDate | 2018-06-01 |
| publisher | Copernicus Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| spelling | doaj.art-5749e7329c53464e86d8b5d815201b952022-12-21T17:48:30ZengCopernicus PublicationsAtmospheric Chemistry and Physics1680-73161680-73242018-06-01189011902310.5194/acp-18-9011-2018Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehiclesZ. Du0M. Hu1M. Hu2J. Peng3J. Peng4W. Zhang5J. Zheng6F. Gu7Y. Qin8Y. Yang9M. Li10Y. Wu11M. Shao12S. Shuai13State Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaBeijing Innovation Center for Engineering Sciences and Advanced Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, Chinanow at: Department of Atmospheric Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USAState Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Department of Automotive Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Joint Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Pollution Control, College of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing 100871, ChinaState Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Department of Automotive Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, ChinaGasoline vehicles significantly contribute to urban particulate matter (PM) pollution. Gasoline direct injection (GDI) engines, known for their higher fuel efficiency than that of port fuel injection (PFI) engines, have been increasingly employed in new gasoline vehicles. However, the impact of this trend on air quality is still poorly understood. Here, we investigated both primary emissions and secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation from a GDI and a PFI vehicle under an urban-like driving condition, using combined approaches involving chassis dynamometer measurements and an environmental chamber simulation. The PFI vehicle emits slightly more volatile organic compounds, e.g., benzene and toluene, whereas the GDI vehicle emits more particulate components, e.g., total PM, elemental carbon, primary organic aerosols and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Strikingly, we found a much higher SOA production (by a factor of approximately 2.7) from the exhaust of the GDI vehicle than that of the PFI vehicle under the same conditions. More importantly, the higher SOA production found in the GDI vehicle exhaust occurs concurrently with lower concentrations of traditional SOA precursors, e.g., benzene and toluene, indicating a greater contribution of intermediate volatility organic compounds and semi-volatile organic compounds in the GDI vehicle exhaust to the SOA formation. Our results highlight the considerable potential contribution of GDI vehicles to urban air pollution in the future.https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/18/9011/2018/acp-18-9011-2018.pdf |
| spellingShingle | Z. Du M. Hu M. Hu J. Peng J. Peng W. Zhang J. Zheng F. Gu Y. Qin Y. Yang M. Li Y. Wu M. Shao S. Shuai Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics |
| title | Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| title_full | Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| title_short | Comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| title_sort | comparison of primary aerosol emission and secondary aerosol formation from gasoline direct injection and port fuel injection vehicles |
| url | https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/18/9011/2018/acp-18-9011-2018.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zdu comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT mhu comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT mhu comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT jpeng comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT jpeng comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT wzhang comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT jzheng comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT fgu comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT yqin comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT yyang comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT mli comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT ywu comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT mshao comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles AT sshuai comparisonofprimaryaerosolemissionandsecondaryaerosolformationfromgasolinedirectinjectionandportfuelinjectionvehicles |