4.7 Article

Health risk equations and risk assessment of airborne benzene homologues exposure to drivers and passengers in taxi cabins

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 4797-4811

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-015-5678-x

关键词

Health risk assessment; Health risk equations; Indoor air evaluation; Benzene homologues; Taxi cabins; Drivers and passengers; Interior air pollution (IAP); Vehicle interiors

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51568026]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2014M562512XB]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interior air environment and health problems of vehicles have attracted increasing attention, and benzene homologues (BHs) including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xyl-enes, and styrene are primary hazardous gases in vehicular cabins. The BHs impact on the health of passengers and drivers in 38 taxis is assessed, and health risk equations of in-car BHs to different drivers and passengers are induced. The health risk of in-car BHs for male drivers is the highest among all different receptors and is 1.04, 6.67, and 6.94 times more than ones for female drivers, male passengers, and female passengers, respectively. In-car BHs could not lead to the non-cancer health risk to all passengers and drivers as for the maximal value of non-cancer indices is 0.41 and is less than the unacceptable value (1.00) of non-cancer health risk from USEPA. However, in-car BHs lead to cancer health risk to drivers as for the average value of cancer indices is 1.21E-04 which is 1.21 times more than the unacceptable value (1.00E-04) of cancer health risk from USEPA. Finally, for in-car airborne benzene concentration (X, mu g/m(3)) to male drivers, female drivers, male passengers, and female passengers, the cancer health risk equations are Y = 1.48E-06X, Y = 1.42E-06X, Y = 2.22E-07X, and Y = 2.13E-07X, respectively, and the non-cancer health risk equations are Y = 1.70E-03X, Y = 1.63E-03X, Y = 2.55E-04X, and Y = 2.45E-04X, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据