Emissions and Concentrations of Particulate Matter in Poznan Compared with Other Polish and European Cities

atmosphere

Article Emissions and Concentrations of Particulate Matter in Poznan Compared with Other Polish and European Cities

Remigiusz Jasi ´nski , Marta Galant-Goł˛ebiewska,Mateusz Nowak, Karolina Kurtyka , Paula Kurzawska , Marta Maciejewska and Monika Ginter *

Faculty of Civil and Transport Engineering, Poznan University of Technology, 60-965 Poznan, Poland; [email protected] (R.J.); [email protected] (M.G.-G.); [email protected] (M.N.); [email protected] (K.K.); [email protected] (P.K.); [email protected] (M.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +48-61-665-2791

Abstract: It is estimated that the excessive emission of airborne particulate matter shortens the life expectancy of a European city inhabitant by up to eight months. The conducted comparison shows the emission and concentration of PM10 in Poznan against the supra-regional background. The purpose of the comparison with similar area and population cities is to identify the position of the Poznan agglomeration in terms of particulate matter emissions. The main sources are: original research, PM official measuring stations’ data, and the relevant organizations’ reports. On the basis of the conducted comparison, it can be concluded that Wroclaw and Poznan achieve very similar results in terms of emissions. Cracow, on the other hand, as a city where for several years there Citation: Jasiński,R.; have been significant problems with the phenomenon of smog and excessive emission of particulate Galant-Goł˛ebiewska,M.; Nowak, M.; Kurtyka, K.; Kurzawska, P.; matter, reaches extremely different values compared to Poznan. The article presents also the air Maciejewska, M.; Ginter, M. quality in Poznan and other Polish and European cities. There were also measurements of PM mass Emissions and Concentrations of and number conducted in Poznan. The results show that there is a significant difference between the Particulate Matter in Poznan air quality measured at official measuring stations (only some of them are measuring PMs at all) and Compared with Other Polish and that measured with portable equipment in different parts of the city. European Cities. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/ Keywords: particulate matter; anthropogenic emission; PM10; air quality in Poznan; urban emission atmos12050533 sources; emission measurements

Academic Editor: Marta García Vivanco 1. Introduction Received: 30 March 2021 Economic development and the associated climate change are constantly contributing Accepted: 19 April 2021 Published: 22 April 2021 to signiﬁcant deterioration of air quality. Due to the complexity of this problem it is now considered on a global scale. According to data [1], about 90% of the inhabitants

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral of European cities are exposed to pollutants at concentrations higher than the air quality with regard to jurisdictional claims in levels that are considered harmful to health. It is estimated that the excessive emission of published maps and institutional afﬁl- dust suspended in the air (e.g., Particulate Matter, PM10) shortens the life expectancy of a iations. European city inhabitant by more than eight months. Deteriorating air quality negatively affects the health of the entire population, however some groups are particularly vulnerable. These include not only children, pregnant women, and elder people, but also inhabitants of industrial cities and people living near the communication routes [2,3]. Particulate matter (PM) is a term generally used to describe a type of air pollutant con- Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. sisting of a complex of various mixtures of suspended particles that differ in composition, This article is an open access article place of formation and size. For example, suspended dusts 2.5 are atmospheric aerosols, distributed under the terms and the diameter of which does not exceed 2.5 µm. According to the World Health Organization conditions of the Creative Commons (WHO), dust of this diameter is the most dangerous to human health among atmospheric Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// pollutants. WHO reports that long-term exposure to PM2.5 dust results in a shorter life creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ expectancy. These dusts are so small that they freely penetrate the lungs and even the blood 4.0/). vessels of human beings. Short-term exposure to PM10 or PM2.5 results in an increased

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12050533 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/atmosphere Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 16

lungs and even the blood vessels of human beings. Short-term exposure to PM10 or PM2.5 results in an increased number of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, such as: exacerbation of asthma, acute respiratory reactions, and decreased lung function. Poznan Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 is undoubtedly one of the cities where the problem of air pollution2 of 15 occurs, as in the whole of Poland, it is mainly associated with household heating, industry, road transport, energy and agriculture (Figure 1). The household energy has the largest share in air pollu- number of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, such as: exacerbation of asthma, acute tionrespiratory sources reactions, in European and decreased cities, lung function. the second Poznan is(1 undoubtedly7%) compares one of the with cities industry and the rest are energywhere the supply, problem of agriculture, air pollution occurs, and as inothers. the whole The of Poland, European it is mainly Union associated (EU) has been working on with household heating, industry, road transport, energy and agriculture (Figure1). The improvinghousehold energy air hasquality the largest in Europe share in airfor pollution many sourcesyears. in Its European activities cities, mainly the focus on monitoring thesecond emission (17%) compares of harmful with industry substances and the rest into are energythe atmosphere, supply, agriculture, improving and quality used fuels others. The European Union (EU) has been working on improving air quality in Europe for andmany implementation years. Its activities mainly of focusenvironmental on monitoring theprotection emission of harmfulrequirements substances to the transport and in- dustryinto the atmosphere,sectors and improving energy quality [4–8]. used fuels and implementation of environmental protection requirements to the transport and industry sectors and energy [4–8].

