| 基于棕地的居民小区土壤重金属健康风险评价 |
| 摘要点击 4579 全文点击 2247 投稿时间：2013-07-30 修订日期：2013-09-29 |
| 查看HTML全文
查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 中文关键词 棕地 重金属 健康风险 评价 居民小区 |
| 英文关键词 brownfield heavy metals health risk assessment residential community |
|
| 中文摘要 |
| 以河南省某市不同类型的棕地居民小区为研究对象，采集土壤样品，测定重金属（As、Hg、Cd、Pb）含量，采用美国环境保护署（US EPA）推荐的健康风险模型对其展开健康风险评价. 结果表明，棕地居民小区土壤重金属含量和健康风险比原棕地有了明显改善，但均高于非棕地居民小区；各小区土壤重金属的HQ和HI均小于1，不存在非致癌健康风险；CR和TCR略超过US EPA推荐的土壤治理标准，但低于一些专家所提出的宽松标准，存在致癌风险的可能；儿童4种重金属的HI大于成人，约相当于成人的7倍左右. HQAs对HI的贡献率在75%左右，CRAs对TCR的贡献率在80%左右，As是最主要的非致癌和致癌风险因子. |
| 英文摘要 |
| Nine residential communities which were built on different brownfields in a city of Henan Province were chosen to investigate the health risks of heavy metals (As, Hg, Cd, and Pb) in surface soils. Concentrations of soil heavy metals were measured according to the methods described in the national standard. Based on the health risk models recommended by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic health risks of soil heavy metals were assessed. The results showed that compared with the original brownfields, the heavy metal concentrations in soils and their health risks in residential communities built on brownfields were significantly improved, and the concentrations and health risks of soil heavy metals in these communities were all higher than those in non-brownfield residential communities. The HQ and HI values of soil heavy metals in all the residential communities were lower than 1, which indicated that there was no non-carcinogenic risk in these communities. Meanwhile, the values of CR and TCR were slightly higher than the standard suggested by the US EPA, indicating that slight carcinogenic risks in the communities, but these values were lower than the lenient standard proposed by some experts. The HI value of the four metals for children was exactly seven times higher than that for adults. The contribution rate of HQAs to HI was about 75%, CRAS to TCR was about 80%, and therefore arsenic was the crucial factor for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk in the residential communities of the city. |
|
|
|
