期刊文献+

典型铬渣污染场地健康风险评价及修复指导限值 被引量:26

The health risk assessment and remediation guide limit value of typical chromium slag contaminated sites
原文传递
导出
摘要 通过对青海某化工厂铬渣污染场地钻孔采样,分析了样品质地及铬含量,得到场地的水文地质及铬污染状况.根据场地区域生活现状,运用美国环保局健康风险计算模型,评估了现有条件下该场地对周边居民的潜在健康风险.同时,结合场地的修复目标,应用地下水溶质运移方程及土壤中Cr6+的解吸曲线,探讨了场地污染物的修复指导限值.结果表明:场地表层0~4m为黄土状土,4~22m为砾砂,铬污染区域面积约4×104m2;现有条件下场地Cr6+对人体的健康风险值为9.39,需要对Cr6+进行修复治理,而Cr3+的健康风险值在可接受范围内;通过计算得到场地表层0~4m黄土状土Cr6+的修复值为60mg·kg-1;4~22m砾砂Cr6+修复值为15mg·kg-1. The chromium slag contaminated sites of a chemical plant in Qinghai were analyzed by drilling samples to investigate the hydrogeology and chromium pollution of the contaminated sites. The potential health risk to the surrounding residents was assessed by the EPA's Health Risk Calculation Model,which is based on the current situation of life. The guide limits value of the contaminated site remediation was determined by using the groundwater and soil solute transportation equations and the desorption curve of Cr^6+ according to the remedial goal. The results showed:0-4 m of the surface soil is loess-like sand,4-22 m is gravel,and the size of the chromium polluted area is about 4×10^4 m^2. The heath risk value of Cr^6+ for humans is 9.39,so it should be controlled and remediated,while that of Cr3+ is within the acceptable risk value range. According to our calculations,the restoration value of Cr^6+ was 60 mg·kg^-1 for the 0-4 m loess soil and 15 mg·kg^-1 for the 4-22 m gravelly sand.
出处 《环境科学学报》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2010年第7期1445-1450,共6页 Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae
基金 国家高科技研究发展计划(863)项目(No.2009AA063101)~~
关键词 铬渣 污染场地 风险评价 修复限值 chromium slag contaminated sites health-based risk assessment restoration limit value
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2001. Canada-wide standards for petroleum hydrocarbons in soil [ OL ]. 2009-11-01, http://www, ccme. ca.
  • 2曹云者,施烈焰,李丽和,李发生.石油烃污染场地环境风险评价与风险管理[J].生态毒理学报,2007,2(3):265-272. 被引量:67
  • 3段小丽,王宗爽,于云江,聂静,王菲菲,赵秀阁.垃圾填埋场地下水污染对居民健康的风险评价[J].环境监测管理与技术,2008,20(3):20-24. 被引量:29
  • 4Ferguson C C. 1999. Assessing risk from contaminated sites: Policy and practice in 16 European countries [ J ]. Land Contamination and Reclamation, 7 (2) : 33--54.
  • 5刘玉强,李丽,王琪,董路,蔡木林.典型铬渣污染场地的污染状况与综合整治对策[J].环境科学研究,2009,22(2):248-253. 被引量:79
  • 6U. S. EPA. 1989. Exposure factors handbook [ OL]. Washington DC: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. 2009- 11- 01, http ://www. epa. gov.
  • 7U.S. EPA. 2005. Guidelines for carcinogen risk assessment [ OL ]. 2009-11-01, http ://www. epa. gov.
  • 8U. S. EPA Office of Solid Waste. 1999a. Data collection for The hazardous waste identification rule: Section 9. 0 Human receptor data[ OL]. 2009-11-01, http://www, epa. gov.
  • 9U. S. EPA Office of Solid Waste. 1999b. Data collection for The hazardous waste identification rule: Section 10.0 Farm food chain and terrestrial foodweb data [ OL ]. 2009- 11- 01, http://www. epa. gov.
  • 10U. S. EPA. 1989. Risk assessment guidance for superfund: Human health evaluation manual[ OL]. 2009-11-01, http://www, epa. gov.

二级参考文献62

共引文献309

同被引文献418

引证文献26

二级引证文献389

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部