Figure 1. Air pollution sources in Polish cities, based on [1]. Figure 1. Air pollution sources in Polish cities, based on [1]. The European Union agency responsible for providing information on the environment is the European Environment Agency (EEA). Thanks to the annual reports prepared by theThe EEA, itEuropean is possible to Union analyze air agency quality in responsible all European Union for countries providing [1,7–9]. information on the envi- ronmentIt was onis theirthe basis European that it was Environment assumed that the permissible Agency values (EEA). of the Thanks annual to the annual reports average concentration of suspended dust (according to the European Commission) are as preparedfollows [10]: by the EEA, it is possible to analyze air quality in all European Union countries [1,7–9].• PM10 (40 µg/m3), • PM2.5It was (25 µong/m their3). basis that it was assumed that the permissible values of the annual averageThe EEA concentration report on air quality of suspended in the years 2000–2017, dust (acco updatedrding in 2019, to shows the thatEuropean the Commission) are as highest values of the average annual concentration of PM10 particulate matter (above the followslimit value [10]: of 40 µg/m3) were recorded in Turkey, Poland, Italy, Macedonia, and Bulgaria. •For PM2.5 airborne particulate3 matter, the annual average concentration values were exceeded PM10 in seven (40 Memberµg/m States), (including Poland) and three other reporting countries •(Slovakia PM2.5 Bulgaria, (25 Spain).µg/m Thus,3). the main aim of the work is to establish the place of the city of Poznan compared to other cities in Poland and Europe, and to establish the reasons for theThe differences. EEA Onreport this basis, on itair can bequality concluded in whichthe actionsyears taken2000–2017, by city managers updated in 2019, shows that thehave highest the greatest values impact of on the air aver qualityage in annual cities, and concentration indirectly on the health of PM10 of their particulate matter (above inhabitants [8,10,11]. the limit value of 40 µg/m3) were recorded in Turkey, Poland, Italy, Macedonia, and Bulgaria.2. Materials For and MethodsPM2.5 airborne particulate matter, the annual average concentration values wereThe exceeded materials enabling in seven the comparison Member were, States inter alia,(including data from annualPoland) reports and three other reporting published by the Main Inspectorate of Environmental Protection (in the case of Poland), countriesthe National (Slovakia Ofﬁce for Environment, Bulgaria, Agriculture Spain). andThus, Geology the (Germany)main aim and of Slovak the work is to establish the place of the city of Poznan compared to other cities in Poland and Europe, and to establish the reasons for the differences. On this basis, it can be concluded which actions taken by city managers have the greatest impact on the air quality in cities, and indirectly on the health of their inhabitants [8,10,11].

2. Materials and Methods The materials enabling the comparison were, inter alia, data from annual reports published by the Main Inspectorate of Environmental Protection (in the case of Poland), the National Office for Environment, Agriculture and Geology (Germany) and Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute (Slovakia), ministries of the environment of the given

Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 3 of 15

countries, services, and applications allowing users to determine the level of air pollution and EEAHydrometeorological database [12–15]. Institute A device (Slovakia), for air quality ministries monitoring of the environment was used of in the the given conducted coun- researchtries, of services,external and environment applications in allowing Poznan. users The to criterion determine of the air level quality of air in pollution the city and was assumedEEA particulate database [ 12matter–15]. Aemission device for depend air qualitying on monitoring the number was usedand inmass. the conductedThe device used toresearch conduct of measurements external environment is the inTSI Poznan. Optical The Particle criterion Sizer of (OPS) air quality Model in the3330 city (Figure was 2). assumed particulate matter emission depending on the number and mass. The device used to conduct measurements is the TSI Optical Particle Sizer (OPS) Model 3330 (Figure2).

Figure Figure2. The 2.TSIThe Optical TSI Optical Particle Particle Sizer Sizer (OPS) (OPS) Model Model 3330 3330 [16]. [16 ]. It enables the measurement of particles in the range from 0.3 to 10 µm for concentration Itfrom enables 0 to the 3000/cm measurement3. The OPS of is particles a lightweight, in the portablerange from device 0.3 that to 10 provides µm for fast concen- and trationaccurate from 0 particleto 3000/cm concentration3. The OPS and is sizea lightweight, distribution portable measurement device using that single provides particle fast and accuratecounting particle technology. concentration The protocol and for size research distribution in Poznan measurement was programmed. using The single samples particle countingwere gathered technology. every ten The seconds protocol for31 for min research at each ofin threePoznan chosen was places. programmed. It enables toThe samplesgather were 186 gathered samples eachevery time. ten In seconds order to analyzefor 31 themin collected at each research of three results, chosen appropriate places. It enablescharacteristics to gather 186 were samples developed. each time. The In number order andto analyze mass distributions the collected of research solid particles results, as well as total averages will be presented particle concentration by number and mass. appropriate characteristics were developed. The number and mass distributions of solid The 6 measurements (3 in the morning and 3 in the afternoon) were taken. The places of particlesmeasurement as well as weretotal chosenaverages according will be to presented proximity particle of road, household,concentration and pointby number (industry) and mass. emissionThe 6 measurements sources and close (3 toin thethe ofﬁcial mornin measuringg and 3 stationsin the [afternoon)16]. were taken. The places of measurement were chosen according to proximity of road, household, and point (industry)3. Results emission sources and close to the official measuring stations [16]. 3.1. Comparison of Particulate Matter Emissions in Poznan with Other Cities 3. Results3.1.1. Comparison with European Cities 3.1. ComparisonCities of similar Particulate to Poznan Matter were Emissions selected forin thePoznan comparative with Other analysis, Cities mainly in terms of population density. The ﬁrst of the selected cities is Dresden, which is the capital of Saxony 3.1.1. Comparisonin eastern Germany. with European The second Cities city is Bratislava (the capital of Slovakia), it is divided Citiesinto 5similar districts, to there Poznan are 6 were measuring selected stations for the in its comparative area, 4 of which analysis, are state-owned mainly in [3 terms,17]. 2 of populationDresden coversdensity. an The area first of 328.28 of the km selected, and in 2019cities it is had Dresden, a population which of aroundis the capital 557,000 of Saxony(Table in eastern1). Germany. The second city is Bratislava (the capital of Slovakia), it is

dividedTable into 1. Descriptive5 districts, parameters there are of analyzed 6 measuring European cities,stations based in on its Refs. area, [17– 194]. of which are state-owned [3,17]. Dresden covers an area of 328.28 km2, and in 2019 it had a population Population Density No. of Measuring of around 557,000City (Table 1). Area (km2) (People per km2) Stations

Poznan 262 2042 4 Dresden 328 1697 3 Bratislava 368 1174 4

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 4 of 15

There are 3 measuring stations of the National Ofﬁce for Environment, Agriculture and Geology (LgULG) in Dresden city, where PM10 and PM2.5 are measured [20]: • Bergstraße, • Winckelmannstraße, • Nord. Bratislava is a city with an area of 367.9 km2, 432 thousand habitants, there are 4 measuring stations belonging to the national air quality monitoring network [15,21]: • Bratislava-Jeséniova, • Bratislava-Kamienne namestie, • Bratislava-Trnawskie myto, • Bratislava-Mamatejowa. Based on the results obtained from the reports (Polish Chief Inspectorate of Environ- mental Protection and the Free City of Saxony), a comparison was made of the average annual concentration of PM10 dust in Poznan, Dresden, and Bratislava agglomeration (Table2).

