In situ formation and spatial variability of particle number concentration in a European megacity

• Main Authors: M. Pikridas, J. Sciare, F. Freutel, S. Crumeyrolle, S.-L. von der Weiden-Reinmüller, A. Borbon, A. Schwarzenboeck, M. Merkel, M. Crippa, E. Kostenidou, M. Psichoudaki, L. Hildebrandt, G. J. Engelhart, T. Petäjä, A. S. H. Prévôt, F. Drewnick, U. Baltensperger, A. Wiedensohler, M. Kulmala, M. Beekmann, S. N. Pandis
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Copernicus Publications 2015-09-01
• Series: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
• Online Access: http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/15/10219/2015/acp-15-10219-2015.pdf

Ambient particle number size distributions were measured in Paris, France, during summer (1–31 July 2009) and winter (15 January to 15 February 2010) at three fixed ground sites and using two mobile laboratories and one airplane. The campaigns were part of the Megacities: Emissions, urban, regional and Global Atmospheric POLlution and climate effects, and Integrated tools for assessment and mitigation (MEGAPOLI) project. New particle formation (NPF) was observed only during summer on approximately 50 % of the campaign days, assisted by the low condensation sink (about 10.7 ± 5.9 × 10⁻³ s^−1). NPF events inside the Paris plume were also observed at 600 m altitude onboard an aircraft simultaneously with regional events identified on the ground. Increased particle number concentrations were measured aloft also outside of the Paris plume at the same altitude, and were attributed to NPF. The Paris plume was identified, based on increased particle number and black carbon concentration, up to 200 km away from the Paris center during summer. The number concentration of particles with diameters exceeding 2.5 nm measured on the surface at the Paris center was on average 6.9 ± 8.7 × 10⁴ and 12.1 ± 8.6 × 10⁴ cm⁻³ during summer and winter, respectively, and was found to decrease exponentially with distance from Paris. However, further than 30 km from the city center, the particle number concentration at the surface was similar during both campaigns. During summer, one suburban site in the NE was not significantly affected by Paris emissions due to higher background number concentrations, while the particle number concentration at the second suburban site in the SW increased by a factor of 3 when it was downwind of Paris.