New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Sunlight Activates Smog-Causing Chemicals in City Grime

The grime on city buildings and may actively contribute to urban air pollution. Christopher Intagliata reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

In recent years big cities have seen lower rates of crime. But there’s still plenty of grime. Combustion from cars, factories and fires spews out nitrogen oxides. Those compounds react with sunlight and air to form ozone—the main ingredient in smog. And certain nitrogen oxides called nitrates—same stuff you find in fertilizer—also settle onto buildings and other city surfaces. Scientists figured that was the end of the story. 

“Usually one thinks about pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and nitrous acid as being lost from the atmosphere onto surfaces.” University of Toronto chemist Jamie Donaldson, at a meeting of the American Chemical Society in Boston on August 17th. “What we have been interested in is to see whether or not the influence of sunlight on urban grime material can in fact recycle these compounds and bring them back into active play in the atmosphere.” [D. James Donaldson et al, Composition and chemistry of urban grime: a field and laboratory study]

Donaldson and his team found that sunlight interacts with nitrates stuck in grime, kicking them back into the air, where they can contribute to smog. They verified that process by putting trays of glass balls—a proxy for window glass, but with more surface area—out in downtown Toronto, and Leipzig, Germany. The glass in sunny areas lost 10 percent more nitrogen compounds than did their shady counterparts. 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“The total amount of nitrogen oxides entering a city is probably well captured in models. What is not well captured is the fact that the losses are less than people had considered because a loss from the gas phase to the grime surface does not constitute a permanent loss.” 

So grime is not as inert as we thought it was. And city beautification efforts, aimed at making buildings more pleasing to the eye, might also make the urban environment more pleasant for the lungs.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe