AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT
IN AN OIL AND GAS FIELD AT ATRUSH AREA WITH PARTICULARE REFERENCE TO SULFUR
DIOXIDE AND NITROGEN DIOIXDE
Omar M. Assaf a,* and Siraj Mouhammed Abdulla Goran a
a Dep. of
Environmental Sciences and Health, College of Science, University of Salahaddin, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
(Asaf.omar@hotmail.com; Siraj.goran@su.edu.krd)
Received: 15 Aug., 2022 / Accepted: 22 Nov., 2022 / Published: 30
Jan., 2023 https://doi.org/10.25271/sjuoz.2022.11.1.993
ABSTRACT:
The effectiveness and usability of a diffusion
tube for air quality sampling were assessed at 14 sites throughout an oil and
gas production area in Atrush sub-district for
measurement of Sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
in ambient air by Palmes
diffusion tubes in air during autumn and winter season of 2021-2022. Using triethanolamine as a trapping agent,
the passive sampler collects SO2 and NO2, which are then proven to
be sulphate and nitrite using ion chromatography and visible spectrometry. Ion
chromatography was used to determine the respective dissolved ionic forms of SO2.
Additionally, Ultraviolet-Visible (UV-Vis) spectrophotometry used to analyse NO2
as nitrite. Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
concentration was high in locations close to flare with high elevation, as well
as in winter season were higher than that of autumn season, the highest average
of CPF (Central Processing Facility) is (26.39 ppb), however the highest
concentration recorded is below Iraqi standard limit 140 ppb for 24 hr and
lowest average at ECP3(Entry Check Point 3) (4.37 ppb) respectively. Nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) concentrations were high in locations where heavy equipment’s
operated and in diesel consumption areas, highest average of NO2
concentration of E pad (East Pad) is (8.94 ppb), and lowest average was in ECP3
(3.09 ppb).
KEYWORDS:
Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Pollution, Air
Quality, Diffusion tube.
In the most recent decades, pollution
of the air has emerged as a significant problem, posing significant risks to
both human health as well as the natural environment (Bower et al., 1991). Individual cigarettes, as well as natural occurrences like
volcanic activity, as well as large volumes of pollutants created by
automobiles and industrial operations, are all examples of pollution sources (Robinson, 2005). A long-term results of the air pollution on the start of
illnesses like chest diseases also inflammatory disorders, cardiovascular
dysfunctions, also tumour are generally acknowledged (Rumana et al., 2014, Yamamoto et al.,
2014). As the direct outcome, air pollution is responsible for the
deaths of millions of people all over the world every year (Faustini et al., 2013). A recent study discovered a connection among male infertility
with air pollutants (Zhou et al., 2014). Over the last decades, there have been significant improvements
in our understanding for the impact of the air pollution on human well-being (Dasgupta and Srikanth, 2020). The majority of society, including those who suffer from lower
and upper respiratory issues, is aware that air pollution can induce
respiratory difficulties (Bernstein et al., 2004). Particulate matter (PM), Sulfur
dioxide, Nitrogen oxide, also Ozone are examples of historical air pollutants
that are often utilized as indicators of fuel combustion and transport air
pollution. Total suspended particle (TSP) levels in several big cities were
quite high in the mid-twentieth century. For instance, during the event that
took place in London in 1952, the ambient levels of the TSP as well as SO2
reached 1000s of micrograms and milligrams per cubic metre (mg/m3) (Davis, 2002). During 1970s, the transboundary nature of air
pollutants were already confirmed and recorded, a significant amount of focus
has been placed on the reduction of Sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions (Menz and Seip, 2004, Simpson et al., 1999). Vestreng (Vestreng et al., 2007) carried out study about Europe's anthropogenic
Sulfur emissions has decreased gradually during the
past 25 years, from around 55 Tg(total emission
trend) SO2 in 1980 to 15 Tg SO2
in 2004. When the concentration of SO2 exceeds the World Health
Organization's (WHO) recommended levels, it has a particularly negative impact
on persons suffering from asthma, bronchitis, lung and heart disorders (Khan and Siddiqui, 2014). When Sulfur dioxide
combines with water, an acid called Sulfuric acid is produced. Sulfuric acid is
the primary component of acid rain and a factor in the loss of forest cover (Vestreng et al., 2007). The petroleum sector has a variety of
pollution sources, with the following being the major categories of emission
sources which include Production emission that the standard process that occurs
in the oil and gas, petroleum refining sectors involve separations,
transformations, and processes such as fracturing, transforming,
polymerization. The gases released after these activities are called as
Production emissions, releases from burning are produced by the combustion of
energies for processing and transport. The main pollutant that emit from oil and gas production is Sulfur
dioxide, which is a colourless soluble aerosol with a distinctive unpleasant odour.
