4.3 Article

Dispersion of NO2 and SO2 pollutants in the rolling industry with AERMOD model: a case study to assess human health risk

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40201-021-00686-x

Keywords

AERMOD; Air pollution modeling; Steel complex; Risk assessment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to establish an emission model for SO2 and NO2 pollutants from the rolling industry of the Sepid-Farab Kavir Steel complex using the AERMOD model and health risk assessment. Results showed that emissions of SO2 and NO2 from the complex were below the maximum allowable when natural gas was used as the main fuel, although the hourly concentration of SO2 exceeded the standard value. Urban gas was considered a clean source with no adverse effects on worker health.
Steel and rolling industry are the most important industries polluting the environment. Therefore, aim of this study is to make an emission model for SO2 and NO2 pollutants released from the rolling industry of Sepid-Farab Kavir Steel (SKS) complex using the AERMOD model and health risk assessment. Sampling pollutants released from SKS complex was performed in January 2017 at 10 different sites. Distribution of these pollutants was investigated by AERMOD model, domain site of AERMOD was designed for area around the factory with a radius of 30 km, and also SO2 and NO2 modeling was performed for both natural gas and liquid fuel. Human health risk assessment was also studied. The results of this study demonstrated the emission of SO2 and NO2 from this complex is less than the maximum allowable, when used natural gas as the main fuel. The hourly concentration of SO2 reached about 324 mu g/m(3), which in higher than the standard value for 1 h. Considering the findings, the urban gas is considered as a clean source in terms of furnace air output and the concentration of emitted pollutants. Also, it has no side effects on workers' health.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available