4.7 Article

Heavy metals in food, house dust, and water from an e-waste recycling area in South China and the potential risk to human health

Journal

ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 205-212

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2013.06.017

Keywords

Heavy metals; Exposure assessment; e-waste; Risk

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of China [41073078, 41230639]
  2. Key Project for Science &Technique Development of Guangdong Province [2010B080703035]
  3. National Environmental Protection Public Welfare Industry Targeted Research Fund [201309049]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Concentrations of heavy metals (Cd, Pb, Cu, Zn, and Ni) were measured in the foodstuffs, house dust, underground/drinking water, and soil from an electronic waste (e-waste) area in South China. Elevated concentrations of these potentially toxic metals were observed in the samples but not in drinking water. The health risks for metal exposure via food consumption, dust ingestion, and drinking water were evaluated for local residents. For the average residents in the e-waste area, the non-carcinogenic risks arise predominantly from rice (hazard index=3.3), vegetables (2.2), and house dust (1.9) for adults, while the risks for young children are dominated by house dust (15). Drinking water may provide a negligible contribution to risk. However, local residents who use groundwater as a water supply source are at high non-carcinogenic risk. The potential cancer risks from oral intake of Pb are 8 x 10(-5) and 3 x 10(-4) for average adults and children, and thus groundwater would have a great potential to induce cancer (5 x 10(-4) and 1 x 10(-3)) in a highly exposed population. The results also reveal that the risk from oral exposure is much higher than the risk from inhalation and dermal contact with house dust. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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