It is generated by the burning of Sulfur-containing
fossil fuels. Coal and lignite combustion account for around 80% of global
emissions, with oil accounting for the remaining 20%. Coal generally contains
approximately 2% Sulfur by weight, whereas heavy fuel
oil has about 3% (Harrop, 2018). Rapid economic growth and urbanization in
worldwide country have resulted in major air pollution concerns in recent
decades, with NOx would become the fastest rising air pollutant in some Asian
country over the previous two decades (Zhao et al., 2013). Attempts in Europe and North America to
minimize anthropogenic NO2 emissions have resulted in
remarkable decreases in urban NO2
levels (Zhou et al., 2012). The aim and objective of this study Were to
identify and evaluate the concentration of SO2 and/or NO2
pollutant in study area, identify factors affecting dispersion of gases in
atmosphere, assessment of pollutant in oil field area and estimated downwind
ambient concentration of pollutant emitted in oil field.
The
Study field area is located approximately 90 km north of Erbil and 70km
north-northeast of Mosul (36°52'8.00"N, 43°29'2.63"E) . The field is approximately 30km long and 9km wide,
covering an area of approximately 270 km2. The terrain within the block is
characterised by the high mountain ridge (Chiya E Khere Mountain) which generally follows the high points of
the sub-surface reservoir. The elevations of the block vary from approximately
600m to 1600m above mean seal level. The majority of the Upper Jurassic BSAM (Barsarin, Sargelu, Alan and Mus
formations) reservoir is located under the slopes of the north side of the
ridge, with the majority of populated areas located to
the south. Hence the Chiya E Khere
mountain ridge effectively screens the majority of
activities associated with the development of the Atrush
block from much of the local population.
Figure
1: Study Area map (Google map)
The
models that are now available predict a moderately to high temperature climate
for the lowlands, including an annual precipitation average of around 380
millimetres and temperatures that range from 0.6 to 37.3°C with significant
changes caused by atmospheric circulation effects and mountain air circulation
patterns(Wilkinson, 2003). While summers are dry and hot to very hot,
winters are mild to chilly. About 90% of the yearly precipitation falls between
December and March, during the winter season. The climate in the mountainous
highlands is categorized as Mediterranean, with up to 1000 mm of precipitation
annually and a lengthy rainy season (November to April)(Al-Zuhairi et al., 2016, Eklund and Seaquist, 2015). Majority of rivers and tributaries are active
in rainy season (Othman and Gloaguen, 2013) and ephemeral or inactive in the dry season.
The Tigris, Great Zab, Nahr al-Khazir
and Khabur are perennially active rivers.
Diffusive samplers available in a variety of
designs, including radial samplers, badges, and Palmes
diffusive samplers. 17–19 The Palmes diffusive
sampler(Palmes et al., 1976) provided by Gradko
Int. Ltd. was selected in order to concentrate on the most popular diffusional
samplers in Europe. With the use of a PTFE teflon
membranes and a static layer, the Palmes diffusive
sampler may collect air samples from the ambient atmosphere at a pace
determined by the tube's diameters and gaseous diffusion (Gerboles et al., 2006).
Diffusion
tubes were deployed in 14 locations in different elevation and distance from
source of flare for a period of time during hot and
cold season between 2021-2022; as just a result, they are constructed in such a
way as to ensure that a significant concentration of substances is absorbed
onto their surfaces before being noticed during the analysis. The tube Were positioned
in the designated location for monitoring, and it was remain
there for anywhere among two and four weeks. After the sample period has come
to an end, the tubes are sealed and sent back to the lab for further
examination. Depending on the type of diffusion tube being examined, a specific
method of examination is applied. The lab determined the concentration of each
component that is present on the tube. This information is then combined with
the absorption rate in a calculation to determine the average concentration of
substances that were available in the air during the course
of the monitoring period. The data are presented in terms of parts per
billion (ppb) and micrograms per cubic meter (µg.m-3) so that they can be
compared to the values recommended by health organizations (Singla, 2018).
Table 1:
Sampling Locations, Coordinates and Elevation
|
Location
Code |
Locations
(Area) |
Coordinates
UTM |
Elevation |
|
TM01 |
D pad Down Area |
38n |
1074 m |
|
TM02 |
Shilya Road |
38n |
1157 m |
|
TM03 |
Entry Check Point 1 (ECP1) |
38n |
1064 m |
|
TM04 |
Waste Water Pit Area |
38n |
1138 m |
|
TM05 |
ABC Camp (Base camp) |
38n |
1159 m |
|
TM06 |
A pad |
38n |
1168 m |
|
TM07 |
ATOC (Main Camp) |
38n |
1060 m |
|
TM08 |
Central Process Facility (CPF) |
38n |
1120 m |
|
TM09 |
Entry Check Point 2 (ECP2) |
38n |
1085 m |
|
TM10 |
G pad |
38n |
1060 m |
|
TM11 |
E pad |
38n |
1180 m |
|
TM12 |
Right of Way (ROW) |
38n |
1097 m |
|
TM13 |
C pad |
38n |
1004 m |
|
TM14 |
Entry Check Point 3(ECP3) |
38n |
656 m |
The mean
and standard deviation for SO2 and NO2 concentrations for
the seasonal cycle September 2021 to March 2022 are presented in Figure 2.
Fourteen locations recorded lowest average concentration of SO2 were
4.37 ppb at ECP3 and the highest average were 26.39 ±3.61 ppb at CPF, while the
lowest average of NO2 were 3.09 ±0.202 ppb and the highest average
were 8.94 ± 3.83 ppb at E Pad area. Within a range of 15 percent, which is
regarded as a suitable percentile for routine passive monitoring, the passive
approach generally agreed with active procedures (Ferm and Svanberg, 1998).
Table 2:
Mean and Standard Deviation for SO2 and NO2 in 14
different locations for Oil and Gas exploration and production area.
|
Area |
NO2 (ppb) |
|||
|
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
|
|
D pad Down Area |
14.51 |
5.07 |
6.43 |
1.12 |
|
Shilya Road |
20.57 |
5.98 |
6.35 |
2.4 |
|
ECP 1 |
14.81 |
2.4 |
6.1 |
1.55 |
|
Wastewater Pit Area |
18.58 |
2.96 |
5.99 |
1.85 |
|
ABC Camp |
16.03 |
2.75 |
3.85 |
1.87 |
|
A pad |
22.31 |
3.55 |
6.31 |
3.08 |
|
ATOC |
10.69 |
2.14 |
5.06 |
2.33 |
|
CPF |
26.39 |
3.61 |
5.75 |
2.58 |
|
ECP 2 |
16.99 |
6.47 |
7.72 |
4.33 |
|
G pad |
16.3 |
6.06 |
7.23 |
3.46 |
|
E pad |
23.07 |
2.69 |
8.94 |
3.83 |
|
Right of Way (ROW) |
13.37 |
4.34 |
3.58 |
1.29 |
|
C pad |
11.09 |
4.33 |
3.1 |
1.81 |
|
ECP 3 |
4.37 |
1.65 |
3.09 |
3.12 |
3.1.1 SO2 concentration in ambient
air: Table 2 displays Mean and Standard Deviation
for SO2 and NO2 pollutants in an oil and gas exploration
and production in 14 different area. The highest amount of SO2 is
explored in CPF (Central Process Facility) with 26.39 ppb which is nearest
location to the flare with an elevation 1120 m above sea, The greatest SO2
deposition was seen close to the main stacks that emit SO2 (Hsu et al., 2016). Islam et.al., studied and observed the maximum
SO2 concentration was observed at one of the site during the 2nd
exposure period with a value of 1.91 ppb which located far from flare (Islam et al., 2016), while Mahdi et.al., recorded average of 60
ppb of SO2 in Duhok city on 2017 (Mahdi et al., 2020) which almost triple of current study due to the
sulfur pollution by vehicle exhaust. The maximum permissible value for the
concentrations of SO2 and CO in the northern region of Iraq is 0.14
ppm for 24 hours, however the highest recorded concentration in study area is
below Iraqi standard. Followed by E pad
23.07 ppb located east side of flare with an 1180 m above sea as in the similar
elevation with CPF which the dispersion of gases and wind direction has impact
on the site as well as temporary production facility in operation, A pad 22.31
ppb which located west of flare with 1168 m above sea as almost similar
elevation with CPF, Shilya road 20.57 ppb is from
north west of flare with elevation 1157 m, Wastewater pit area 18.58 ppb. ECP2
and G pad are 16.99 ppb, 16.30 ppb as the readings are close each other due to close
distance to each other where both located north of flare, however both ECP1
14.81 ppb and D pad down area 14.51 ppb are adjacent located far west from
flare. Right of way 3.37 ppb and C pad 11.09 ppb which are located far east
from flare and nearby each other with huge distance from flare in a complex
terrain between them, however
ATOC 10.69 ppb is just in down west side of flare as has similar
reading with C pad due to similar elevation which might have impact on
dispersion of the gases around. Finally ECP3 4.37 ppb is from far east side of flare with
low elevation, respectively while the lowest detected by Nazrul Islam was 0.47
ppb (Islam et al., 2016). Respectively the mean of SO2 and
NO2 for all 14 locations shown in figure 2.
