本文選題：風險評估　切入點：暴露評估　出處：《中國疾病預(yù)防控制中心》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：1目的以風險類型、主要參數(shù)、暴露濃度計算、危險分級、風險評估原理及優(yōu)缺點為參數(shù),對國內(nèi)外已經(jīng)普遍使用的六種職業(yè)健康風險評估方法進行對比研究,優(yōu)選出在油氣作業(yè)場所更適用的新加坡化學毒物職業(yè)暴露半定量風險評估方法(簡稱新加坡模型)和羅馬尼亞職業(yè)事故和職業(yè)病風險評估方法(簡稱羅馬尼亞模型);分別利用新加坡模型、羅馬尼亞模型以及擬采取的綜合評估方法(簡稱綜合評估模型)對油氣作業(yè)場所崗位員工在生產(chǎn)過程中可能接觸到的化學有害因素、物理因素和針對不同危害因素而采取的不同防護措施等三方面進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,通過三種評估模型在油氣生產(chǎn)過程中的不同作業(yè)場所的崗位員工的評估結(jié)果進行比較分析,為油氣作業(yè)場所不同崗位進行職業(yè)健康風險評估提供基礎(chǔ)數(shù)據(jù)資料。2方法采用流行病學現(xiàn)況調(diào)查方法對油氣作業(yè)場所現(xiàn)場調(diào)研,搜集作業(yè)場所的相關(guān)機構(gòu)設(shè)置、組織管理、工藝流程、生產(chǎn)設(shè)施設(shè)備布局、總體布局、防護設(shè)施、應(yīng)急救援、職業(yè)健康檢查等資料,現(xiàn)場調(diào)查不同崗位員工工作寫實、結(jié)合對職業(yè)病危害因素現(xiàn)場采樣檢測,明確作業(yè)現(xiàn)場不同崗位員工可能接觸到的危害因素種類、接觸途徑、接觸水平等,確定油氣作業(yè)場所不同危害因素(化學有害因素、物理因素)的暴露風險水平及危害水平,針對作業(yè)現(xiàn)場不同崗位員工進行職業(yè)健康風險評估。使用新加坡模型、羅馬尼亞模型和綜合評估模型,與我國職業(yè)病防治法律、法規(guī)、標準的要求相結(jié)合,兼顧油氣作業(yè)場所特有的危害特征,遵從危害等級和暴露等級,增加對防護措施等級的評估,建立簡單、全面、適用于油氣作業(yè)場所不同崗位員工的職業(yè)健康風險評估方法。3結(jié)果利用新加坡模型對成品油管道工程不同作業(yè)場所的操作崗、維修崗進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗接觸的硫化氫判定為可忽略風險、汽油和苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)判定為中等風險;維修崗接觸的一氧化碳、氮氧化物、二氧化硫等判定為低風險、汽油和苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)判定為中等風險;因此成品油管道工程油氣作業(yè)場所操作崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)職業(yè)健康風險存在可忽略風險和中等風險,維修崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)職業(yè)健康風險存在低風險和中等風險,綜合判定維修崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)職業(yè)健康風險高于操作崗。對天然氣管道工程凈化廠油氣作業(yè)場所操作崗、硫磺包裝崗進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗所接觸的甲烷、硫化氫、一氧化碳、氮氧化物、二氧化硫、硫化氫等為可忽略風險;硫磺包裝崗所接觸的硫化氫、二氧化硫等化學毒物均判定為可忽略風險,硫磺粉塵判定為中等風險;凈化廠油氣作業(yè)場操作崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)職業(yè)健康風險均為可忽略風險,硫磺包裝崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)的職業(yè)健康風險中硫磺粉塵判定為中等風險;硫磺包裝崗接觸的化學物質(zhì)種類少于操作崗,但因為存在硫磺粉塵,硫磺粉塵的職業(yè)健康風險判定為中等風險,綜合判定硫磺包裝崗所接觸的化學物質(zhì)職業(yè)健康風險高于操作崗。利用羅馬尼亞模型對成品油管道工程油氣作業(yè)場所操作崗、維修崗進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗所接觸的一氧化碳、硫化氫最嚴重后果為死亡,嚴重性等級為7級,可能性等級為1級,風險水平為3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)嚴重性等級為4級,可能性等級為3級,風險水平為4低;噪聲最嚴重后果為噪聲聾,嚴重性等級為3級,可能性等級為4級,風險水平為3低;故操作崗崗位總風險水平為3級,低風險作業(yè)。維修崗所接觸的一氧化碳、硫化氫最嚴重后果為死亡,嚴重性等級為7級,可能性等級為1級,風險水平為3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)嚴重性等級為4級,可能性等級為3級,風險水平為4低;噪聲最嚴重后果為噪聲聾,嚴重性等級為3級,可能性等級為4級,風險水平為3低;電焊煙塵可導(dǎo)致電工塵肺,嚴重性等級為5級,可能性等級為3級,風險水平為4低;汽油引起中毒,嚴重性等級為2級,可能性等級為4級,風險水平為2級非常低,故維修崗崗位總風險水平為4級,中等風險作業(yè)。以危險等級判定預(yù)防的先后次序,一氧化碳和硫化氫風險等級最高(7級)是首要預(yù)防的風險因子;噪聲的風險等級中等(3級),由于噪聲可以對人體聽覺等多系統(tǒng)造成影響,甚至引起職業(yè)性噪聲聾,是重點防護的險因子,故維修崗是職業(yè)危害風險控制的關(guān)鍵崗位。利用羅馬尼亞模型對天然氣管道工程凈化廠油氣作業(yè)場所操作崗、硫磺包裝崗進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗接觸的一氧化碳、硫化氫、甲硫醇最嚴重后果為死亡,嚴重性等級為7級,可能性等級為1級,風險水平為3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)嚴重性等級為4級,可能性等級為3級,風險水平為4低;噪聲最嚴重后果為噪聲聾,嚴重性等級為3級,可能性等級為4級,風險水平為3低;汽油引起中毒,嚴重性等級為2級,可能性等級為4級,風險水平為2非常低;操作崗崗位總風險水平為3級低風險。硫磺包裝崗接觸的硫化氫、二氧化硫、硫磺粉塵、噪聲等職業(yè)健康風險水平均為3低,硫磺包裝崗崗位總風險水平為3級低風險。一氧化碳和硫化氫、甲硫醇風險等級最高(7級)是首要預(yù)防的風險因子;噪聲的風險等級中等(3級),是重點防護的險因子,硫磺包裝崗是職業(yè)危害風險控制的關(guān)鍵崗位。利用綜合評估模型對成品油管道工程油氣作業(yè)場所操作崗、維修崗進行職業(yè)健康風險風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗職業(yè)健康風險值為2.49,維修崗職業(yè)健康風險值為1.81;操作崗職業(yè)健康風險等級為2級,屬于低風險,維修崗職業(yè)健康風險等級為1級,屬于可忽略風險;操作崗員工職業(yè)健康風險等級高于維修崗員工職業(yè)健康風險,對操作崗員工繼續(xù)目前已正常運行職業(yè)危害防護措施控制水平,同時加強生產(chǎn)場所定期檢測、加強作業(yè)員工培訓(xùn)與職業(yè)健康監(jiān)護。對天然氣管道工程操作崗、硫磺包裝崗進行職業(yè)健康風險評估,結(jié)論為操作崗職業(yè)健康風險值為2.07,硫磺包裝崗職業(yè)健康風險值為2.62;操作崗員工職業(yè)風險等級為2級,屬于低度風險,硫磺包裝崗員工職業(yè)風險等級為3級,屬于中度風險;硫磺包裝崗員工職業(yè)健康風險高于操作崗員工。操作崗繼續(xù)目前已正常運行的職業(yè)危害防護措施控制水平,加強生產(chǎn)場所定期檢測、加強作業(yè)員工培訓(xùn)與職業(yè)健康監(jiān)護。硫磺包裝崗繼續(xù)目前已正常運行的職業(yè)危害防護措施控制水平,加強生產(chǎn)場所定期檢測、強化職業(yè)衛(wèi)生管理措施執(zhí)行和加強應(yīng)急救援的演練,加強作業(yè)員工培訓(xùn)與職業(yè)健康監(jiān)護。