n29fIAwxpY

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Fig. 1.1. Compilation of pollutants in tested Murmansk plaster samples

Studies in the micro area show that the greatest diversity of pollutants are samples 20, 28, 25, 29, respectively, from: Lenin Prospectus, Murmansk College College, Ul. Polarnye Zori 10, Pietrovskoy 12 / Profsojuzov junction. And 35 respectively from Ul Lenin 65, the area of the Dramatic Theater (Lenin), and in the vicinity of the harbor.

Chemical studies with ICP-OAS and ASA showed that the metal content in the samples analyzed was variable. In the case of Zn content the relatively highest content was found in the area of jez. Siemoionovski, ul Cheluskincev and Papanina, for tests 01–05 and 13 and in the area of ul. Vorovskogo (samples 27 and 28) where the concentration of this metal exceeds 920ppm, while the lowest contents of this metal below 50ppm were found in sample 35 in the Nizhnierostinskoye shosee (fig. 1.2, 1.3). In the case of Manganese, the highest content of this element was found in samples such as 03, 17, 21 and 29 reaching up to 1200ppm in the area of Marksa street as well as the intersection of Vorovskogo and Pietrovskoi streets. 04, 09, 25 and 35 where the content of this element was about 120 ppm. The area of elevated Manganese content is within the Pietrovskoi and Marksa streets, essentially constituting two “islands”. In case of iron content a relatively high content was found in sample 06 (the fate of Cheluskintsev and Liebknieha streets) and then 27, 28, 29 in the area of Pietrovskoy street, and 30 and 31, which corresponds to their location in the streets Chumbarova-Luchonskovo from the junction with Geroev street Severomortsev to Askoldovcev Street, reaching content exceeding 20tys ppm. In other regions this content is half lower, and in samples of 07, 10 and 11nawet ten times reached the content of about 2000 ppm (fig. 1.2, 1.3). In the case of copper its highest content was determined in samples 02 and 34 reaching close to 200ppm in the area of streets Cheliskincev and Wierkhnierostinskoe shosee and street Lobova. In other places this content rarely exceeds 50ppm and for tests 11, 17, 32 comes to about 10ppm. Zones of the lowest content are

21

correlated with Papanina Street. In case of arsenic, the highest content was found mainly in sample 03 (over 17ppm) in the area of Siemionovski Lake, on average, within half the limits (fig. 1.3) and the lowest content was found for sample 11 where the content was measured in half ppm. In the case of lead, the highest content was measured in sample 33 (3158 ppm) at Vodoprovodnyi per (military base), Cheluskintsev ul, and relatively high content in samples of 02, 04, 05 and 19, Cheluskincev ul. The lowest content of this metal was found in the area of Chumbarova Luchinskovo and Polarnye Zori in samples 07–09, 17 and 18 and 31 – below the detection limit of this element of 0.1ppm. In the case of nickel, the highest concentrations of this element were found in the area of Pietrovskoi and Cheluskintsev Streets in Siemionovskis, in samples of 28, 31 where it reached the value of over 170ppm, in the remaining regions it was around 30ppm and the lowest content showed in the street area Kirova, in sample 11 below 7ppm. In the case of chrome, the highest content of this element was found in the area of Radishcheva and Pavlova, sample 15, Polarnye Zori (sample 27) and roundabout at Chumbarova-Luchinskovo and Askoldovcev (sample 30), where it reached a value close to 110ppm while the lowest content In the examined samples 11, 13, 20, 34, from the neighborhood of Kirova street, the intersection of Pavlov and Lenin streets, and Lobova, reaching even below 10ppm. The titanium content of the samples also shows some variation, with the highest values showing for samples 02–05 and 32 near Siemionovski Lake and Lobova ul, reaching up to 6000ppm while the lowest values showing Kirova in sample 11 reaching 1100ppm. In the case of cadmium, the highest content of this element was found in samples 06 and 18 reaching over 60 ppm in the area of Cheluskincev and Liebknieht streets and Papanin, while the lowest content was found for samples 7, 17, 23 and 35 in the area of Lenin Street, reaching even the threshold of determination Of this element up to 0.01ppm.

Fig. 1.2. Content of investigated metals in analyzed samples based on ICP-OAS analysis [ppm].

Analysis of maximum, average and minimum values (shown in fig. 1.3) shows a certain trend of the content of these elements. The most similar values

22

are reached for iron, titanium, or chromium and manganese, with average values of 17770, 1165, 7.41, and 112ppm, respectively. The highest content deviations were found for lead, cadmium, arsenic and nickel, with a maximum to minimum ratio of 31000, 6080, 38 and 26 (fig. 1.3). In the case of lead and cadmium, the highest content was in the range of 31580 and 6080ppm respectively and the average was 119 and 5.6ppm, respectively. For these elements it is found at a high level.