The offshore
facilities are where the majority of SO2 emissions take place. The
gas flare was the primary source of SO2 at the offshore facilities
79.13 percent; sweet gas and a little quantity of sour gas were burned during
the water treatment process (Papailias and Mavroidis, 2018).
3.1.2 NO2 concentration in ambient
air: The highest amount of NO2 is explored in E pad
area was 8.94 ppb due to temporary facility operation and diesel used heavy
equipment, generators emissions and local timber activities, while study
carried out by Islam et.al., and observed similar result with the maximum
concentration of NO2 among all locations exposure period was 9.1 ppb (Islam et al., 2016). Followed by ECP2 7.72 ppb where the entry
point and stopping heavy machines as located north side of flare, G pad 7.23
ppb as similar is located north side of flare and adjacent to ECP2 where some
drilling activities performed as result of high traffic of heavy equipment and
diesel used drilling equipment has impact both locations. (Hashim et al., 2021) studied During the COVID-19 lockdown in Iraq,
the effects of emission reductions due to reduced anthropogenic activities,
primarily on transportation and industry, on air pollution were investigated.
During four periods of partial and total lockdown, the NO2 concentration in
Baghdad was reduced by 6, 7, 8, and 20%, respectively. D pad down area 6.43 and Shilya
road 6.35 ppb is located far west of flare, however, is on the main road of
area which high heavy traffic cause reading of NO2. (Wu et al., 2021) During the COVID-19 pandemic, the diurnal
variation of NO2 and CO was significantly reduced at all Shanghai stations due
to vehicular movement restrictions, particularly during peak traffic hours. A
pad 6.31 ppb, ECP1 6.10 ppb where the check point of entering of heavy
equipment to activity site which cause of NO2 emission reading.
Wastewater pit area 5.99 ppb, CPF 5.75 ppb, ATOC 5.06 ppb, ABC camp 3.85 ppb, Right of way 3.58 ppb, C pad 3.10 ppb, and ECP3 3.09 ppb
respectively as shown in figure 2.
Figure
2: Mean for SO2 and NO2 in ppb for Oil and Gas exploration
and production in 14 different area.
Table 3:
Mean and Standard Deviation for SO2 and NO2 for oil and
gas exploration and production in seven different months.
|
Month |
SO2
(ppb) |
NO2
(ppb) |
||
|
Mean |
Standard
Deviation |
Mean |
Standard
Deviation |
|
|
Sep-21 |
15.24 |
6.69 |
6.14 |
3.01 |
|
Oct-21 |
17.49 |
5.2 |
6.32 |
2.46 |
|
Nov-21 |
17.34 |
7.41 |
7.21 |
2.45 |
|
Dec-21 |
15.52 |
8.19 |
2.45 |
2.98 |
|
Jan-22 |
15.59 |
5.59 |
6.19 |
2.62 |
|
Feb-22 |
19.01 |
8.37 |
6.42 |
2.61 |
|
Mar-22 |
14.36 |
5.11 |
5.03 |
2.73 |
3.1.3 Seasonal Variation: Table 3
shows the mean and standard deviation for SO2 and NO2
amounts for oil and gas exploration and production over seven months. The
highest amount of SO2 is explored in February 2022, is 19.01 ppb,
while studied carried out in south Iraq and recorded 165 ppb in winter season (Shehabalden and Azeez, 2017). followed by October 2021 17.4 ppb, November
2021 17.34 ppb where previous study recorded 147 ppb in autumn season. Where
the level decreased in January 2022 15.59 ppb, December 2021 15.52 ppb due to precipitation
of pollutant by effect of rain and snow, as well as the level of SO2
reduced in September 2021 15.24 ppb, and March 2022 14.36 ppb respectively as
shown in figure 3.