綜合評估模型將化學有害因素、物理因素、防護措施等三方面風險水平進行綜合評估,職業(yè)健康風險評估更全面、具體、有針對性,對油氣作業(yè)場所的不同崗位職業(yè)健康風險評估適用性更強。4結(jié)論本研究采用的三種評估模型均能夠適用于油氣生產(chǎn)過程中不同崗位員工的職業(yè)健康風險評估。新加坡模型結(jié)合現(xiàn)場檢測數(shù)據(jù),對生產(chǎn)場所中化學物的風險評估更有效和精確,可以根據(jù)現(xiàn)場化學物的檢測濃度的變化實時追蹤職業(yè)健康風險的變化;羅馬尼亞模型結(jié)合物理因素的綜合判定,更全面,但是缺乏對風險變化的實時追蹤;綜合評估模型結(jié)合新加坡模型、羅馬尼亞模型的優(yōu)勢,既結(jié)合現(xiàn)場檢測數(shù)據(jù),根據(jù)化學物的濃度變化調(diào)整風險水平,又增加物理因素的判定,對不同作業(yè)場所的防護措施加以評估,這三方面的結(jié)合則更全面評估生產(chǎn)場所不同崗位的職業(yè)健康風險,根據(jù)評估結(jié)果,優(yōu)先采取有更針對性的控制措施,在保護作業(yè)員工健康方面起到一定的作用。
[Abstract]:1 with the purpose of risk types, main parameters, concentration calculation, risk classification, risk assessment principle and the advantages and disadvantages for the parameters, six kinds of occupation health risk assessment methods at home and abroad has been widely used in the comparative study, selected evaluation methods of semi quantitative risk Singapore chemical poisons occupation is most suitable for oil and gas in workplace exposure (referred to as the Singapore model) and the Romania occupation accidents and occupation disease risk assessment method (Romania model) respectively; using Singapore model, Romania model and comprehensive evaluation method intends to take (comprehensive evaluation model) of harmful chemical factors of oil and gas in workplace staff may be exposed to in the process of production, three according to different physical factors and hazard factors and adopt different protective measures such as occupation health risk assessment, through three kinds of evaluation model of oil and gas Evaluation of the production process in different workplaces of staff positions to compare the results of the analysis, carried out occupation health risk assessment provides the basis data of.2 method for oil and gas in workplaces in different positions based on epidemiological investigation method of oil and gas in workplace investigation, relevant agencies to collect workplace settings, organization management, process flow, production the facilities and equipment layout, overall layout, protective facilities, emergency rescue, occupation health examination data, field investigation of different staff work realistic, based on occupation hazards on-site sampling inspection, clear operation field employees of different positions may be exposed to the risk factors, the route of exposure, exposure level, determine the different risk factors of oil gas (workplace harmful chemical factors, physical factors) exposure level and risk level, according to the working site employees of different positions Occupation health risk assessment. Using the Singapore model, Romania model and comprehensive evaluation model, and legal regulations, occupation disease prevention and control in our country, the requirements of the combination of both oil and gas hazard characteristics of workplace specific compliance, hazard rating and exposure levels, increase the level of assessment, protection measures to establish a simple, comprehensive. Occupation health risks for employees of different positions of oil and gas in workplace assessment methods using the.3 Singapore model of oil pipeline project in different workplaces operating posts, maintenance post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is the operation of hydrogen sulfide determination for gang contact negligible risk, gasoline and BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) belongs to medium risk; maintenance gang contact with carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and other judged to be low risk, gasoline and BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) is determined in The risk of chemical substances; therefore occupation health risks of oil