Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (2012) National Planning Policy Framework (NPFF). HMSO, London.

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Modelling Dust Emissions from a Source Using Dust Monitoring and Meteorological Data

    AUTHORS: John Bruce, Jim Smith, Hugh Datson, Mike Fowler

    KEYWORDS: Dust, Nuisance Dust, Dust Modelling, Sticky Pad, ADMS

    JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Environmental Protection, Vol.7 No.3, February 29, 2016

    ABSTRACT: This paper describes a study into the development of more robust dust emission factors by means of dust and meteorological monitoring. Emission factors for nuisance dusts in the literature are scarce, with estimates of dust output given for many processes in mass per unit area per year. Temporal variations and the extent and conditions in which maximum concentrations occur can therefore be impossible to predict with any accuracy. This investigation aims to improve predic-tions by “back calculating” emission levels based on dust monitoring around known dust sources. Nuisance dust and meteorological monitoring has been undertaken at a sand and gravel quarry in the UK for a consecutive period of two years. Sticky pad directional dust monitors were used to collect dust at eight locations at and around the site with meteorological data collected at an elec-tronic weather station within the site. Air quality modelling software (ADMS) was used to test emission factors from the European Environment Agency (EEA) and the US Environmental Protec-tion Agency (EPA) for emissions from mineral workings. Predictions were compared with the dust monitoring data to assess accuracy, with results showing limited poor correspondence (r2 2 0.89) and similar maximum concentrations (