Background/aimDue to lack of PM monitoring process in Ukraine the aim of this work was to obtain information on the actual concentrations of PM10 and PM2,5 in one of the Ukrainian cities with the population under coal power plant exposure.MethodsDefinition of air pollution by PM10 and PM2.5 was conducted in the seven points located in operation zone of the TPP which were selected according to the algorithm including relief, infrastructure, meteo data.The study was conducted throughout the 2015 as a result it was managed to get the average annual concentration. Measurements of PM2,5 and PM10 concentration levels in the ambient air carried out using portable handheld analyzers Con.Tec Personal Dust Monitor PM10-PM2.5-PM1 (Italy).Measurements were carried out at the height of 1.2 to 1.8 metres from the ground in the human breathing area. Gathered measurements in real-time mode were conducted within one hour with an average of 1 min for 3 sequences per day.ResultsAs a result of the research, it has been established that:concentrations of PM10 were determined in the range of 11 to 67 μg/m3, PM2.5 – from 4 to 47 μg/m3. In this case, the excess of the recommended by the WHO levels of averaged concentrations PM10 and PM2.5 in the ambient air observed in 43% of measurements especially in the autumn–winter heating period;every 10 µg of concentration above normative increases the death rate by 0.6%. Accordingly, in the worst scenario with a concentration of 67 μg/m3 the mortality rate may increase by 2.82%.ConclusionBased on the foregoing, conclusions can be drawn on the need for implementation and expansion of monitoring programs measurements of particulate matter (PM10 and PM2,5) in the ambient air of Ukraine settlements. Mandatory review and approval of hygienic standards for PM10 and PM2.5, in accordance with Directives 2008/50/EU, 2001/80/EU, recommendations and requirements of WHO.
Objective. Justify need to use the methodology of human health risk assessment to determine the size of sanitary protection zones for industrial enterprises (especially, I-II hazard classes). Materials and methods: sanitary protection zone of an industrial enterprise; mathematical modelling of air pollution; physical and chemical analysis methods of pollutants; human health risk assessment; cartographic methods using geographic information systems (GIS; ArcGis 10.0) and Earth remote sensing data (remote sensing; space images). Results. Improved understanding effectiveness of the human health risk assessment (HHRA) methodology used during the state sanitary and epidemiological examination of materials on the substantiation of the sanitary protection zones size for industrial enterprises. The human health risk has been assessed and the effectiveness of the developed and implemented management decisions on health and environmental issues has been demonstrated. The risk was reduced by almost 30 times compared to 2009 after environmental conservation measures (non-carcinogenic risk of chronic inhalation in 2009 for manganese and its compounds was HQ=15.3÷41.0; in 2012, HQ=1.1÷1.5). Priority and assessment of the contribution of individual emission sources (in %) to the total air pollution was additionally conducted and further phased implementation of environmental measures is recommended. This allowed to reduce the risk to the limit (allowable) indicators. Conclusions. Scientifically substantiated the need to study the patterns of distribution of potentially dangerous chemicals in the natural atmosphere and analyze the level of their concentration in the enterprise operation area (radius 40 heights of the largest pipe, m) at different distances in all directions of the world by rhumbs, taking into account territorial features (characteristics of land use, topographic and meteorological data) location of industrial facilities and residential areas. The necessity of HHRA implementation accelerating within the framework of arbitrary procedures through the support of cooperation in management decisions in the development and improvement of environmental and hygienic measures to reduce air pollution has been implemented.
References made to CERCLA throughout this document should be interpreted as meaning "CERCLA, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)." 40 CFR Part 300. Proposed revisions to the NCP were published on December 21, 1988 (53 Federal Register 51394). \The term "public health evaluation" was introduced in the previous risk assessment guidance (EPA 1986f) to describe the assessment of chemical releases from a site and the analysis of public health threats resulting from those releases, and Superfund site risk assessment studies often are referred to as public health evaluations, or PHEs. The term "PHE" should be replaced by whichever of the three parts of the revised human health evaluation process is appropriate: "baseline risk assessment," "documentation of preliminary remediation goals," or "risk evaluation of remedial alternatives."Baseline risks are risks that might exist if no remediation or institutional controls were applied at a site.Volume II of the Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund is the Environmental Evaluation Manual (EPA 1989b), which provides guidance for the analysis of potential environmental (i.e., not human health) effects at sites.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.