pipeline project of oil and gas in workplace contact exists post negligible risk and medium risk, low risk and moderate risk chemicals occupation health risk maintenance gang contact, determine the chemical occupation health risk maintenance gang contact than gang. Natural gas purification plant oil and gas pipeline engineering workplace operation posts, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is the operation of contact Gang methane, hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, two oxygen sulfur, hydrogen sulfide and other risks can be ignored; hydrogen sulfide sulfur packing contact Gang sulfur dioxide, chemical poisons were determined the risk is negligible, sulfur dust belongs to medium risk; oil and gas purification plant operation field operation Gang contact chemical occupation health risk was negligible wind Occupation health insurance, the risk of chemical substances in contact with sulfur packing gang in sulfur dust determination for medium risk; sulfur packing chemical contact Gang type less than the operating posts, but because of sulfur dust, occupation health risk determination of sulfur dust is the medium risk, comprehensive determination of chemical substances occupation health risk gang with sulfur packing the above operation post. The Romania model of oil pipeline project of oil and gas in workplaces operating posts, maintenance post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion for the operation contact gang of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulphide, the most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) serious possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the risk level of 4 low noise; the most serious consequences of noise induced deafness, severity of grade 3, the possibility of Grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; so the operation post total risk level is 3 level, low risk operation. Maintenance gang with carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide is the most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; benzene (benzene toluene, xylene), severity of the possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the level of risk for the 4 most serious consequences for low noise; noise induced hearing loss, the severity of the possibility of grade 3, grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; welding fumes can cause electrical pneumoconiosis, severity level 5 level, the possibility for the 3 class, the level of risk as low as 4; gasoline poisoning, serious possibility of grade 2, grade 4, grade 2 risk level is very low, so the maintenance post total risk level of grade 4, medium risk operations. In order to determine the risk level of prevention, carbon monoxide and the risk of hydrogen sulfide The highest level (Level 7) is a risk factor for primary prevention; noise medium risk level (Level 3), because of noise influence on human auditory system, and even cause the occupation of noise induced hearing loss, risk factor is the key protection, so the maintenance gang is the key position occupation hazard risk control of natural. Gas pipeline engineering of oil and gas purification plant workplace operation gang by Romania model, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is post contact with carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan and most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; benzene (benzene, toluene, xylene) serious possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the level of risk for the 4 most serious consequences for low noise; noise induced hearing loss, the severity of the possibility of grade 3, grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; gasoline caused in Poison, the severity of the possibility of grade 2, grade 