DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Health Risk Assessment with Source Apportionment of Ambient Volatile Organic Compounds in Seoul by Positive Matrix Factorization

수용체 모델(PMF)를 이용한 서울시 대기 중 VOCs의 배출원에 따른 위해성평가

  • Kwon, Seung-Mi (Department of Environmental Chemical Engineering, Seogyeong University) ;
  • Choi, Yu-Ri (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Park, Myoung-Kyu (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Lee, Ho-Joon (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Kim, Gwang-Rae (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Yoo, Seung-Sung (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Cho, Seog-Ju (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Shin, Jin-Ho (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Shin, Yong-Seung (Seoul Metropolitan Government Research Institute of Public Health and Environment) ;
  • Lee, Cheolmin (Department of Environmental Chemical Engineering, Seogyeong University)
  • 권승미 (서경대학교 환경화학공학과) ;
  • 최유리 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 박명규 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 이호준 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 김광래 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 유승성 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 조석주 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 신진호 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 신용승 (서울특별시보건환경연구원) ;
  • 이철민 (서경대학교 환경화학공학과)
  • Received : 2021.08.11
  • Accepted : 2021.10.07
  • Published : 2021.10.31

Abstract

Background: With volatile organic compounds (VOCs) containing aromatic and halogenated hydrocarbons such as benzene, toluene, and xylene that can adversely affect the respiratory and cardiovascular systems when a certain concentration is reached, it is important to accurately evaluate the source and the corresponding health risk effects. Objectives: The purpose of this study is to provide scientific evidence for the city of Seoul's VOC reduction measures by confirming the risk of each VOC emission source. Methods: In 2020, 56 VOCs were measured and analyzed at one-hour intervals using an online flame ionization detector system (GC-FID) at two measuring stations in Seoul (Gangseo: GS, Bukhansan: BHS). The dominant emission source was identified using the Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) model, and health risk assessment was performed on the main components of VOCs related to the emission source. Results: Gasoline vapor and vehicle combustion gas are the main sources of emissions in GS, a residential area in the city center, and the main sources are solvent usage and aged VOCs in BHS, a greenbelt area. The risk index ranged from 0.01 to 0.02, which is lower than the standard of 1 for both GS and BHS, and was an acceptable level of 5.71×10-7 to 2.58×10-6 for carcinogenic risk. Conclusions: In order to reduce the level of carcinogenic risk to an acceptable safe level, it is necessary to improve and reduce the emission sources of vehicle combustion and solvent usage, and eco-car policies are judged to contribute to the reduction of combustion gas as well as providing a response to climate change.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

본 연구는 2021년도 환경부 주관 '화학물질 안전관리 전문인력 양성사업'의 화학물질 특성화대학원 지원 사업을 통한 성과물임을 밝힙니다.

