4.7 Article

Evolution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the surface sediment of southern Jiaozhou Bay in northern China after an accident of oil pipeline explosion

Journal

MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN
Volume 183, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114039

Keywords

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Long-term risk assessment; Oil spill; Jiaozhou Bay

Funding

  1. Ocean Non-profit Research Project [201205012]
  2. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China [ZR2019BB033]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that three years after the 2013 Qingdao oil pipeline explosion, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were still detected in sediment samples, indicating a lingering minimal impact. The environmental impact was already minimal 3 years later and negligible thereafter. Although the cancer risk has decreased over the years, there is still a potential hazard for specific occupational groups.
The 2013 Qingdao oil pipeline explosion contaminated about 2.5 km of shoreline in the Jiaozhou Bay area and aroused widespread concern because of the serious casualties even though it was not the most severe oil-spill contamination in China. To evaluate the long-term impact, we collected thirty-three surface sediment samples after 3 years of the accident, with sixteen polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) detected. Spatial-temporal variation in PAHs revealed that a minimal impact might still be present after 3 years. Source analysis combined with a one-way ANOVA showed that pyrolytic sources were consistently predominant. The environmental impact was already minimal 3 years later and negligible thereafter. Although the cancer risk has decreased over the years, there has always been a potential hazard to human for specific occupation, with all of the risk values exceeded 10(-6). This study offers a reference for assessing the long-term impact of oil spills in similar bay areas.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available