期刊文献+

利用靶器官毒性剂量法(TTD)和证据权重分析法(WOE)评估固化飞灰中重金属非致癌健康风险 被引量:9

Assessment of heavy metal non-carcinogenic health risk in solidified fly ash using TTD and WOE methods
下载PDF
导出
摘要 传统的健康风险评价方法未考虑重金属对多种靶器官的影响及重金属间的相互作用,不能反映重金属真实的风险情况.ATSDR的靶器官毒性剂量法(TTD)和EPA的证据权重分析法(WOE)分别将重金属能够产生效应的靶器官与重金属间的相互作用引入评价过程,对传统评价方法进行修正.基于此,本研究采用了TTD法和WOE法评估了生活垃圾焚烧厂固化飞灰中重金属的非致癌健康风险,并将其与传统的非致癌健康风险评价方法进行比较.结果表明,传统的非致癌健康风险评价方法得出的HI值为0.2084,经TTD法和WOE法修正后的HI值分别为0.5165和0.6717,修正后风险大于传统方法所预测风险,更严格的反映固化飞灰对工人健康的真实风险. Traditional health risk assessment methods do not really reflect the heavy metals risk, because the interactions among heavy metals and their effects on target organs are not taken into account. To solve this problem, the traditional evaluation method was modified by the target organ toxicity dose(TTD) approach of ATSDR and the weight of evidence(WOE) approach of EPA. This study evaluated the non-carcinogenic health risks of heavy metals in solidified fly ash from a municipal solid waste incinerator in South China through the TTD and WOE methods, and the results were compared with that of the traditional method. The results showed that the Hazard Index(HI) values of the traditional health risk method was 0.2084, whereas the value of TTD modified HI and WOE modified HI was 0.5165 and 0.6717. The value of health risks by the TTD and WOE method were higher than that of the traditional method. It could reflect the factual health risk better for male workers in MSWI.
作者 刘丽君 韩静磊 钱益斌 张宗尧 郭庶 LIU Lijun;HAN Jinglei;QIAN Yibin;ZHANG Zongyao;GUO Shu(South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Environmental Protection, Guangzhou, 510655 , China;Hainan Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Haikou, 570206, China)
出处 《环境化学》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2019年第5期1014-1020,共7页 Environmental Chemistry
基金 广州市污染防治新技术、新工艺开发项目(PM-zx022-201507-027)资助~~
关键词 靶器官毒性剂量 证据权重分析 非致癌健康风险 固化飞灰 重金属 target organ toxicity dose weight of evidence analysis non-carcinogenic health risk solidified fly ash heavy metals
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献14

  • 1丁爱芳,潘根兴.南京城郊零散菜地土壤与蔬菜重金属含量及健康风险分析[J].生态环境,2003,12(4):409-411. 被引量:55
  • 2Kalliopi Anastasiadou,Konstantinos Christopoulos,Epameinontas Mousios,Evangelos Gidarakos.Solidification/stabilization of fly and bottom ash from medical waste incineration facility[J].Journal of Hazardous Materials.2011
  • 3Hui-Sheng Shi,Li-Li Kan.Leaching behavior of heavy metals from municipal solid wastes incineration (MSWI) fly ash used in concrete[J].Journal of Hazardous Materials.2008(2)
  • 4Junfeng Li,Jianlong Wang.Advances in cement solidification technology for waste radioactive ion exchange resins: A review[J].Journal of Hazardous Materials.2005(1)
  • 5Guangren Qian,Yali Cao,Pengcheong Chui,Joohwa Tay.Utilization of MSWI fly ash for stabilization/solidification of industrial waste sludge[J].Journal of Hazardous Materials.2005(1)
  • 6Jatta Partanen,Peter Backman,Rainer Backman,Mikko Hupa.Absorption of HCl by limestone in hot flue gases. Part II: importance of calcium hydroxychloride[J].Fuel.2005(12)
  • 7Zhao Youcai,Song Lijie,Li Guojian.Chemical stabilization of MSW incinerator fly ashes[J].Journal of Hazardous Materials.2002(1)
  • 8Young Jun Park,Jong Heo.Conversion to glass-ceramics from glasses made by MSW incinerator fly ash for recycling[J].Ceramics International.2002(6)
  • 9宋珍霞,王里奥,林祥,刘元元,袁辉.城市垃圾焚烧飞灰特性及水泥固化试验研究[J].环境科学研究,2008,21(4):163-168. 被引量:30
  • 10高亮,张曙光,刘汉桥,刘彦博,郝永俊,杨恩德,付晨光.水泥类型对生活垃圾焚烧飞灰固化效果的影响[J].环境化学,2010,29(6):1183-1184. 被引量:7

共引文献74

同被引文献114

引证文献9

二级引证文献17

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