Furthermore,
the highest amount of NO2 is explored in November 2021 7.21 ppb,
Because the primary sources of SO2 and NO2 emissions are
industrial and transportation emissions, which only have modest seasonal
cycles, these emissions exhibit weak seasonal changes, with ratios of 1.4 and
1.3 between their maxima and minima values(Zhang et al., 2012).
Shehabalden et.al.,
(2017) recorded NO2 with a concentration of 185 ppb in autumn season
in south Iraq. Followed by February 2022 6.42 ppb, October 2021 6.32 ppb,
January 2021 6.19 ppb, September 2021 6.14 ppb, March 2022 5.03 ppb, and December
2021 2.45 ppb, when daytime sunlight is less intense, there is less
photodissociation of ozone and less hydroxyl radical production, which results
in less conversion of NO2 to HNO3(Hertel et al., 2011). Respectively as shown in figure 4. When
stated as NO2 equivalent, the total 2014 emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx
= NO + NO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from offshore and
onshore facilities from oil and gas extraction in Greece were 36.53 tonne (Papailias and Mavroidis, 2018).
Figure
3: Mean of monthly SO2 and NO2 concentration.
A normality test is used to determine whether a
sample data has been drawn from a normally distributed population.
Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test is used for normality of the data if the sample
is 50 or more (Aroian et al., 2017). According to the normality test in Table 4,
the p-values of both SO2 (0.200) and NO2 (0.070) are
greater than the significant level of alpha value (0.05) and this indicates
that the data sets are normally distributed.
Table 4:
Normality Test for SO2 and NO2 for Oil and Gas
exploration and production
|
Parameters |
Kolmogorov-Smirnova |
||
|
Statistic |
df |
p-value |
|
|
SO2 |
0.063 |
98 |
0.2 |
|
NO2 |
0.086 |
98 |
0.07 |
Table 5: Homogeneity of Variances Test for SO2 and NO2 for oil and gas exploration
and production
|
Gases |
Levene Statistic |
p-value |
|
SO2 |
1.166 |
0.319 |
|
NO2 |
1.023 |
0.438 |
Table 6 and 7 shows there are a statistically
significant difference between the mean of 14 separate regions where based of the distance of each area form the source of
flare and the type of activities conducted near each area which directly affect
the reading of SO2 and NO2 for gas exploration and SO2
and NO2 because its p-value (0.001) is less than the significant
level of α=0.05. It means, another indirect reason of the significant
differences is seasonal variation and elevation of each area there is a
difference between the mean of fourteen regions for gas exploration including D
pad Down Area, Shilya Road, ECP 1, Wastewater Pit
Area, ABC Camp, A pad, ATOC, CPF, ECP 2, G pad, E pad, ROW, C pad, and ECP 3.