4, the risk level of 2 very low post operation; the total risk level of 3 low risk. Hydrogen sulfide, sulfur packing Gang contact sulfur dioxide, sulfur dust, noise and other occupation health risk level were as low as 3, sulfur packing post total risk Level 3. Low risk of carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan highest risk grade (Grade 7) is a risk factor for primary prevention; noise medium risk level (Level 3), is the key factor of insurance protection, sulfur packing Gang is the key position occupation hazard risk control. Using the comprehensive evaluation model of oil pipeline project oil and gas workplace operation maintenance Gang Gang, occupation health risk risk assessment, the conclusion is post occupation health risk value is 2.49, the maintenance gang occupation health risk value is 1.81; the level of health risk level 2 GANG occupation operation, and belongs to the low wind The level of health insurance, the risk is 1 level maintenance post occupation, negligible risk; the operating staff occupation health risk level is higher than the maintenance staff post occupation health risk, the operating staff has continued normal operation of occupation hazard protection measures to control level, and strengthen the production sites, regular inspection, to strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care for the natural gas pipeline project operation posts, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is post occupation health risk value of 2.07, sulfur packing Gang occupation health risk value is 2.62; the operating staff occupation risk grade 2, belong to low risk, sulfur packing staff occupation risk grade was 3. The moderate risk; sulfur packing staff occupation health risk is higher than the operating staff. Post operation to protective measures of occupation hazards has the normal operation of the control level, and The regular detection of strong production areas to strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care. Sulfur packing occupation hazard protection measures to gang control level has normal operation, strengthen regular inspection of production sites, strengthen the implementation of occupation health management measures and strengthen emergency rescue exercises, strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care. The comprehensive evaluation model of chemical harmful factors, physical factors, comprehensive evaluation of three aspects of protective measures, risk level, occupation health risk assessment more comprehensive, specific, targeted, different post occupation health risk of oil and gas in workplace occupation health risk assessment evaluation applicability.4 conclusion three evaluation models used in this study are applicable to different staff in the production process of oil and gas. The Singapore model based on the test data, the chemicals in workplace risk assessment More effectively and accurately, according to the change of concentration field of the chemical detection of real-time tracking and occupation health risk; Romania model with comprehensive judgement, physical factors are more comprehensive, but the lack of real time tracking of the change of risk; comprehensive evaluation model combined with the Singapore model, Romania model, combined with the field test data. According to the concentration level of risk adjustment of the chemical and physical factors, increasing judgment, to evaluate the different workplace protective measures, the combination of these three aspects is more comprehensive assessment of occupation health risk production field in different positions, according to the evaluation results, give priority to more targeted prevention and control measures, to play a the role in the protection of workers health.

