本文關鍵詞：典型重金屬污染場地再利用風險評估及修復目標值研究　出處：《安徽理工大學》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關文章： 重金屬 污染場地 健康風險評價 修復目標值

【摘要】：本文以典型鉻鹽生產(chǎn)企業(yè)搬遷遺留重金屬污染場地為研究對象,在對場地原有企業(yè)生產(chǎn)歷史、原料產(chǎn)品、生產(chǎn)工藝與污染防治措施進行調(diào)查分析的基礎上,通過監(jiān)測布點、采樣分析,評價了場地內(nèi)土壤重金屬環(huán)境質(zhì)量,得出該場地的土壤污染特征和分布情況。應用前期所得數(shù)據(jù)對該場地展開生態(tài)風險評價與健康風險評價,篩選了4種可能對人體健康產(chǎn)生危害的污染物,計算場地再利用過程中的健康風險水平,并分別計算這些污染物的修復目標值。通過以上研究,得出了如下結論： 1.該重金屬污染場地污染程度 根據(jù)污染場地監(jiān)測數(shù)據(jù),利用污染指數(shù)法對場地中重金屬污染程度進行評價。從監(jiān)測結果判斷,超標點位均在場地內(nèi)。場地內(nèi)重金屬污染嚴重,場地內(nèi)土壤樣品中砷、鉻、Cr(VI)、鎳4種污染物均存在超標現(xiàn)象,未發(fā)現(xiàn)鎘、鋅、銅超標。土壤鉻污染最為嚴重,同時Cr(VI)監(jiān)測數(shù)據(jù)表明污染點位樣品中Cr(VI)是該場地污染土壤中鉻的重要存在形態(tài)；鎳的污染程度次之,再次為砷污染。 2.場地污染分布情況 原有企業(yè)的主要生產(chǎn)區(qū)域、鉻渣堆場以及循環(huán)水池等典型產(chǎn)污環(huán)節(jié)處都屬于重度污染區(qū)域。在所測土壤點位中,大多數(shù)點位的監(jiān)測濃度變化符合隨著采樣深度的加深而降低的趨勢,少數(shù)點位出現(xiàn)跳躍性,且都出現(xiàn)在1m以上。其跳躍性的原因可能是原有生產(chǎn)活動中對局部土壤進行翻土整理或者是由于企業(yè)搬遷過程中對土壤的擾動所致。砷、鉻(三價鉻和六價鉻)以及鎳的污染表現(xiàn)出同源性,即由原有生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營活動所致,同時也存在個別點位出現(xiàn)波動性。究其原因可能是受地表徑流或是人工擾動所致。 3.污染場地生態(tài)風險水平 運用瑞典科學家Lars Hakanson提出的潛在生態(tài)風險危害指數(shù)法,對該場地進行生態(tài)風險評價,結果表明：從單個重金屬的潛在生態(tài)危害角度來講,金屬鉻的生態(tài)危害最大,其次為鎳,再次為砷。所有監(jiān)測樣品中銅、鋅、鎘均為輕微生態(tài)危害。從總潛在生態(tài)危害角度來講,生態(tài)危害指數(shù)總體上隨深度增加而逐漸降低。表層、0.5m、1m的樣品生態(tài)危害最大。 4.污染場地健康風險水平 根據(jù)住宅用地情景,確定暴露人群為成人和兒童,結合重金屬污染物在土壤環(huán)境中的行為特征,確定敏感人群主要的暴露途徑為：經(jīng)口攝入、經(jīng)皮膚接觸和經(jīng)呼吸吸入三種途徑。在綜合參考了污染物的相關毒理學參數(shù)后,利用健康風險評價模型,對場地污染物的致癌風險及非致癌危害商進行評價,評價結果表明,致癌風險方面,六價鉻的致癌風險最大,砷次之,鎳最小。非致癌風險方面,砷的非致癌風險最大,六價鉻次之,鎳最小,鉻不存在非致癌風險。 5.基于健康風險的土壤修復目標值 以10-6和1作為可接受風險水平,應用健康風險評價模型進行計算,得出基于健康風險的土壤風險控制值,即污染修復目標值分別是：As:0.368mg·kg-1、Cr(Ⅵ):0.251mg·kg-1、Ni:90.6mg·kg-1。
[Abstract]:In this paper, the typical chromate production enterprises move left heavy metal contaminated sites as the research object, on the site of the original production history, raw materials, investigating and analyzing the production process and pollution control measures, monitoring, sampling and analysis, evaluation of the site of heavy metals in soil environmental quality, soil pollution characteristics and the distribution of the site the application of pre launch data. The health risk assessment and ecological risk assessment of the site, the screening of 4 kinds of pollutants may cause harm to human health, calculation of site utilization over the level of health risk in the process of repair, and target value. These pollutants were calculated through the above research, conclusions are as follows:
1. pollution degree of the heavy metal contaminated site
According to the contaminated site monitoring data, the evaluation of the extent of heavy metal pollution in the field using pollution index method. From the results of the monitoring judgment, exceed the standard point position in the field. In the field of heavy metal pollution serious, site soil samples of arsenic, chromium, nickel, Cr (VI) there are 4 kinds of pollutants exceed the standard phenomenon, not found in CD copper, zinc, chromium exceed the standard. The soil pollution is most serious, at the same time, Cr (VI) monitoring data show that the pollution point in the sample of Cr (VI) is an important form of the site soil pollution of chromium; nickel pollution degree, again for arsenic pollution.
2. site pollution distribution
The main production area of the original enterprise, chromium slag and circulating water tank and other typical pollution sources are belonging to heavy pollution area. In the measured soil sites, monitoring the change of concentration with most points decreased with the sampling depth increasing trend, a few points appear to jump, and have appeared in more than 1m the reason of the jump. May be finishing or turn the soil is due to the relocation of enterprises in the process of soil disturbance caused by the local soil. The original production activities of arsenic, chromium (chromium and chromium six) and nickel pollution showed homology, from the original production and operation activities. There are also some points a volatility. The reason may be affected by surface runoff or artificial disturbance caused by.
3. ecological risk level of contaminated site
The potential ecological risk of the Swedish scientist Lars Hakanson proposed the risk index method, ecological risk assessment of the site, the results showed that: from a single heavy metal potential ecological risk perspective, the biggest ecological hazards of chromium metal, followed by nickel, again for arsenic. All monitoring samples of copper, zinc and cadmium were slight ecological harm from the total potential ecological risk perspective, ecological risk index generally increases with depth and gradually decreased. The surface of 0.5m, the largest sample 1m. Ecological harm
4. health risk level of contaminated sites
According to the situation of residential, to determine the exposure for adults and children, combined with behavior characteristics of heavy metal pollutants in the soil environment, determine the sensitive population exposure pathways for the major: ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact by three ways. In reference to the comprehensive toxicological parameters of pollutants, the use of health a risk evaluation model of pollutants carcinogenic risk and non carcinogenic hazard quotient is evaluated, the evaluation results show that the risk of cancer, six chromium carcinogenic risk, arsenic of nickel is minimal. The non carcinogenic risk side, the largest non carcinogenic risk of arsenic, chromium six times, nickel chromium minimum. There is no non carcinogenic risk.
5. target value of soil remediation based on health risk
Taking 10-6 and 1 as acceptable risk level, the health risk assessment model was applied to calculate the soil risk control value based on health risk. The target values of pollution recovery were: As:0.368mg. Kg-1, Cr (VI): 0.251mg? Kg-1, Ni:90.6mg? Kg-1..