Table 6: Comparison between the mean of 14
separate regions for oil and gas exploration and production by SO2
|
|
N |
Mean |
SD |
95% CI
for Mean |
Min |
Max |
F |
p-value |
|
|
Lower
Bound |
Upper
Bound |
||||||||
|
D pad
Down Area |
7 |
14.510 |
5.069 |
9.822 |
19.198 |
9.510 |
24.100 |
13.278 |
0.001 |
|
Shilya Road |
7 |
20.574 |
5.978 |
15.045 |
26.103 |
13.520 |
32.660 |
||
|
ECP 1 |
7 |
14.810 |
2.400 |
12.591 |
17.029 |
10.330 |
17.790 |
||
|
Waste Water Pit Area |
7 |
18.584 |
2.962 |
15.845 |
21.323 |
12.650 |
22.260 |
||
|
ABC Camp |
7 |
16.033 |
2.753 |
13.487 |
18.579 |
11.570 |
19.450 |
||
|
A pad |
7 |
22.306 |
3.552 |
19.021 |
25.591 |
16.230 |
25.730 |
||
|
ATOC |
7 |
10.689 |
2.142 |
8.708 |
12.669 |
7.180 |
14.200 |
||
|
CPF |
7 |
26.386 |
3.607 |
23.050 |
29.721 |
21.100 |
31.440 |
||
|
ECP 2 |
7 |
16.986 |
6.469 |
11.003 |
22.969 |
11.520 |
30.770 |
||
|
G pad |
7 |
16.304 |
6.062 |
10.698 |
21.910 |
10.730 |
29.010 |
||
|
E pad |
7 |
23.074 |
2.688 |
20.589 |
25.560 |
18.700 |
26.460 |
||
|
ROW |
7 |
13.369 |
4.341 |
9.354 |
17.383 |
8.320 |
21.680 |
||
|
C pad |
7 |
11.086 |
4.332 |
7.079 |
15.092 |
6.350 |
18.800 |
||
|
ECP 3 |
7 |
4.373 |
1.655 |
2.842 |
5.903 |
2.390 |
7.150 |
||
|
Total |
98 |
16.363 |
6.733 |
15.013 |
17.713 |
2.390 |
32.660 |
||
Table 7:
Comparison between the mean of 14 separate regions for oil and gas exploration
and production by NO2
|
|
N |
Mean |
SD |
95% CI
for Mean |
Min |
Max |
F |
p-value |
|
|
Lower
Bound |
Upper
Bound |
||||||||
|
D pad
Down Area |
7 |
6.431 |
1.122 |
5.394 |
7.469 |
4.580 |
7.960 |
3.109 |
0.001 |
|
Shilya Road |
7 |
6.353 |
2.404 |
4.129 |
8.577 |
4.250 |
11.630 |
||
|
ECP 1 |
7 |
6.100 |
1.551 |
4.666 |
7.534 |
3.060 |
7.820 |
||
|
Waste Water Pit Area |
7 |
5.993 |
1.851 |
4.281 |
7.705 |
2.770 |
8.080 |
||
|
ABC Camp |
7 |
3.854 |
1.868 |
2.127 |
5.582 |
0.300 |
5.750 |
||
|
A pad |
7 |
6.310 |
3.078 |
3.463 |
9.157 |
0.300 |
9.710 |
||
|
ATOC |
7 |
5.063 |
2.327 |
2.911 |
7.215 |
0.300 |
7.820 |
||
|
CPF |
7 |
5.754 |
2.584 |
3.365 |
8.144 |
0.300 |
8.060 |
||
|
ECP 2 |
7 |
7.716 |
4.330 |
3.711 |
11.721 |
0.300 |
14.300 |
||
|
G pad |
7 |
7.234 |
3.455 |
4.039 |
10.430 |
0.290 |
10.420 |
||
|
E pad |
7 |
8.941 |
3.826 |
5.403 |
12.480 |
2.110 |
12.920 |
||
|
ROW |
7 |
3.579 |
1.289 |
2.387 |
4.771 |
2.520 |
6.240 |
||
|
C pad |
7 |
3.100 |
1.810 |
1.426 |
4.774 |
0.300 |
6.100 |
||
|
ECP 3 |
7 |
3.089 |
3.121 |
0.202 |
5.975 |
0.030 |
9.400 |
||
|
Total |
98 |
5.680 |
2.995 |
5.079 |
6.280 |
0.030 |
14.300 |
||
Passive diffusive sampling may be used to
reliably measure the seasonal variability in the atmospheric Nitrogen dioxide
and Sulfur dioxide levels at sample locations of
different Oil and Gas operations in the region. The quantitative Sulfur dioxide and Nitrogen oxide concentrations obtained
by the IC and UV- Vis techniques highest correlation.
Both Nitrogen dioxide and Sulfur dioxide had a
seasonal trend; for example, highest Sulfur dioxide
levels were seen in February 19.01 ppb and in areas close to flares with high
elevation, whereas March had seen the lowest levels 14.36 ppb. The lowest
amount of Nitrogen dioxide was recorded in December 2.45 ppb at low elevation
and without operating of heavy equipment, whereas the Nitrogen Dioxide peak was
recorded in November 7.21 ppb at the site where heavy equipment was in operations.