Table 2. Average annual concentration of PM10 in European cities with the highest annual value in ug/m3 [14,15,18,21–26].

City Station 2017 2018 2019 Polanka 26 - 26 Dabrowskiego 29 32 30 Poznan Szymanowskiego 27 28 25 Chwialkowskiego 30 31 28 Bergstraße 21 23 17 Dresden Nord 20 22 19 Winckelmannstraße 17 18 15 Kamenné 19 26 22 námestie Bratislava Trnavské mýto 25 29 24 Jeséniova 20 24 19 Mamateyowa 23 26 21

The agglomeration is the area which comprises a city or town proper and the suburban fringe or thickly settled territory lying outside, but adjacent to, its boundaries. A single large urban agglomeration may comprise several cities or towns and their suburban fringes [7,8]. In the case of Poznan it is the city and 15 other districts, e.g., Buk, Dopiewo, Swarzedz. The study was prepared for 2017–2019. It shows that the average annual concentration of PM10 is lower in Dresden than in Poznan every year, and this applies to all measuring stations. In analyzed cities, there was an increase in the average annual concentration of PM10 (compared to 2017), although in 2019 there was a slight decrease [18,22,27,28]. As can be seen, the average annual concentration of PM10 is lower in Bratislava than in Poznan agglomeration in 2017, 2018, and 2019, and this applies to all measuring stations. However, both in Bratislava and in Poznan, the average annual concentration increased in 2018 compared to 2017. At no measurement station was any exceedance of the permissible level recorded in any year [12]. In the case of Poznan, there are no measurement results for the station at Polanka St., so it is not possible to compare the difference in the annual concentration at one station. Every year the biggest annual concentration value was measured in Poznan (marked red in Table2). The next step of the analyzes enables to compare Poznan with cities of neighboring countries (Dresden, Bratislava, Brno, Vilnius and Gothenburg, Copenhagen beyond Baltic Sea). Ukrainian and Belarusian cities were not considered due to the lack of data on the emissions of the separated PM10 and PM2.5 fractions. The data are presented in Figure3. Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 16

are no measurement results for the station at Polanka St., so it is not possible to compare the difference in the annual concentration at one station. Every year the biggest annual concentration value was measured in Poznan (marked red in Table 2). The next step of the analyzes enables to compare Poznan with cities of neighboring countries (Dresden, Bratislava, Brno, Vilnius and Gothenburg, Copenhagen beyond Bal- tic Sea). Ukrainian and Belarusian cities were not considered due to the lack of data on Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 the emissions of the separated PM10 and PM2.5 fractions. The data are5 ofpresented 15 in Fig- ure 3.

Figure 3. Average PM10 concentration in cities of neighboring countries of Poland in 2018 and 2019, Figureown study 3. Average based on [PM1013,29]. concentration in cities of neighboring countries of Poland in 2018 and 2019, own study based on [13,29]. In 2018 the average PM10 concentration in Poznan was the second largest after Vilnius, howeverIn 2018 in 2019 the there average was aPM10 signiﬁcant concentration decrease in Vilniusin Poznan which was made the Poznan second almost largest after Vil- even. The rest of the cities had lower concentration of PMs than Poznan, even though nius,Gothenburg however and Copenhagenin 2019 there noted was an increase.a significant decrease in Vilnius which made Poznan almost even. The rest of the cities had lower concentration of PMs than Poznan, even though3.1.2. Comparison Gothenburg with and Other Copenhagen Polish Cities noted an increase. After comparing the emissions in European cities, selected cities in Poland were analyzed. When selecting the cities to be thoroughly compared in Poland, a similar 3.1.2. Comparison with Other Polish Cities territorial area and a similar population density in a given agglomeration were taken into account.After It wascomparing assumed thatthe theemissions data of selected in European cities may ci differties, byselected up to 25% cities compared in Poland were analyzed.to the data When of Poznan. selecting Two properthe cities cities to were be selected:thoroughly Wroclaw compared and Cracow. in Poland, As shown a in similar territo- rialthe area Table 3and, the a area similar of the citiespopulation and the populationdensity in density a given are agglomeration similar. In 2016, Cracow were taken into ac- was included in the list of the most polluted cities in the European Union prepared by the count.WHO (WorldIt was Health assumed Organization), that the data which of is anselect additionaled cities argument may differ for the by rightness up to of25% compared toincluding the data it inof thePoznan. analysis. Two proper cities were selected: Wroclaw and Cracow. As shown in the Table 3, the area of the cities and the population density are similar. In 2016, Cra- cowTable was 3. Descriptive included parameters in the list of analyzed of the Polish most cities polluted [27,28,30 cities–32]. in the European Union prepared

by the WHO (World Health Organization),2 Population which Density is an No.additional of Measuring argument for the City Area (km ) 2 rightness of including it in the analysis. (People per km ) Stations Poznan 262 2042 4 Wroclaw 293 2195 4 Table 3. Descriptive parameters of analyzed Polish cities [27,28,30–32]. Cracow 327 2384 8 Population Densi- No. of Measuring The citiesCity compared in PolandArea are (km Poznan,2) Wroclaw,ty/////(People and Cracow, the per last one has the largest number of measuring stations. The ﬁrst discussed parameter is the annual averageStations 2 PM10 dust concentration expressed in micrograms per m3. Askm can) be seen, the average annualPoznan concentration of PM10 particulate262 matter in Poznan and 2042 Wroclaw is similar. No 4 exceedanceWroclaw of the permissible level was293 recorded in any of the measuring 2195 stations through 4 the years (Table4). Cracow 327 2384 8

The cities compared in Poland are Poznan, Wroclaw, and Cracow, the last one has the largest number of measuring stations. The first discussed parameter is the annual

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 6 of 15

Table 4. Average annual concentration of PM10 in Polish cities (ug/m3)[12,13,18,27,28,30–36].