Fig. 1.3. Compare of the content of metals in sample (highest, lowest, average)

1.4. Disscussion

The most beautiful part of the city is the city center with many representative buildings. They were built up to the middle of the 20th century mostly from bricks [29, 33]. They have many neoclassical decorations. Their condition slowly improves. Many of these buildings are being renovated, but many still require renovation. The climate that causes these buildings to deteriorate is mainly unfavorable, mainly through physical ventilation (wall breaking by freezing moisture) and penetration of plants [7, 9]. They enter into damp places, contributing to the further destruction of the walls [1, 3, 5]. The high humidity of the city’s climate is conducive to this development. These plants were also spotted during the microscopic examination of plaster samples. Solid air pollution associated with human activity is the reason for the numerous dirt and dust that are visible on the surface of the plaster [4, 6, 10, 11]. The city has heavy traffic and a large transshipment port, which is a source of many pollutants [11–20]. In addition, some of them come from CHPs that deal with winter heating, although winter air analysis shows that it is not as polluted as other European cities [17, 21–28]. Probably, however, this is due to the

23

character of the city’s location in diverse areas, the presence of frequent winds and the low emissions associated with connecting homes to the central heating network.

Fig. 1.4. Total pollution content

As a result, the amount of these pollutants is lower although in the vicinity of busy roads and harbors still high. Their analysis showed that for the beautification of the facade of houses used a variety of materials: these were mineral ornaments, sand, pigments. Sulphate precipitates and barite have also been reported. Research in the micro area has found that iron, titanium, lead zinc and sulfur, chlorine and phosphorus are present. This has also been confirmed by studies using ICP-OAS and ASA. In many cases anomalously high levels of lead, arsenic, nickel and other heavy metals were found. In some cases, the anomalous content of copper, nickel, iron are dictated by a distillation halo, as a result of urban infrastructure corrosion. In the vicinity of the samples taken, there are trolleybus lines and city lanterns, etc. In the study of the nature of metallic plaster impurities, it can be stated that the highest total content can be explained by analyzing the data collected during the plaster test tests. Their highest concentration was measured for samples 31 and 32 and the lowest for samples 07, 09, 11, 21, 27 and 35.

Location 31 and 32 on the city map correspond to the streets of Geroev Severomorcev and Lobov. These are quite busy streets in the industrial zone of the city. Relatively large pollution has also been found in the city center, where traffic is intense. The main source of pollution in the center is circular traffic. It is worth noting, however, that most of the transit traffic takes place in a remote part of the city center, which is currently being modernized. The close association of pollution with industry and commodity movement is also evident in the analysis of the total amount of metals in the sample of the center. The

24

lowest total values were obtained in the neighborhood of Kirova, Cheluskincev streets, which are the center of the city, where the neighborhood is mainly residential houses. These streets are also located south of the port and industrial parts of the city (they are also located slightly higher than the industrial part).

1.5. Conclusion

Murmansk city is undoubtedly a very interesting example of urbanization with many original solutions in the area (Arctic). Its buildings show a great diversity and are very original, much nicer than many other cities in the north. Her state of behavior is an example of a man’s struggle with the hard climate of this region not always won. Analysis of plasters indicates that corrosion processes in many buildings are far advanced. Research conducted using microarea analysis shows that in the very center of the city there are numerous humaninduced solids (wheeled transport, industry, harbor). These impurities are related to many factors, including infrastructure corrosion. The biggest source of pollution seems to be traffic and industry. The reason for this condition may be poorly upgraded technologies and old rolling stock.

1.6. References

1.Andrzejewski R.; 1975, Problemy ekologiczne kształtowania środowiska w mieście. Wiad. Ekol. 21: 175-186

2.Archive of Warsaw Reconstruction Office; 2011, (ang.). W: Memory of the World [on-line]. UNESCO. [dostęp 2011-06-14].

3.Błażejczyk K.; 2014, Miejska wyspa ciepła w Warszawie. Warszawa:

Wydawnictwo Akademickie Sedno, s. 40–43.

4.Bogucka M., Kwiatkowska M., Kwiatkowski M., Tomkiewicz W., Zahorski A.; 1984, Warszawa w latach 1526–1795. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, s. 144.

5.Brightman F.H.; 1959, Some factors influencing lichen growth in towns. Lichenologist 1:104-108

6.Cela A., Lankford L., Knowles-Lankford J.; 2009, Visitor Spending and Economic Impacts of Heritage Tourism: A Case Study of the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area, Journal of Heritage Tourism, nr 3.

7.Dettloff P.; 2006, Odbudowa i restauracja zabytków architektury w Polsce w latach 1918-1939: teoria i praktyka, Universitas, Kraków.

8.Dod, R.L., Giauque, R.D., Novakov, T.; 1986, Sulfate and carbonaceous aerosols in Beijing, China. Atmospheric Environment 20, 2271–2275.