The passive diffusion samplers in this study presented a reliable method
to examine the variations in ambient air quality along a vast region in
response to different gas production operations since their overall accuracy
was consistent with that observed in other studies elsewhere. In order to identify areas with increased ambient
concentrations, dispersion modelling and short-term consistent monitoring
should be combined with passive monitoring of Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
Sulfur dioxide (SO2), as was done in the
current study.
AL-ZUHAIRI, M.
F., AL-JUMAILY, K. J. & AL-SALIHI, A. M. 2016. Characteristics of
precipitation systems over Iraq observed by TRMM radar. American Journal of Engineering Research, 5, 76-81.
AROIAN, K., UDDIN, N. & BLBAS, H. 2017. Longitudinal study of
stress, social support, and depression in married Arab immigrant women. Health care for women international, 38, 100-117.
BERNSTEIN, J. A., ALEXIS, N., BARNES, C., BERNSTEIN, I. L., NEL,
A., PEDEN, D., DIAZ-SANCHEZ, D., TARLO, S. M. & WILLIAMS, P. B. 2004. Health
effects of air pollution. Journal of
allergy and clinical immunology, 114,
1116-1123.
BOWER, J., LAMPERT, J., STEVENSON, K., ATKINS, D. & LAW, D.
1991. A diffusion tube survey of NO2 levels in urban areas of the UK. Atmospheric Environment. Part B. Urban
Atmosphere, 25, 255-265.
DASGUPTA, P. & SRIKANTH, K. 2020. Reduced air pollution during
COVID-19: Learnings for sustainability from Indian Cities. Global Transitions, 2,
271-282.
DAVIS, D. L. 2002. A look back at the London smog of 1952 and the
half century since. Environmental health
perspectives, 110, A734-A735.
EKLUND, L. & SEAQUIST, J. 2015. Meteorological, agricultural
and socioeconomic drought in the Duhok Governorate, Iraqi Kurdistan. Natural Hazards, 76, 421-441.
FAUSTINI, A., STAFOGGIA, M., COLAIS, P., BERTI, G., BISANTI, L.,
CADUM, E., CERNIGLIARO, A., MALLONE, S., SCARNATO, C. & FORASTIERE, F.
2013. Air pollution and multiple acute respiratory outcomes. European Respiratory Journal, 42, 304-313.
FERM, M. & SVANBERG, P.-A. 1998. Cost-efficient techniques for
urban-and background measurements of SO2 and NO2. Atmospheric Environment, 32,
1377-1381.
GERBOLES, M., BUZICA, D., AMANTINI, L. & LAGLER, F. 2006.
Laboratory and field comparison of measurements obtained using the available
diffusive samplers for ozone and nitrogen dioxide in ambient air. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 8, 112-119.
HARROP, O. 2018. Air quality
assessment and management: A practical guide, CRC Press.
HASHIM, B. M., AL-NASERI, S. K., AL-MALIKI, A. & AL-ANSARI, N.
2021. Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on NO2, O3, PM2. 5 and PM10 concentrations
and assessing air quality changes in Baghdad, Iraq. Science of the Total Environment, 754, 141978.
HERTEL, O., REIS, S., SKJOTH, C. A., BLEEKER, A., HARRISON, R.,
CAPE, J. N., FOWLER, D., SKIBA, U., SIMPSON, D. & JICKELLS, T. 2011.
Nitrogen processes in the atmosphere. The
European nitrogen assessment: Sources, effects and policy perspectives.
Cambridge University Press.
HSU, Y.-M., BYTNEROWICZ, A., FENN, M. E. & PERCY, K. E. 2016.
Atmospheric dry deposition of sulfur and nitrogen in the Athabasca Oil Sands
Region, Alberta, Canada. Science of the
Total Environment, 568, 285-295.
ISLAM, S. N., JACKSON, P. L. & AHERNE, J. 2016. Ambient
nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide concentrations over a region of natural gas
production, Northeastern British Columbia, Canada. Atmospheric Environment, 143,
139-151.
KHAN, R. R. & SIDDIQUI, M. 2014. Review on Effects Of
Particulates: Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Dioxide on Human Health. Int Res J Environl Sci, 3, 70-3.
