透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.137.185.180
  • 學位論文

台北捷運站、火車站及公車站超細粒徑懸浮微粒 濃度特性之研究

Characterization of ultrafine particles in mass rapid transit, train, and bus stations in Taipei.

指導教授 : 詹長權

摘要


目的:本研究針對台北都會區公車站、火車站及捷運站等大眾運輸車站環境中NC0.01-0.1( ultrafine particles,微粒粒徑<100nm )懸浮微粒之濃度與粒徑分佈情況及大眾運輸使用者暴露量進行比較研究。 方法:本研究環境採樣期間為2005年1月17日至2005年3月18日,使用SMPS+C以及DUSTTMcheck為採樣儀器,採集環境中之微粒粒數濃度與質量濃度值。總計於四處公車站(忠孝西路一段、板橋花市、忠孝東路五段、捷運劍潭站),三處火車站(台北火車站、板橋火車站、松山火車站)以及四處捷運站(台北車站、新埔站、永春站、劍潭站)進行11次現場採樣,每個採樣點均進行一次為期17.5小時的採樣。分析過程中我們分為NC0.01-0.1(微粒粒徑 < 100nm之粒數濃度)以及NC0.01-0.05(微粒粒徑 < 50nm之粒數濃度)兩個粒徑範圍進行討論,以了解大眾運輸環境中懸浮微粒粒數濃度以及粒徑分佈情形。此外,我們結合各車站測得之NC0.01-0.1濃度、候車時間及呼吸量來估計大眾運輸工具使用者之暴露量。 結果:研究結果發現NC0.01-0.1微粒粒數濃度值高低依序為公車站(12.8 × 104 cm-3)、室內火車站(6.38 × 104cm-3)以及室內捷運站(3.63 × 104cm-3);而火車站與捷運站位於不同室內外環境之比較,則是室外車站之粒數濃度低於室內車站。上班、下班交通尖峰時段與非尖峰時段,微粒粒數濃度變化差異在公車站以及捷運站有達到統計上的顯著(P-value<0.05),但在火車站並沒有類似的趨勢。在NC0.01-0.05粒徑範圍也有相同的發現。此外,在微粒粒徑分佈結果可發現公車站環境中微粒粒數濃度,主要分佈在粒徑小於50 nm以下之範圍,其佔微粒總粒數濃度約78.5%。火車站及捷運站的比例則分別為46.6%與47.1%。成年人於公車站、火車站及捷運站之年平均NC0.01-0.1暴露量為1.77 × 1013顆、5.76 × 1012顆及2.84 × 1012顆。 結論:大眾運輸公車站、火車站及捷運站環境中NC0.01-0.1之粒數濃度值,會因為與汽機車排放源遠近而有所差異,公車站濃度顯著高於火車站及捷運站。此項濃度差異導致搭乘公車之成人使用者年平均NC0.01-0.1暴露量較火車站高1.19 × 1013顆,較捷運站高1.48 × 1013顆。 關鍵字:超細粒徑懸浮微粒、大眾運輸車站、粒數濃度、通勤者、暴露評估

並列摘要


Objective: This study is designed to characterize NC0.01-0.1(number concentrations of ultrafine particles with size between 10nm ~ 100 nm) at public transportation stations, including mass rapid transit (MRT), train, and bus stations, in Taipei. Method: The number concentrations and size distribution of PM with size range 9.8-874.5 nm(Total number concentrations) were measured by a scanning mobility particle sizer(SMPS) at four bus stations, three train stations, and four mass rapid(MRT) stations in Taipei from January 17th to March 18th, 2005. The sampled period at each station is 17.5 hours. We focused our study on two particle sizes, i.e. NC0.01-0.1 and NC0.01-0.05(number concentrations of ultrafine particles with size between 10nm ~ 50 nm). NC0.01-0.1 exposures of public transportation users were estimated by combining NC0.01-0.1 concentrations at stations and commuters’ waiting time, and ventilation rate together. Result: Hourly average number concentrations of NC0.01-0.1 at bus, train and MRT stations were 12.8 × 104 cm-3, 6.38 × 104cm-3 and 3.63 × 104cm-3, respectively. For train and MRT stations, the number concentrations of NC0.01-0.1 at indoors were higher than those outdoors. Moreover, the number concentrations at MRT and bus stations in rush hours were higher than those in non-rush hours.We found the same results for NC0.01-0.05. The percentage of number concentrations of accounted for NC0.01-0.05 about 78.5% at bus stations, 46.6% at train stations, and 47.1% at MRT stations. Adult commuters’ annual NC0.01-0.1 exposures were 1.77 × 1013counts at bus stations, 5.76 × 1012counts at train stations, and 2.84 × 1012counts at MRT stations. Conclusion: The NC0.01-0.1 concentrations in public transportation stations varied by the distance between the stations and on-road vehicle emission sources in Taipei. The NC0.01-0.1 concentrations in bus stations were significantly higher than those in train and MRT stations. Accordingly, bus users annual NC0.01-0.1 exposures were 1.19 × 1013counts higher than train users, and 1.48 × 1013counts higher than MRT users.

參考文獻


Adamson IY, Prieditis H, Vincent R. Pulmonary toxicity of an atmospheric particulate sample is due to the soluble fraction. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1999; 157(1):43-50.
Burnett RT, Smith-Doiron M, Stieb D CS. Effect of particulate and gaseous air pollution on cardiorespiratory hospitalizations. Arch Environ Health 1999; 54:130-138.
Buzorius G, Hameri K, Pekkanen J, Kulmala M. Spatial variation of aerosol number concentration in Helsinki city. Atmos Environ 1999; 33(4):553-565.
Chan CC, Chuang KJ, Shiao GM, Lin LY. Personal exposure to submicrometer particles and heart rate variability in human subjects. Environ Health Perspect 2004; 112(10):1063-1067.
Chalupa DC, Morrow PE, Oberdorster G, Utell MJ, Frampton MW. Ultrafine particle deposition in subjects with asthma. Environ Health Perspect 2004; 112(8):879-882.

延伸閱讀