【學位授予單位】：安徽理工大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：X53;X820.4

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 李選統(tǒng);盧維盛;李謙;李擁軍;鄭飛騰;;土壤重金屬污染的修復[J];現(xiàn)代農(nóng)業(yè)科技;2011年24期

2 甄燕紅;成顏君;潘根興;李戀卿;;中國部分市售大米中Cd、Zn、Se的含量及其食物安全評價[J];安全與環(huán)境學報;2008年01期

3 羅思東;美國城市的棕色地塊及其治理[J];城市問題;2002年06期

4 胡二邦,姚仁太,任智強,辛存田;環(huán)境風險評價淺論[J];輻射防護通訊;2004年01期

5 付在毅,許學工;區(qū)域生態(tài)風險評價[J];地球科學進展;2001年02期

6 劉勝華;我國土地生態(tài)安全問題及其立法[J];國土資源科技管理;2004年02期

7 趙沁娜,楊凱,張勇;土壤污染治理與開發(fā)的環(huán)境經(jīng)濟調(diào)控對策研究[J];環(huán)境科學與技術;2005年05期

8 徐爭啟;倪師軍;庹先國;張成江;;潛在生態(tài)危害指數(shù)法評價中重金屬毒性系數(shù)計算[J];環(huán)境科學與技術;2008年02期

9 趙慶齡;張乃弟;路文如;;土壤重金屬污染研究回顧與展望Ⅱ——基于三大學科的研究熱點與前沿分析[J];環(huán)境科學與技術;2010年07期

10 田裘學;健康風險評價的基本內(nèi)容與方法[J];甘肅環(huán)境研究與監(jiān)測;1997年04期

，

本文編號：1430735