City Station 2017 2018 2019 Polanka 26 – 26 Dabrowskiego 29 32 30 Poznan Szymanowskiego 27 28 25 Chwialkowskiego 30 31 28 Korzeniowskiego 30 32 26 Wroclaw Orzechowa 29 29 22 Krasinskiego 55 56 50 Bujaka 43 43 35 Bulwarowa 42 37 34 Dietla 49 47 35 Cracow Piastow 38 36 31 Waldow – 33 29 Zloty Rog 44 42 35 Swoszowice – – 31

There were three stations measuring concentration of PM10 in Poznan (station at Chwialkowskiego St., Dabrowskiego St., and Szymanowskiego St.) and one more station in 2019 (Polanka station). The lowest average annual concertation of PM10 in Poznan was noted at Szymanowskiego St. station and was equal 25 µg/m3. The highest one was in 2018 at Dabrowskiego station [36,37]. It is located near one of the main exit routes from Poznan leading towards Poland’s western border. In Wroclaw, there are two measuring station (at Korzeniowskiego Street and Orzechowa Street). The average annual concentration of PM10 in Wroclaw is the lowest in 2019 at Wroclaw Orzechowa station, the highest in 2018 at Korzeniowskiego Street, but none of them were that high to exceed the acceptable level of 40 µg/m3. When analyzing the annual average concentration of PM10 in Cracow, it can be seen that this concentration decreased in 2019 compared to 2018. The values of the average annual concentration in Cracow are much higher than in Poznan. In 2017 almost every station in Cracow recorded an exceedance of the limit value. For 4 stations in 2018 in Cracow, the limit was exceeded, and in 2019 in one station. The maximum value every analyzed year was noted at Krasinskiego St. [34,35]. Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16 The 36th maximum concentration is the concentration value at the 36th measurement exceeding the allowable level. The 35 is the permissible level of the number of cases above the permissible concentration of PM10 dust (Figures4–6).

FigureFigure 4. 4.Maximum Maximum concentration concentration of PM10 of (36th)PM10 in (36th) Poznan in [27 Poznan,28]. [27,28].

In the case of the maximum concentration of PM10 dust, it can be noticed that in Poznan the maximum concentrations reached highest values at Dąbrowskiego and Chwialkowskiego Street (Figure 4). In the case of 3 stations in Poznan, the permitted level was exceeded. Additionally, no maximum PM10 dust concentration values lower than 40 µg/m3 were recorded at any of the stations. In Wroclaw [15], on the other hand, the permissible level was exceeded only in one station, and the maximum concentration values were below 40 µg/m3 (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Maximum concentration of PM10 (36th) in Wroclaw [31,32].

Taking into account the maximum concentration of PM10 in Cracow and Poznan, a significant difference can be noticed again (Figures 4 and 6). In Cracow, the maximum values are much higher than in Poznan. At each station, the permissible level is exceeded. As before, there is a decrease in the value of the maximum concentration of PM10 suspended dust in 2019 compared to 2018.

Figure 6. Maximum concentration of PM10 (36th) in Cracow [30,38].

Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 16

FigureFigure 4. Maximum 4. Maximum concentration concentration of PM10 (36th) of in PM10 Poznan (36th) [27,28]. in Poznan [27,28].

In Inthe thecase caseof the ofmaximum the maximum concentration concentration of PM10 dust, it canof bePM10 noticed dust, that in it can be noticed that in Poznan the maximum concentrations reached highest values at Dąbrowskiego and ChwialkowskiegoPoznan the maximumStreet (Figure 4).concentrations In the case of 3 stations reached in Poznan, highest the permitted values level at Dąbrowskiego and wasChwialkowskiego exceeded. Additionally, Street no maximum (Figure PM10 4). Indust the concentration case of 3 values stations lower in than Poznan, 40 the permitted level µg/mwas3 exceeded.were recorded Additionally, at any of the stations. no maximumIn Wroclaw [15], PM10 on the dust other concentrationhand, the per- values lower than 40 missible level was exceeded only in one station, and the maximum concentration values 3 wereµg/m below were 40 µg/m recorded3 (Figure 5). at any of the stations. In Wroclaw [15], on the other hand, the permissible level was exceeded only in one station, and the maximum concentration values Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 7 of 15 were below 40 µg/m3 (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Maximum concentration of PM10 (36th) in Wroclaw [31,32].

FigureFigure 6. MaximumMaximum concentration concentration of PM10of PM10 (36th) (36th) in Cracow in Cracow [30,38 [30,38].].

In the case of the maximum concentration of PM10 dust, it can be noticed that in Poznan the maximum concentrations reached highest values at D ˛abrowskiego and

Chwialkowskiego Street (Figure4). In the case of 3 stations in Poznan, the permitted level was exceeded. Additionally, no maximum PM10 dust concentration values lower than 40 µg/m3 were recorded at any of the stations. In Wroclaw [15], on the other hand, the permissible level was exceeded only in one station, and the maximum concentration values were below 40 µg/m3 (Figure5). Taking into account the maximum concentration of PM10 in Cracow and Poznan, a signiﬁcant difference can be noticed again (Figures4 and6). In Cracow, the maximum values are much higher than in Poznan. At each station, the permissible level is exceeded. As before, there is a decrease in the value of the maximum concentration of PM10 suspended dust in 2019 compared to 2018. In the case of the maximum concentration of PM10 dust (Figures4 and5), it can be noticed that in Poznan the maximum concentrations reached higher values. In the case of Figure3 stations 6. in Maximum the area of Poznan concentration an exceedance of of thePM10 limit (36th) was registered. in Cracow Additionally, [30,38]. not at any of the station’s values of the maximum concentration of PM10 was less than 40 µg/m3 recorded. In Wroclaw, while the limit was exceeded only for one station, and the values the maximum concentration was below 40 µg/m3. Analyzing the number of exceedances above the permissible PM10 concentration level (Table5), it can also be concluded that in Poznan this number was higher than in Wroclaw, both in 2018 and 2019. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 8 of 15

Table 5. Number of cases when the acceptable level was exceeded in Polish cities [19,27,28,30–34].