9.Dominici F., McDermott A., Daniels M., Zeger S.L., Samet J.M.; 2005, Revised Analyses of the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study: Mortality Among Residents Of 90 Cities, Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 68:13–14, 1071–1092, DOI: 10.1080/152873905909359

10.Fenger, J., Hertel, O., Palmgren, F.; 1998, Urban air Pollution, European Aspects. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

25

11.Gałuszka N., Serafin S.; 2008. Wkład firm społecznych w rewitalizacją dziedzictwa przyrodniczego i kulturowego. Studia przypadków z Polski, Francji, Włoch i Finlandii, Fundacja Partnerstwo dla Środowiska, Kraków.

12.Jeżowski P.;2009, Podstawy regulacji środowiska i zdrowia [w:] Metody

szacowania korzyści i strat w dziedzinie ochrony środowiska i zdrowia, red.

P.Jeżowski, SGH, Warszawa.

13.Kaprowski W. (red); 2008, Dziedzictwo przemysłowe Mazowsza i jego rola w turystyce. Almamer WSE, Warszawa.

14.Król-Kaczorowska B.; 1986, Teatry Warszawy. Budynki i sale w latach 1748–1975. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.

15.Majewski P.; 2009, Ideologia i konserwacja. Architektura zabytkowa w Polsce w czasach socrealizmu, Trio, Warszawa.

16.Mukai, H.; 2001, Regional characteristics of sulfur and lead isotope ratios in the atmosphere at several Chinese urban sites. Environmental Science & Technology 35, 1064–1071.

17.Murzyn M.; 2008, Heritage Transformation in Central and Eastern Europe [w:] The Ashgate Research Companion to Heritage and Identity, red. B. Graham,

P.Howard, Ashgate, Aldershot.

18.Nietyksza M., Pruss W.; 1973, Zmiany w układzie przestrzennym Warszawy [w:] Irena Pietrza-Pawłowska (red.) Wielkomiejski rozwój Warszawy do 1918 r. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Książka i Wiedza.

19.OECD; 1995, Motor vehicle pollution. Reduction strategies beyond 2010. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.

20.Peel M.C., Finlayson B.L., McMahon T.A; 2007, Updated world map of the

Köppen-Geiger climate classification. „Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.”. 11,

s. 1633–1644.

21.Riegl A.; 2002, Nowoczesny kult zabytków. Jego istota i powstanie [w:] Alois Riegl, Georg Dehio i kult zabytków, red. J. Krawczyk, Mówią Wieki, Warszawa

2002.

22.Shi, Z., Shao, L., Jones, T.P., Lu, S.; 2005, Microscopy and mineralogy of airborne particles collected during severe dust storm episodes in Beijing, China. Journal of Geophysical Research 110, D01303.

23.Szmygin B. (red); 2009, Adaptacja obiektów zabytkowych do współczesnych funkcji użytkowych, ICOMOS, Politechnika Lubelska, Warszawa-Lublin.

24.Szmygin B.; 1996, Odbudowa zabytków i zespołów w Polsce – konsekwencje praktyczne i doktrynalne [w:] Ochrona i konserwacja dóbr kultury w Polsce,

1944–1989, SKZ, red. A. Tomaszewski, Warszawa.

25.Tomaszewski A. (red); 1996, Ochrona i konserwacja dóbr kultury w Polsce,

1944–1989, red., SKZ, Warszawa.

26.Xie, S., Zhang, Y., Qi, L., Tang, X.; 2003, Spatial distribution of traffic-related pollutant concentrations in street canyons. Atmospheric Environment 37, 3213–3224.

27.Xu, X.D., Zhou, L., Zhou, X.; 2005, Influencing domain of peripheral sources in the urban heavy pollution process of Beijing. Science in China, Series D 48, 565–575.

26

28.Ушаков И. Ф. Кольская земля. Мурманск: Кн. изд-во, 1972, История. Мурманский морской торговый порт.

29.Фёдоров П. В., Обрядина Т. А. Всесоюзная перепись населения 1939 года и

политические репрессии на Мурмане.

30. Общегеографический региональный атлас «Мурманская область» –

439 ЦЭВКФ, издание 1-е, 2007.

31.Численность населения Российской Федерации по муниципальным образованиям на 1 января 2015 года. Проверено 6 августа 2015.

32.Религиозная жизнь на Кольском полуострове на рубеже XX–XXI вв. // Кольская энциклопедия. В 5 т. Т. 1. А–Д / Гл. ред. А. А. Киселёв. СанктПетербург : ИС ; Апатиты : КНЦ РАН, 2008. С. 109–112.

1.7. Graphic and tables attachement

Fig. 1.5. Photographs of the building type in Murmansk

27

Mu01

Mu02

Mu03

Mu04

Mu05

Mu06

28

Mu07

Mu08

Mu09

Mu10

Mu11

Mu12

29

Mu13

Mu14

Mu15

Mu16

Mu17

Mu18

30