MAHDI, B., YOUSIF, K. & DOSKY, L. S. 2020. Influence of
meteorological parameters on air quality and other pollutants in Duhok city,
Iraq. The Iraqi Journal of Agricultural
Science, 51, 1160-1172.
MENZ, F. C. & SEIP, H. M. 2004. Acid rain in Europe and the
United States: an update. Environmental
Science & Policy, 7,
253-265.
OTHMAN, A. A. & GLOAGUEN, R. 2013. River courses affected by
landslides and implications for hazard assessment: A high resolution remote
sensing case study in NE Iraq–W Iran. Remote
sensing, 5, 1024-1044.
PALMES, E., GUNNISON, A., DIMATTIO, J. & TOMCZYK, C. 1976.
Personal sampler for nitrogen dioxide. American
Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 37, 570-577.
PAPAILIAS, G. & MAVROIDIS, I. 2018. Atmospheric emissions from
oil and gas extraction and production in Greece. Atmosphere, 9, 152.
ROBINSON, D. L. 2005. Air pollution in Australia: Review of costs,
sources and potential solutions. Health
Promotion Journal of Australia, 16,
213-220.
RUMANA, H. S., SHARMA, R. C., BENIWAL, V. & SHARMA, A. K. 2014.
A retrospective approach to assess human health risks associated with growing
air pollution in urbanized area of Thar Desert, western Rajasthan, India. Journal of Environmental Health Science and
Engineering, 12, 1-9.
SHEHABALDEN, S. H. & AZEEZ, N. M. 2017. Air quality index over
Basra Province, south of Iraq. International
Journal of Technical Research and Applications, 5, 112-114.
SIMPSON, D., WINIWARTER, W., BÖRJESSON, G., CINDERBY, S., FERREIRO,
A., GUENTHER, A., HEWITT, C. N., JANSON, R., KHALIL, M. A. K. & OWEN, S.
1999. Inventorying emissions from nature in Europe. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 104, 8113-8152.
SINGLA, S. Air quality friendly route recommendation system. Proceedings of the 2018 workshop on MobiSys
2018 Ph. D. forum, 2018. 9-10.
VESTRENG, V., MYHRE, G., FAGERLI, H., REIS, S. & TARRASÓN, L.
2007. Twenty-five years of continuous sulphur dioxide emission reduction in
Europe. Atmospheric chemistry and
physics, 7, 3663-3681.
WILKINSON, T. J. 2003. Archaeological
landscapes of the Near East, University of Arizona Press.
WU, C.-L., WANG, H.-W., CAI, W.-J., NI, A.-N. & PENG, Z.-R.
2021. Impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on roadside traffic-related air pollution
in Shanghai, China. Building and
environment, 194, 107718.
YAMAMOTO, S., PHALKEY, R. & MALIK, A. 2014. A systematic review
of air pollution as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease in South Asia:
Limited evidence from India and Pakistan. International
journal of hygiene and environmental health, 217, 133-144.
ZHANG, X., VAN GEFFEN, J., LIAO, H., ZHANG, P. & LOU, S. 2012.
Spatiotemporal variations of tropospheric SO2 over China by SCIAMACHY
observations during 2004–2009. Atmospheric
Environment, 60, 238-246.
ZHAO, B., WANG, S., LIU, H., XU, J., FU, K., KLIMONT, Z., HAO, J.,
HE, K., COFALA, J. & AMANN, M. 2013. NO x emissions in China: historical
trends and future perspectives. Atmospheric
Chemistry and Physics, 13,
9869-9897.
ZHOU, N., CUI, Z., YANG, S., HAN, X., CHEN, G., ZHOU, Z., ZHAI, C.,
MA, M., LI, L. & CAI, M. 2014. Air pollution and decreased semen quality: a
comparative study of Chongqing urban and rural areas. Environmental Pollution, 187,
145-152.
ZHOU, Y., BRUNNER, D., HUEGLIN, C., HENNE, S. & STAEHELIN, J.
2012. Changes in OMI tropospheric NO2 columns over Europe from 2004 to 2009 and
the influence of meteorological variability. Atmospheric Environment, 46,
482-495.
This is an open access under a CC
BY-NC-SA 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)