City Station 2018 2019 Polanka - 27 Dabrowskiego 53 54 Poznan Szymanowskiego 29 23 Chwialkowskiego 45 34 Korzeniowskiego 48 25 Wroclaw Orzechowa 37 11 Krasinskiego 161 125 Bujaka 92 68 Bulwarowa 68 63 Dietla 103 57 Cracow Piastow 69 52 Waldow 58 40 Zloty Rog 96 65 Swoszowice – 49

When analyzing the number of exceedances above the permissible PM10 concentration level, it can also be concluded that in Poznan this number was much lower than in Cracow, both in 2018 and 2019. Additionally, in Cracow, at each station, the permitted level was exceeded by as much as 400% in the case of stations on Krasinski Avenue. At other stations, the exceedances range from 50 to 70%. It should be noted that in both agglomerations the number of exceedances of the permissible level is lower in most measuring stations in 2019 compared to 2018. In order to extend the analysis, data on the emission of suspended dust PM10 in the compared agglomerations were also collected. The presented data are divided according to the type of emission and expressed in Mg/year. On the basis of the collected data, the characteristics of the emission volume in a given city were made, broken down into its types (Figure7). When analyzing the emission of PM10 suspended dust in selected agglomerations, it can be noticed that the highest emission occurs in Wroclaw in 2018. The sum of the missions in Poznan is comparable to that in Wroclaw. In 2019, the smallest sum of emissions was recorded in Wroclaw, and Poznan, as in 2018, achieved a comparable value. In Cracow, the largest point issue was registered in both 2018 and 2019. It increased significantly in 2019 compared to 2018 and is over three times higher than in Poznan. The communal and housing emission reaches the highest values in Poznan and Wroclaw. It should be noted that it decreased significantly in both agglomerations in 2019. Road transport emissions are similar in Poznan and other agglomerations. Figure7 shows the amount of suspended dust PM2.5 in the compared agglomerations in 2018 and 2019. As in the case of PM10 dust, the highest emission occurs in Poznan and Wroclaw in 2018. Similarly, to the previous analysis, municipal and household emissions achieve the highest values in Poznan and Wroclaw. It also decreased significantly in 2019. In Cracow, the largest point issue was registered in both 2018 and 2019. It increased significantly in 2019 compared to 2018 and is over three times greater than in Poznan [39]. Atmosphere 2021 12 Atmosphere 2021, 12, ,x FOR, 533 PEER REVIEW 10 of 916 of 15

FigureFigure 7. PM10 7. PM10 emission emission in Polish in Polish agglomerat agglomerationsions in 2018 in 2018 and and2019 2019 [19,24,25,33,34,40]. [19,24,25,33,34, 40]. Extending the analysis reveals the importance of considering particulate matter air Extending the analysis reveals the importance of considering particulate matter air pollution in terms of both emissions and concentration. Annual average concentrations pollution in terms of both emissions and concentration. Annual average concentrations and the number of exceedances of permissible levels reach much higher values in the and the number of exceedances of permissible levels reach much higher values in the agglomeration Cracow than in Poznan. Analyzing for emissions, however, shows higher agglomeration Cracow than in Poznan. Analyzing for emissions, however, shows higher values for particulate matter for Poznan and Wroclaw. A signiﬁcant annual decline in the values for particulate matter for Poznan and Wroclaw. A significant annual decline in the value of household and living emission (PM fraction) in Polish agglomerations may be value of household and living emission (PM fraction) in Polish agglomerations may be caused, inter alia, by the local government programs like KAWKA bis [38]. The performed caused, inter alia, by the local government programs like KAWKA bis [38]. The per- comparison shows the emission and concentration of suspended dust PM10 in Poznan formed comparison shows the emission and concentration of suspended dust PM10 in against the supraregional background. Taking into consideration values of average PM Poznan against the supraregional background. Taking into consideration values of av- concentration in Polish cities and the ones in neighboring countries, which have a similar erage PM concentration in Polish cities and the ones in neighboring countries, which number of habitants, it can be stated that in most cities the average in 2019 is lower havethan a similar 2018 (Figurenumber8). of The habitant onlys, exceptions it can be stated are Copenhagen that in most and cities Gothenburg the average but in still2019 the is lowervalues than are 2018 lower (Figure than in 8). most The Polishonly exceptions cities. Additionally, are Copenhagen Dresden, and Brno, Gothenburg and Bratislava but stillobtained the values better are resultslower than than in Poznan. most Po Thelish worst cities. air Additionally, quality was notedDresden, in Cracow,Brno, and GZM Bratislava(the metropolitan obtained better union results with Bytom, than Pozn Chorzow,an. The Katowice, worst air Sosnowiec, quality was and noted around in 30Cra- other cow,districts). GZM (the Belarusian metropolitan and Ukrainianunion with cities Bytom, could Chorzow, not be analyzed, Katowice, because Sosnowiec, there and are no aroundcertiﬁcated 30 other national districts). stations Belarusian measuring and Ukrainian PMs (Figure cities8). could not be analyzed, because there are no certificated national stations measuring PMs (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Average PM10 concentration in Polish and neighboring countries in 2018 and 2019, own Figurestudy 8. Average based on PM10 [13]. concentration in Polish and neighboring countries in 2018 and 2019, own study based on [13].

Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 10 of 15 Additionally, based on monthly average concentration of PMs in Poznan in 2018 and 2019, it can be observed that the changes in values are seasonal (Figure 9). The av- erageAdditionally, concentration based on monthlyof PM10 average and concentration PM2.5 ofis PMs lower in Poznan from in 2018 May and to September and higher in 2019, it can be observed that the changes in values are seasonal (Figure9). The average monthsconcentration with of PM10 lower and PM2.5temperature is lower from while May to September more habitants and higher in monthscommute by car, the houses are heatedwith lower and, temperature due to while shorter more habitants days, commute more electricity by car, the houses is areused. heated and, due to shorter days, more electricity is used.