References

  1. Kulmala M, Vehkamaki H, Petaja T, Dal Maso M, Lauri A, Kerminen VM, et al. Formation and growth rates of ultrafine atmospheric particles: a review of observations. J Aerosol Sci. 2004; 35(2): 143-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2003.10.003
  2. Seinfeld JH, Pandis SN. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics from Air Pollution to Climate Change, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2012. p.26.
  3. Hajizadeh Y, Teiri H, Nazmara S, Parseh I. Environmental and biological monitoring of exposures to VOCs in a petrochemical complex in Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2018; 25(7): 6656-6667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-1045-4
  4. Shuai J, Kim S, Ryu H, Park J, Lee CK, Kim GB, et al. Health risk assessment of volatile organic compounds exposure near Daegu dyeing industrial complex in South Korea. BMC Public Health. 2018; 18(1): 528. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5454-1
  5. Ministry of Environment. Guidelines for Installation and Operation of Air Pollution Monitoring Networks. Sejong: Ministry of Environment; 2006.
  6. Han JS, Hong YD, Shin SA, Lee SU, Lee SJ. Receptor model(CMB) and source apportionments of VOCs in Seoul metropolitan area. J Environ Impact Assess. 2005; 14(4): 227-235.
  7. Kim YP. Validation of the emission inventory of volatile organic compounds in Seoul. Part Aerosol Res. 2009; 5(3): 139-148.
  8. National Air Pollutants Emission. Pollutant emissions in 2017. National Air Emission Inventory and Research Center. 2020.
  9. Choi YJ. Identification and Apportionment of VOC Emission Sources in Seoul. Seoul: Seoul Development Institute; 2012.
  10. Kang MK. Source apportionment of organic carbons in PM2.5 using the positive matrix factorization model: characterization of secondary organic aerosols at Seoul, Korea using SOA tracers [dissertation]. [Seoul]: Ewha Womans University; 2021
  11. Heo J, Kim C, Min Y, Kim H, Sung Y, Kim J, et al. Source apportionment of PM10 at Pyeongtaek area using positive matrix factorization (PMF) model. J Korean Soc Atmos Environ. 2018; 36(6): 849-864.
  12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Technical assistance document for sampling and analysis of ozone precursors for the photochemical assessment monitoring stations program- revision 2. Research Triangle Park: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2019.
  13. National Institute of Environmental Research. National Academy of Environmental Sciences Notice No. 2020-30, Air Pollution Process Test Criteria for Ozone Precursors in Environmental Atmosphere-Automatic Measurement Method (ES 01805.1). Incheon: National Institute of Environmental Research; 2020.
  14. Choi W, Cho Y, Jang H, Kim C, Kim T. Analysis of VOCs characterization in Gumi industrial complex by positive matrix factorzation. Korean J Odor Res Eng. 2010; 9(2): 89-99.
  15. Chueinta W, Hopke PK, Paatero P. Investigation of sources of atmospheric aerosol at urban and suburban residential areas in Thailand by positive matrix factorization. Atmos Environ. 2000; 34(20): 3319-3329. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00433-1
  16. Paatero P, Hopke PK. Discarding or downweighting high-noise variables in factor analytic models. Anal Chim Acta. 2003; 490(1-2): 277-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-2670(02)01643-4
  17. Kim S, Kim K, Hyun S, Kim J, Kim M, Kim B, et al. Chemical composition and source apportionment of PM2.5 in Jeju city in 2017. J Korean Soc Environ Anal. 2018; 21(2): 61-70.
  18. Derwent RG, Jenkin ME, Saunders SM. Photochemical ozone creation potentials for a large number of reactive hydrocarbons under European conditions. Atmos Environ. 1996; 30(2): 181-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00303-G
  19. Leggett S. Forecast distributions of species and their atmospheric reactivities for the U.K. VOC emission inventory. Atmos Environ. 1996; 30(2): 215-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00291-6
  20. Derwent RG, Jenkin ME, Saunders SM, Pilling MJ. Photochemical ozone creation potentials for organic compounds in northwest Europe calculated with a master chemical mechanism. Atmos Environ. 1998; 32(14-15): 2429-2441. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(98)00053-3
  21. Derwent RG, Jenkin ME, Passant NR, Pilling MJ. Reactivity-based https://e-jehs.org strategies for photochemical ozone control in Europe. Environ Sci Policy. 2007; 10(5): 445-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.01.005
  22. National Institute of Environmental Research. Regulations on methods of care for evaluation of chemicals No. 2021-13. Incheon: National Institute of Environmental Research; 2021.
  23. Health Canada. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PQRA). Ottawa: Health Canada; 2004.
  24. Kindzierski W, Jin J, Gamal El-Din M. Plain Language Explanation of Human Health Risk Assessment. Edmonton: Oil Sands Research and Information Network, University of Alberta, School of Energy and the Environment; 2011. p.37.
  25. Watson JG, Chow JC, Fujita EM. Review of volatile organic compound source apportionment by chemical mass balance. Atmos Environ. 2001; 35(9): 1567-1584. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(00)00461-1
  26. Han J, Moon K, Kim R, Shin S, Hong Y, Jung I. Preliminary source apportionment of ambient VOCs measured in Seoul metropolitan area by positive matrix factorization. J Korean Soc Atmos Environ. 2006; 22(1): 85-97.
  27. Park J, Park B, Kim S, Yang Y, Lee K, Bae S, et al. Estimation of contribution by pollutant source of VOCs in industrial complexes of Gwangju using receptor model (PMF). J Environ Sci Int. 2021; 30(3): 219-234. https://doi.org/10.5322/JESI.2021.30.3.219
  28. Mukund R, Kelly TJ, Spicer CW. Source attribution of ambient air toxic and other VOCs in Columbus, Ohio. Atmos Environ. 1996; 30(20): 3457-3470. https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(95)00487-4
  29. Brown SG, Frankel A, Hafner HR. Source apportionment of VOCs in the Los Angeles area using positive matrix factorization. Atmos Environ. 2007; 41(2): 227-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.08.021
  30. Shin H, Kim J, Kim Y. Quality assurance and quality control method for volatile organic compounds measured in the photochemical assessment monitoring station. Part Aerosol Res. 2011; 7(1): 31-44.
  31. Ling ZH, Guo H, Cheng HR, Yu YF. Sources of ambient volatile organic compounds and their contributions to photochemical ozone formation at a site in the Pearl River Delta, southern China. Environ Pollut. 2011; 159(10): 2310-2319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.05.001
  32. Andersen AN, Cook GD, Corbett LK, Douglas MM, Eager RW, Russell-Smith J, et al. Fire frequency and biodiversity conservation in Australian tropical savannas: implications from the Kapalga fire experiment. Austral Ecol. 2005; 30(2): 155-167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01441.x
  33. Milic A, Mallet MD, Cravigan LT, Alroe J, Ristovski ZD, Selleck P, et al. Biomass burning and biogenic aerosols in northern Australia during the SAFIRED campaign. Atmos Chem Phys. 2017; 17(6): 3945-3961. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-17-3945-2017
  34. Pekey B, Yilmaz H. The use of passive sampling to monitor spatial trends of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at an industrial city of Turkey. Microchem J. 2011; 97(2): 213-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2010.09.006
  35. Choi E, Heo JB, Yi SM. Apportioning and locating nonmethane hydrocarbon sources to a background site in Korea. Environ Sci Technol. 2010; 44(15): 5849-5854. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903634e
  36. Zhou J, You Y, Bai Z, Hu Y, Zhang J, Zhang N. Health risk assessment of personal inhalation exposure to volatile organic compounds in Tianjin, China. Sci Total Environ. 2011; 409(3): 452-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.10.022
  37. Liu Y, Kong L, Liu X, Zhang Y, Li C, Zhang Y, et al. Characteristics, secondary transformation, and health risk assessment of ambient volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in urban Beijing, China. Atmos Pollut Res. 2021; 12(3): 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2021.01.013
  38. Bari MA, Kindzierski WB. Ambient volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in Calgary, Alberta: sources and screening health risk assessment. Sci Total Environ. 2018; 631-632: 627-640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.023
  39. Korea Central Cancer Registry. Annual Report of Cancer Statistics in Korea in 2018. Goyang: National Cancer Center; 2021.