Physical and chemical characterisation of PM emissions from two ships operating in European Emission Control Areas
- 1IVL, Swedish Environmental Research Institute, P.O. Box 53021, 400 14 Gothenburg, Sweden
- 2Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology, Atmospheric Science, University of Gothenburg, 412 96, Gothenburg, Sweden
- 3TNO, Applied Environmental Chemistry, P.O. Box 80015, 3508 TA Utrecht, the Netherlands
- 4CEMES/CNRS, 29 rue Jeanne Marvig BP 94347, 31055, Toulouse Cedex 4, France
- 5Aix-Marseille Univ., CNRS, CINaM UMR7325, 13288, Marseille, France
- 6Chair for Analytical Chemistry, Institute of Hydrochemistry, Technische Universität München, 813 77 Munich, Germany
- *currently at: SMHI, 60176, Norrköping, Sweden
Abstract. In this paper emission factors (EFs) for particulate matter (PM) and some sub-components as well as gaseous substances were investigated in two onboard measurement campaigns. Emissions from two 4-stroke main engines were measured under stable-load conditions. The impact of varying engine load on the emissions was investigated on one of the engines, and the impact of fuel quality on the other, where heavy fuel oil (HFO) with sulphur content 1% and 0.5% and marine gas oil (MGO) with sulphur content 0.1% were used. Furthermore, emissions from one auxiliary engine were studied. The measured EFs for PM mass were in the range of 0.3 to 2.7 g kg−1 fuel with the lowest values for emissions from the combustion of MGO, and the highest values for HFO with a sulphur content of 1%. The PM mass size distribution was dominated by particles in accumulation mode. Emission factors for particle numbers EF(PN) in the range of 5 × 1015–1 × 1017 # kg−1 fuel were found, the number concentration was dominated by particles in the ultrafine mode and ca. 2/3 of the particle number were non-volatile.
The most abundant component of the PM mass was organic carbon, making up 25–60% of the PM. The measured EFs for organic carbon (OC) were 0.6 g kg−1 fuel for HFO and 0.2 g kg−1 fuel for MGO. Elemental carbon (EC) made up 10–38% of the PM mass, with no significant differences between HFO and MGO fuels. The concentrations of metals on sampled filters were investigated with energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF) and the detected metal elements in exhaust when using HFO was concluded to originate from both the fuel (V, Ni, Fe) and the lubricant (Ca, Zn), while for the case of MGO combustion, most of the metals were concluded to originate from the lubricants. The measured emission factors for sulphate particles, EF (SO2−4), were low, ca. 0.1–0.2 g kg−1 fuel for HFO with 1% sulphur, 0.07–0.09 g kg−1 fuel for HFO with 0.5% sulphur and 0.003–0.006 g kg−1 fuel for MGO. This corresponds to 0.1–0.8% and 0.1–0.6% of fuel S converted to PM sulphate for HFO and MGO, respectively.
Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) images of the collected PM showed three different types of particles: relatively pure soot; char and char-mineral particles; and amorphous, probably organic particles containing inorganic impurities. The maps of elements obtained from STEM showed a heterogeneous composition of primary soot particles with respect to the trace metals and sulphur. Temperature-programmed oxidation (TPO) of PM showed higher soot oxidation reactivity compared to automotive diesel soot, PM from the HFO exhaust being more reactive than PM from the MGO exhaust. Oxidative potential measured as the rate of consumption of Dithiothreitol (DTT) was for the first time measured on PM from ship exhaust. The obtained values were between 0.01 and 0.04 nmol DTT min−1 μg−1 PM, which is quite similar to oxidative potentials of PM collected at urban and traffic sites.
The data obtained during the experiments add information about emission factors for both gaseous and PM-bound compounds from ship engines using different fuels and under different engine-load conditions. Observed variability of the EFs illustrates uncertainties of these emission factors as a result of influences from fuel and lubricant composition, from differences between individual engines and from the differences in sampling conditions.