@article {47401,
	title = {Will PM control undermine China{\textquoteright}s efforts to reduce soil acidification?},
	journal = {Environmental Pollution},
	volume = {159},
	year = {2011},
	note = {<a data-url="https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/34730510" href="https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/34730510" target="_blank" title="">Final Manuscript in DASH</a>},
	pages = {2726-2732},
	abstract = {China{\textquoteright}s strategies to control acidifying pollutants and particulate matter (PM) may be in conflict for soil acidification abatement. Acidifying pollutant emissions are estimated for 2005 and 2020 with anticipated control policies. PM emissions including base cations (BCs) are evaluated with two scenarios, a base case applying existing policy to 2020, and a control case including anticipated tightened measures. Depositions of sulfur (S), nitrogen (N) and BCs are simulated and their acidification risks are evaluated with critical load (CL). In 2005, the area exceeding CL covered 15.6\% of mainland China, with total exceedance of 2.2\&nbsp;Mt S. These values decrease in the base scenario 2020, implying partial recovery from acidification. Under more realistic PM control, the respective estimates are 17.9\% and 2.4\&nbsp;Mt S, indicating increased acidification risks due to abatement of acid-neutralizing BCs. China{\textquoteright}s anthropogenic PM abatement will have potentially stronger chemical implications for acidification than developed countries.},
	url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749111002855},
	author = {Zhao, Yu and Duan, Lei and Lei, Yu and Xing, Jia and Nielsen, Chris P and Hao, Jiming}
}
