유기물자원화 (Journal of the Korea Organic Resources Recycling Association)

  • 제27권3호
  • /
  • Pages.63-74
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1225-6498(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2508-3015(eISSN)
유기성자원학회 (Korea Organic Resources Recycling Association)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

철도정비부지 내 매립된 폐기물에 의해 중금속으로 오염된 토양의 인체위해성 평가

Human Risk Assessment of Soil Contaminated with Heavy Metal by Waste Reclaimed in Railway Maintenance Site

  • ;
  • 정민정 (안양대학교 교양학부) ;
  • 문세흠 (환경부 기후변화정책관 국제협력과) ;
  • 박진규 ((주)에코윌플러스)
  • 투고 : 2019.08.05
  • 심사 : 2019.09.16
  • 발행 : 2019.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 대규모 철도부지를 상업부지로 개발함에 따라 과거 부지 내부에 산업 폐기물 등이 부적절하게 처리되어 중금속 폐기물로 오염된 토양의 Cu, Pb, Zn, Ni 에 대한 인체 위해성 평가를 수행하였다. 위해성 평가는 토양의 복원 및 복원과정에서 필요한 고려요소를 도출하는데 주요한 과정이다. 본 연구에서는 위해성 평가를 위해 환경부 위해성평가지침을 준용하여 노출농도 결정, 노출량 산정, 발암 및 비발암 위해도를 결정하였다. 이를 통해 철도부지의 중금속 오염토양의 인체 위해성 평가 결과를 제시하였다. 노출농도 산정결과 토양내 중금속 함량은 621.3 Cu mg/kg, 2,824.5 Pb mg/kg, 1,559.1 Zn mg/kg, 45 Ni mg/kg이고, 독성금속별 인체 노출량 결과, 노출경로별로는 토양의 실외비산 > 토양섭취 > 토양 접촉 순으로 나타났으며, 오염물질별로는 Pb > Zn > Cu > Ni 순으로 나타났다. 발암위해도 평가 결과, USEPA에서 제시한 허용발암위해도(TCR > $10^{-6}$) 보다 높게 나타났으며, 독성위해도(비발암성) 평가 결과, HI 지수(HI< 1.0)도 성인 3.5, 어린이 4.85, Cu 1.94 ~ 2.16, Pb 1.37 ~ 2.90으로 나타났다. 따라서 대상부지의 중금속으로 오염된 토양의 복원관리가 필요할 것으로 판단된다.

This study carried out a human risk assessment of Cu, Pb, Zn and Ni contained in soil contaminated by improperly buried heavy metal wastes in railway sites. The purpose of the human risk assessment is to derive the need for soil remediation and factors that should be considered during soil remediation. Risk assessment was performed in accordance with the Environment Ministry's Risk Assessment Guidelines. The results of the human risk assessment of contaminated heavy metal soil contaminated by improperly buried waste in the railway site were presented after the process of determining exposure concentration, calculating exposure, and determining carcinogenic hazards. The heavy metal content of soil is 621.3 Cu mg/kg, 2,824.5 Pb mg/kg, 1,559.1 Zn mg/kg and 45 Ni mg/kg, which is the exposure concentration of the target contaminant. The results of human exposure according to exposure pathways were high in the order of soil outdoor dust >soil ingestion >soil contact, and Pb >Zn >Cu >Ni were higher in order of contaminant. The carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic risks of soil contaminated with heavy metal waste were higher than the allowable carcinogenic risks (TCR> $10^{-6}$) and the risk index (Hi < 1.0) suggested by USEPA. Therefore, the site needs to be remediated.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adriano, D. C., "Trace element in the terrestrial environment", Springer-Verlag, New York. (1986).
  2. Cherian, S. and Oliveira, M. M., "Transgenic Plants in Phytoremediation : Recent Adavance and New Possibilities", Environmental Science & Technology 39, pp. 9377-9390. (2005). https://doi.org/10.1021/es051134l
  3. An, Y. J., Baek, Y. W., Lee, W. M., Jeong, S. W. and Kim, T. S., "Comparative study of soil risk assessment models used in developed countries", J. Soil and Groundwater Environment, 12(1), pp. 53-63. (2007).
  4. Cho, C. G., "Heavy metal contamination and risk assessment of an abandoned metal mine", MS Thesis, Soonchunhyang University, Korea. (2012).
  5. Lee, G. H., "Health risk assessment of heavy metals in residents around abandoned metal mines", Ph.D Thesis, Soonchunhyang University, Korea. (2013).
  6. Lee, S.-W. and Kim, J.-J., P ark, M. J., Lee, S.-H. and Kim, S.-O., "Human Risk Assessment of Arsenic and Heavy Metal Contamination and Estimation of Remediation Concentration within Abandoned Metal Mine Area", Journal of the mineralogical society of korea, 28(4), pp. 309-323. (2015). https://doi.org/10.9727/jmsk.2015.28.4.309
  7. Korea railroad and Korea rural community corporation, "Yonsan station area remedial investigation of soil and groundwater". (2009).
  8. Ministry of Environment, "Soil environmental standard test methods". (2009).
  9. Ministry of Environment, "Risk Assessment method of contaminated soil". pp. 102. (2003).
  10. Kolluru, R. V., Bartell, S. M., Pitblado, R. M. and Stricoff, R. S., "Risk Assessment and Management Handbook. McGrow-Hill", New York. (1996).
  11. Paustenbach, D. J., "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: Theory and Practice", John Wiley and Sons, New York. (2002).
  12. US EPA, "Methods for -Evaluating the Attainment of Cleanup Standards Volume 1 : Soils and Solid Media". USEPA/230/02-89-042. (1989).
  13. McBean, E. A. and Rovers, F. A., "Statistical Procedures for Analysis of Environmental Monitoring Data and Risk Assessment. Prentice Hall". New Jersey. (1998).
  14. US EPA, "Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document". (1996).
  15. Ministry of Environment, "Risk Assessment guidance for contaminated soil". (2015).
  16. Lee, J. Y., "A study on the body surface area of Korean adults, Ph.D Thesis", Seoul National University, Korea. (2005).
  17. US EPA, "Risk assessment guidance for Superfund Volume I : Human health evaluation manual (Part E, Supplemental guidance for dermal risk assessment)". (2004).
  18. Ministry of Environment, "Guidelines for risk assessment of soil contaminants". (2015).
  19. US EPA, "Risk assessment guidance for superfund volume I : Human health evaluation manual, Part F, Supplemental guidance for inhalation risk assessment". (2009).
  20. Ministry of Environment, "Korean exposure factor handbook". (2007).
  21. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), "Investigation of health effect on inhabitants around abandoned metal mines". (2007).
  22. Brand, E., Otte, P. F. and Lijzen, J. P. A., "CSOIL 2000: an exposure model for human risk assessment of soil contamination(A model description)", RIVM report 711701054/200. (2007).