Figure 9. Monthly average concentration of PM10 and PM2.5 in Poznan in 2018 and 2019, own study Figurebased on 9. [16 Monthly]. average concentration of PM10 and PM2.5 in Poznan in 2018 and 2019, own

study3.2. Measurements based on in [16]. Poznan The Chief Inspector of Environmental Protection (CIEP) deployed 4 measurement points 3.2.in Poznań.Measurements These are the in stations Poznan on the streets: Chwialkowskiego (1), Szymanowskiego (2), Polanka (3), and Dabrowskiego (4) [34]. All of them allow the measurement of PM concentration.The Chief Two of Inspector them are automatic of Environmental stations, two are manual. Prot Anotherection CIEP (CIEP) station deployed 4 measurement located close to Poznań(in the neighboring Czerwonak commune) is the automatic station pointsin Kozieglowy in Pozna (5). Inń Figure. These 10, the are following the stations are marked on respectively: the str greeneets: color— Chwialkowskiego (1), Szyman- owskiegomanual stations, (2), blue—automatic Polanka (3), stations, and yellow—automatic-manualDabrowskiego (4) stations,[34]. All and red—of them allow the measurement measuring points where the tests were carried out: Rondo Rataje (A), Fabryczna (B), ofPrzemysłowa PM concentration. (C). Two of them are automatic stations, two are manual. Another CIEP stationThe masslocated concentration close andto thePozna numberń of(in solid the particles neighboring were measured Czerwonak in Poznan commune) is the auto- using the apparatus Optical Particle Sizer OPS 3330. The measurements took place in three maticdifferent station points in Poznanin Kozieglowy characterized by (5). the proximity In Figure of: point, 10, household the following and living, are marked respectively: greenand road color—manual transport emission sources.stations, The testsblue—automatic of air quality (understood stations, as measuring yellow—automatic-manual sta- mass and number concentration of PM10) were carried out in the morning rush hours (first tions,measurement) and red—measuring and in the afternoon (second points measurement). where the Each ofte thests measurements were carried out: Rondo Rataje (A), lasted 31 min, during this time the device collected 186 samples (1 sample/10 s). In total, Fabryczna6 measurements (B), were Przemys carried out.łowa The measurement(C). points were chosen as they were located in places characteristic for emission sources: point, household and living, and road transport (Figures 11 and 12). 2

C 3 1 A

Figure 10. Measuring point and stations in Poznan.

Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16

Additionally, based on monthly average concentration of PMs in Poznan in 2018 and 2019, it can be observed that the changes in values are seasonal (Figure 9). The average concentration of PM10 and PM2.5 is lower from May to September and higher in months with lower temperature while more habitants commute by car, the houses are heated and, due to shorter days, more electricity is used.

Figure 9. Monthly average concentration of PM10 and PM2.5 in Poznan in 2018 and 2019, own study based on [16].

3.2. Measurements in Poznan The Chief Inspector of Environmental Protection (CIEP) deployed 4 measurement points in Poznań. These are the stations on the streets: Chwialkowskiego (1), Szyman- owskiego (2), Polanka (3), and Dabrowskiego (4) [34]. All of them allow the measurement of PM concentration. Two of them are automatic stations, two are manual. Another CIEP station located close to Poznań (in the neighboring Czerwonak commune) is the automatic station in Kozieglowy (5). In Figure 10, the following are marked respectively:

Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 green color—manual stations, blue—automatic stations, yellow—automatic-manual11 of 15 stations, and red—measuring points where the tests were carried out: Rondo Rataje (A), Fabryczna (B), Przemysłowa (C).

2 Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 15 5

The mass concentration and the number Bof solid particles were measured in Poznan using the apparatus Optical Particle Sizer OPS 3330. The measurements took place in three different4 points in Poznan characterized by the proximity of: point, household and living, and road transport emission sources. The tests of air quality (understood as measuring mass and number concentration of PM10) were carried out in the morning rush hours (first measurement) and in the afternoon (second measurement). Each of the C measurements lasted 31 min, during3 this time the device collected 186 samples (1 sam- 1 A ple/10 s). In total, 6 measurements were carried out. The measurement points were chosen as they were located in places characteristic for emission sources: point, household FigureFigureand 10. living,10.Measuring Measuring and point point androad and stations stations transport in Poznan. in Poznan. (Figures 11 and 12).

FigureFigure 11. Number 11. Number of PM10 per of cm3 PM10in Poznan per (own cm study).3 in Poznan (own study).

Figure 12. Mass concentration of PM10 in Poznan (own study).

It can be observed that there are more PM10 in number and mass in the morning near point and household emission sources [38]. When it comes to road transport emission it can be stated that the mass is significantly higher than the number of PM, thus in the road transport emission there is a greater share of larger particulate matters. The CPM in all measurement points is approximately a few hundred micrograms per cubic meter at the same time, official measuring stations at Dabrowskiego and Zelazna Street noted average concentration of PM10 24 µg/m3 during the time of first measurement and 12 µg/m3 during the second. It is crucial to highlight the difference between designated measuring points and level of emission in other parts of the city where people also live, commute, and work.

Atmosphere 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16

The mass concentration and the number of solid particles were measured in Poznan using the apparatus Optical Particle Sizer OPS 3330. The measurements took place in three different points in Poznan characterized by the proximity of: point, household and living, and road transport emission sources. The tests of air quality (understood as measuring mass and number concentration of PM10) were carried out in the morning rush hours (first measurement) and in the afternoon (second measurement). Each of the measurements lasted 31 min, during this time the device collected 186 samples (1 sample/10 s). In total, 6 measurements were carried out. The measurement points were chosen as they were located in places characteristic for emission sources: point, household and living, and road transport (Figures 11 and 12).

. Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 12 of 15 Figure 11. Number of PM10 per cm3 in Poznan (own study).

FigureFigure 12. Mass12. concentrationMass concentration of PM10 in Poznan of (ownPM10 study). in Poznan (own study). It can be observed that there are more PM10 in number and mass in the morning near point and household emission sources [38]. When it comes to road transport emission it can be statedIt can that be the massobserved is significantly that higher there than are the number more of PM10 PM, thus in the number road and mass in the morning transportnear point emission and there household is a greater share emission of larger particulate sources matters. [38]. TheWhen CPM in it all comes to road transport emis- measurement points is approximately a few hundred micrograms per cubic meter at the samesion time, it can official be measuring stated stations that atthe Dabrowskiego mass is andsignificantly Zelazna Street notedhigher average than the number of PM, thus in concentrationthe road transport of PM10 24 µ g/memission3 during thethere time is of firsta greater measurement share and of 12 µlargerg/m3 particulate matters. The CPM during the second. It is crucial to highlight the difference between designated measuring pointsin all and measurement level of emission in points other parts is ofapproximately the city where people aalso few live, hundred commute, micrograms per cubic meter andat work.the same time, official measuring stations at Dabrowskiego and Zelazna Street noted The collected data are compared with daily average from the closest measuring station 3 (Tableaverage6). It can concentration be noted that the differences of PM10 between 24 µg/m the first measurementduring the (morning) time of first measurement and 12 andµg/m the second3 during (afternoon) the aresecond. greatest in It the is case crucial of the proximity to hi toghlight the sources the of road difference between designated emissions, additionally, the measurement from Polanka station (3 in the Figure 10) are not available.measuring At the Bpoints point, the and values level from theof conductedemission studies in areother lower parts than the of daily the city where people also live, averagecommute, from the and closest work. station. In the case of household and living (H&L) there is the slightest difference. The average emission for Poznan on the measurement day equals 24.5 µg/m3 [1].