【學位授予單位】：中國疾病預(yù)防控制中心
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R134

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬巖;于冬雪;孫玉欣;;半定量風險評估法在冶金焦化企業(yè)的應(yīng)用[J];工業(yè)衛(wèi)生與職業(yè)病;2016年02期

2 余曉峰;韓麗芳;謝凱蕾;何麗萍;張美辨;;羅馬尼亞職業(yè)事故和職業(yè)病風險評估方法在某貴金屬冶煉廠的應(yīng)用效果[J];浙江預(yù)防醫(yī)學;2016年02期

3 謝紅衛(wèi);張美辨;周莉芳;全長健;陳瑞生;朱江;;兩種風險評估模型在印刷行業(yè)中的應(yīng)用研究[J];環(huán)境與職業(yè)醫(yī)學;2016年01期

4 李鵬飛;楊永堅;;風險評估法在某化工企業(yè)職業(yè)病危害現(xiàn)狀評價中的綜合應(yīng)用[J];職業(yè)與健康;2016年01期

5 唐睿;楊躍林;崔方方;石婷;蘭亞佳;王永偉;;澳大利亞風險評估模式在職業(yè)病危害評價中的應(yīng)用[J];現(xiàn)代預(yù)防醫(yī)學;2015年24期

6 何曉慶;;某制藥企業(yè)職業(yè)病危害的吸入風險評估[J];實用預(yù)防醫(yī)學;2015年05期

7 榮鐵渝;朱方艷;周薇薇;;某氯化聚氯乙烯生產(chǎn)項目職業(yè)病危害預(yù)評價中國際化學品控制工具箱法的應(yīng)用[J];職業(yè)與健康;2015年02期

8 袁偉明;傅紅;張美辨;冷朋波;鄒華;周莉芳;欒俞清;劉鴻;;國外五種職業(yè)危害風險評估模型在某電鍍企業(yè)的應(yīng)用[J];中華勞動衛(wèi)生職業(yè)病雜志;2014年12期

9 周桂俠;宋小和;高青;曲波;;ICMM職業(yè)健康風險評估模型在某金融機具工程項目職業(yè)病危害評價中的應(yīng)用[J];職業(yè)與健康;2014年22期

10 張琦文;;毒物風險評估在職業(yè)危害預(yù)評價的應(yīng)用探討[J];山西醫(yī)藥雜志;2014年17期

，

本文編號：1579787