MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2783488306 · doi:10.5194/acp-18-7757-2018

Stable sulfur isotope measurements to trace the fate of SO <sub>2</sub> in the Athabasca oil sands region

2018· article· en· W2783488306 on OpenAlexafffundabout
N. Amiri, Roya Ghahreman, Ofelia Rempillo, Travis W. Tokarek, Charles A. Odame-Ankrah, Hans D. Osthoff, Ann‐Lise Norman

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersEnvironment CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Keywordsδ34SOil sandsSulfateSulfurAerosolChemistrySulfur dioxideIsotopeEnvironmental chemistryMineralogyTRACEREnvironmental scienceGeologyQuartzArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concentrations and δ 34 S values for SO 2 and size-segregated sulfate aerosols were determined for air monitoring station 13 (AMS 13) at Fort MacKay in the Athabasca oil sands region, northeastern Alberta, Canada as part of the Joint Canada-Alberta Implementation Plan for Oil Sands Monitoring (JOSM) campaign from 13 August to 5 September 2013. Sulfate aerosols and SO 2 were collected on filters using a high-volume sampler, with 12 or 24 h time intervals. Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) enriched in 34 S was exhausted by a chemical ionization mass spectrometer (CIMS) operated at the measurement site and affected isotope samples for a portion of the sampling period. It was realized that this could be a useful tracer and samples collected were divided into two sets. The first set includes periods when the CIMS was not running (CIMS-OFF) and no 34 SO 2 was emitted. The second set is for periods when the CIMS was running (CIMS-ON) and 34 SO 2 was expected to affect SO 2 and sulfate high-volume filter samples. δ 34 S values for sulfate aerosols with diameter D >0.49 µm during CIMS-OFF periods (no tracer 34 SO 2 present) indicate the sulfur isotope characteristics of secondary sulfate in the region. Such aerosols had δ 34 S values that were isotopically lighter (down to −5.3 ‰) than what was expected according to potential sulfur sources in the Athabasca oil sands region (+3.9 to +11.5 ‰). Lighter δ 34 S values for larger aerosol size fractions are contrary to expectations for primary unrefined sulfur from untreated oil sands (+6.4 ‰) mixed with secondary sulfate from SO 2 oxidation and accompanied by isotope fractionation in gas phase reactions with OH or the aqueous phase by H 2 O 2 or O 3 . Furthermore, analysis of 34 S enhancements of sulfate and SO 2 during CIMS-ON periods indicated rapid oxidation of SO 2 from this local source at ground level on the surface of aerosols before reaching the high-volume sampler or on the collected aerosols on the filters in the high-volume sampler. Anti-correlations between δ 34 S values of dominantly secondary sulfate aerosols with D < 0.49 µm and the concentrations of Fe and Mn ( r = −0.80 and r = −0.76, respectively) were observed, suggesting that SO 2 was oxidized by a transition metal ion (TMI) catalyzed pathway involving O 2 and Fe 3+ and/or Mn 2+ , an oxidation pathway known to favor lighter sulfur isotopes. Correlations between SO 2 to sulfate conversion ratio ( F ( s )) and the concentrations of α -pinene ( r = 0.85), β -pinene ( r = 0.87), and limonene ( r = 0.82) during daytime suggests that SO 2 oxidation by Criegee biradicals may be a potential oxidation pathway in the study region.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.394
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physics→Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→