Table 6. A comparison on of real time test results with measurements from the ofﬁcial stations [12,41,42].

Measuring Point A (Road Tranp.) B (Point) C (H&L) First measurement 14 16 23 average (morning) Second measurement 143 7 11 average (afternoon) Daily average from - 19 25 the closest station

4. Discussion When analyzing all the results related to air pollution in urban areas, it is important to remember about their seasonality, related to both home heating and daily and weekly Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 13 of 15

changes in traffic emissions. Significant differences can also be noted during the summer holidays. This is important when using modeling to obtain air pollution maps. In terms of air quality understood as PM10 concentration, Poznan compares well with other cities in Poland, but much worse than neighboring cities located nearby. The situation is improving year by year; however, this is not as spectacular as it is in Cracow. Actions to improve air quality, especially regarding particulate matter emissions, should begin before such high levels of exceedance are achieved as in Krakow. In all analyzed Polish cities, however, a decrease in the number of days with exceeded permissible values is observed. The conducted research shows that averaged values are not everything. The air quality can vary considerably up to several hundred meters from the measuring site. All measurement points were located in places where the inhabitants of the city travel on a daily basis. This is especially noticeable when measuring at a point related to traffic emission. The average of the measuring points that are distant from the street does not indicate a real danger. Therefore, it is important to establish a dense network of measuring stations and to warn residents of exceeded limits on a regular basis. Poznan has taken steps to improve air quality, these are activities based on the elimination of low-emission heat sources caused by solid fuel furnaces, control of home furnaces and home boiler rooms as well as improvement of communication and reduction of transport emissions, district heating, gas or electric heating. Cracow: “Infoair—what do we know about smog?” It is a program that informs the public about air quality. Cracow was the first city in Poland to introduce a system of informing about high air pollution with the concentration of PM10 dust at the level exceeding 150 µg/m3. Moreover, from 6 July 2015, urban transport company in Cracow puts on displays with the timetable located at communication stops municipalities, information on the air condition in Cracow. On the basis of the conducted comparison, it can be concluded that Wroclaw and Poznan achieve very similar results in terms of emissions. Cracow, on the other hand, is a city where for a few years there have been significant problems, with the phenomenon of smog and excessive emission of particulate matter reaching extremely different values compared to Poznan. However, it should be noted that for each of the compared cities, it actively works for air protection and reduction air pollutant emissions. The effects of these activities can be seen in significantly reduced municipal and household emissions in 2019 compared to 2018. Both Bratislava and Dresden have lower concentrations of particulate matter than Poznan, but these values increased in 2018 compared to 2017. Wroclaw and Poznan have similar emission values, but Cracow’s efforts to improve air quality are worth following. Most of the reports consist the data about the whole countries, e.g., there are comparisons of harmful compounds in Poland, Germany, Norway, and the Czech Republic. These dates are average form the data from the cities, and the annual value is an average from hourly measurements from stations in a few points in the city. This makes the comparison a huge generalization and makes it harder to propose the appropriate corrective actions.

5. Conclusions The purpose of the article is to identify the position of the Poznan agglomeration compared with similar cities in terms of particulate matter emissions. It can be concluded that Wroclaw and Poznan achieve very similar results in terms of emissions. Cracow, on the other hand, as a city where for several years there have been signiﬁcant problems with the phenomenon of smog and excessive emission of particulate matter, reaches extremely different values compared to Poznan. When comparing Poznan, Dresden, and Bratislava (2017–2019) it can be seen that every year the biggest annual concentration value was measured in Poznan. Average PM10 concentration in Poznan is one of the highest comparing with neighboring countries’ cities and the Vilnius noted better improvement in the matter. The communal and housing emission reaches the highest values in Poznan and Wroclaw and it can be signiﬁcantly improved as the Cracow example shows. Changes in values of PM10 are seasonal. It can be observed that there are more PM10 in number and mass in the morning near point and household emission sources. When it comes to road Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 14 of 15

transport emission it can be stated that the mass is signiﬁcantly higher than the number of particles, thus in the road transport emission there is a greater share of larger particles. The location and the distance of the measuring station from the emission source is crucial.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, R.J. and M.G.-G.; methodology, R.J.; software, M.N.; validation, P.K., M.M., M.G. and K.K.; formal analysis, K.K.; investigation, P.K.; resources, M.M.; data curation, M.N.; writing—original draft preparation, M.G.; writing—review and editing, K.K. and M.G.; visualization, M.M. and P.K.; supervision, M.G.-G.; project administration, R.J.; funding acquisition, R.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research and APC was funded by Interdisciplinary Rector’s Grant, grant number ERP/33/32/SIGR/0004. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Data available on request due to restrictions e.g., privacy or ethical. The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to onging project. Conﬂicts of Interest: The authors declare no conﬂict of interest.

References 1. European Environment Agency. Air Pollution. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/pl/themes/air/intro (accessed on 9 August 2020). 2. Jasinski, R. Number and mass analysis of particles emitted by aircraft engine. MATEC Web Conf. 2017, 18, 00023. [CrossRef] 3. Kryzia, D.; Pepłowska, M. The impact of measures aimed at reducing low-stack emission in Poland on the energy efficiency and household emission of pollutants. Energy Policy J. 2019, 22, 121–132. [CrossRef] 4. Directive 2004/107/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 Relating to Arsenic, Cadmium, Mercury, Nickel and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Ambient Air, L 23/3, 2004. Available online: https://www.eumonitor. eu/9353000/1/j9vvik7m1c3gyxp/vitgbgig0qzr (accessed on 10 August 2020). 5. Directive (EU) 2016/2284 Of The European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016. Available online: https: //www.legislation.gov.uk/eudr/2016/2284/contents (accessed on 10 August 2020). 6. Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on Ambient air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe, L 152. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32008L0050 (accessed on 10 August 2020). 7. EEA Report No 5/2020. European Union Emission Inventory Report 1990–2018 under the UNECE Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP); Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg; Copenhagen, Denmark, 2020. 8. European Environment Agency. Air Quality in Europe—2019 Report. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/ publications/air-quality-in-europe-2019 (accessed on 9 August 2020). 9. Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/1832 of 5 November 2018 Amending Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1151 for the Purpose of Improving the Emission Type Approval Tests and Procedures for Light Passenger and Commercial Vehicles, Including Those for In-Service Conformity and Real-Driving Emissions and Introducing Devices for Monitoring the Consumption of Fuel and Electric Energy (OJ L 301, 27.11.2018, pp. 1–314). Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018R1832 (accessed on 10 August 2020). 10. Sokolnicka-Popis, B.; Szymlet, N.; Siedlecki, M.; Gallas, D. The impact of particulate filter substrate type on the gaseous exhaust components emission. Combust. Engines 2020, 183, 58–62. [CrossRef] 11. Zhang, N.; Huang, H.; Duan, X.; Jinlong, Z.; Su, B. Quantitative Association Analysis between PM2.5 Concentration and Factors on Industry, Energy, Agriculture, and Transportation; Scientific Reports; Nature Publishing Group: Berlin, Germany, 2018. [CrossRef] 12. Atlas of Air Quality Zones and Monitoring Stations 2013&2014, Slovakia; DG Environment: Brussels, Belgium, 2014. 13. Discomap. Available online: eea.europa.eu (accessed on 3 February 2021). 14. Dresden. Luftreinhalteplanfür die Landeshauptstadt Dresden 2017, Dresden, 2019. Available online: https://www.dresden.de (accessed on 9 August 2020). 15. Národný Program Znižovania Emisií; Ministerstvo Zivotneho Prostredia Slovenskej Rebubliky: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2020. 16. Technical Data of Optical Particle Sizer 3330. Available online: https://tsi.com/products/particle-sizers/particlesize- spectrometers (accessed on 12 August 2020). 17. Bratislava in Figures; Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2019. 18. Dresden. AllgemeineLuftbelastung. Available online: https://www.dresden.de (accessed on 9 August 2020). Atmosphere 2021, 12, 533 15 of 15

19. POZnan. City Activities to Improve Air Quality. Available online: https://www.poznan.pl/mim/main/en/ (accessed on 11 August 2020). 20. Sachsen.de, Aktuelle Messwerte. Available online: https://www.luft.sachsen.de/aktuelle-messwerte-15045.html (accessed on 9 August 2020). 21. Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute, Department Of Emissions and Air Quality Monitoring. Air Pollution in the Slovak Republic in 2015; Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2017. 22. Dresden. Bevölkerungsbestand. Available online: https://www.dresden.de (accessed on 9 August 2020). 23. Informácia o Kvalite Ovzdušia a Podiele Stacionárnych Zdrojov na Zneˇcist’ovaní Ovzdušia, o Programoch na Zlepšenie Kvality Ovzdušia a Akˇcných Plánoch v Bratislavskom Kraji; Oddelenie Štátnej Správy vôd a Vybraných Zložiek Životného Prostredia Kraja Žilina, Slovakia; The Ministry of Interior of the Slovak Republic: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2017. 24. Pausch, A.; Franke, J.; Löschau, G.; Mühlner, M. Luftqualität in Sachsen-Jahresbericht 2018; Sächsische Staatskanzlei: Freistaat Sachsen, Germany, 2018. 25. Pausch, A.; Franke, J.; Löschau, G.; Straková, M.; Mannewitz, A. Luftqualität in Sachsen-Jahresbericht 2017; Sächsische Staatskanzlei: Freistaat Sachsen, Germany, 2017. 26. Správa o Kvalite Ovzdušia v Slovenskej Republike, 2018; Slovenský Hydrometeorologický Ústav: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2019. 27. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Poznan. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2019; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Poznan: Pozna´n,Poland, 2020. 28. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Poznan. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2018; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Poznan: Pozna´n,Poland, 2019. 29. Report on the State of Current National Legislation and Policies to Improve the Air Quality; Interreg Central Europe: Vienna, Austria, 2018. 30. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Cracow. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2018; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Cracow: Kraków, Poland, 2019. 31. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Wroclaw. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2019; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Wroclaw: Wrocław, Poland, 2020. 32. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Wroclaw. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2018; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Wroclaw: Wrocław, Poland, 2019. 33. Report: Solid Fuel Heat Sources in Residential Buildings; Wrocław University of Technology, Research Center for Sustainable Built Environment RoSE: Wrocław, Poland, 2019. 34. Poznan–Measurement Data of Air Quality. Available online: powietrze.poznan.wios.gov.pl/dane-pomiarowe/ (accessed on 2 February 2021). 35. Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Cracow. Annual Assessment of Air Quality in the Lesser Poland Voivodeship, Voivodeship Report for 2019; Regional Department of Environmental Monitoring in Cracow: Kraków, Poland, 2020. 36. Regional Annual Air Quality Assessment in the Greater Poland Voivodeship for 2017; Chief Inspectorate for Environmental Protection in Poznan: Poznan, Poland, 2018. 37. Stations’ Browser. Available online: https://powietrze.gios.gov.pl/pjp/station/search (accessed on 7 August 2020). 38. Website of KAWKA Project Plus Realized in Wroclaw. Available online: https://zmienpiec.pl/kawka-plus (accessed on 10 August 2020). 39. MOCH, B. Learn about Renewable Energy Sources. 2019. Available online: https://www.wroclaw.pl/srodowisko/poznaj-oze/ czerwiec (accessed on 9 August 2020). 40. Jasinski, R. Mass and number analysis of particles emitted during aircraft landing. E3S Web Conf. 2018, 44, 00057. [CrossRef] 41. Regional Annual Air Quality Assessment in the Greater Poland Voivodeship for 2018; Chief Inspectorate for Environmental Protection in Poznan: Poznan, Poland, 2019. 42. Airly.eu. Available online: https://airly.org/pl/ (accessed on 10 August 2020).