深圳市建设用地土壤污染风险筛选值和管制值研究

罗飞; 廖曼; 林挺; 郗秀平; 陈梦舫; 宋静

doi:10.13205/j.hjgc.202408019

深圳市建设用地土壤污染风险筛选值和管制值研究

doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202408019

罗飞^1, ,,
廖曼¹,
林挺¹,
郗秀平¹,
陈梦舫²,
宋静²

1. 深圳市环境科学研究院, 广东深圳 518001;
2. 中国科学院南京土壤研究所, 南京 210008

基金项目:

深圳市生态环境局环境科研项目(2018-01-0082-A1)

详细信息

作者简介:
罗飞(1986-),男,高级工程师,博士,主要研究方向为土壤污染风险管控和修复。feiluo2006@qq.com

通讯作者:
罗飞(1986-),男,高级工程师,博士,主要研究方向为土壤污染风险管控和修复。feiluo2006@qq.com

计量
- 文章访问数: 15
- HTML全文浏览量: 3
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-09-06
- 网络出版日期: 2024-12-02

STUDY ON RISK SCREENING VALUES AND INTERVENTION VALUES FOR SOIL CONTAMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT LAND IN SHENZHEN

1. Shenzhen Academy of Environmental Sciences, Shenzhen 518001, China;
2. Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China

摘要

摘要: 建设用地土壤污染筛选值和管制值可用于土壤污染风险管控和修复决策。基于国内外建设用地土壤污染健康风险评估的基础理论和方法学,通过多介质暴露评估模型筛选、本土化模型参数确定、模型理论值计算、理论值修正定值等过程,针对深圳市建设用地土地利用特征和典型行业企业污染物类型,研究制定了第一类和第二类用地情形下68项污染物的土壤污染风险筛选值和管制值,分析了主要国家和地区建设用地的分类差异。研究表明:不同污染物的第二类用地筛选值均高于第一类用地,同一种污染物的管制值高于筛选值,制定的筛选值和管制值处于具有代表性的国内外同类土壤污染风险管控标准限值范围内,暴露评估模型选择、受体暴露、土壤性质、空气特征、污染物毒性等参数取值及模型理论计算值修正是国内外筛选值存在差异的主要原因。研究结果对深圳市建设用地土壤污染风险筛查和风险管制具有重要指导作用。
- 风险评估 /
- 风险筛查 /
- 风险管制 /
- 特征污染物 /
- 土地利用
Abstract: The risk screening and intervention values for soil contamination of development land can be used for decision-making on soil pollution risk control and remediation. This study was based on the basic theory and methodology of soil pollution health risk assessment for global development land. It involved selecting multi-medium exposure assessment models, determining localized model parameters, calculating model theoretical values, and correcting model theoretical values. Based on the characteristics of land use for development land and the types of pollutants in typical industries in Shenzhen, the soil risk screening and intervention values for 68 pollutants under the first and second types of land use were established. The classification differences of development land in major countries and regions were analyzed. The study showed that the second-category land screening value of pollutants was higher than the first-category land, and the intervention value of the same pollutant was higher than the screening value. The screening and intervention values were within the representative range of similar soil pollution risk control standards at home and overseas. The main reasons for the differences in screening values at home and overseas are the selection of exposure assessment models, receptor exposure values, soil properties, air characteristics, pollutant toxicity parameters, and the correction of theoretical calculation values for the model. The results will play a guiding role in risk screening and control for soil contamination of development land in Shenzhen.
- risk assessment /
- risk screening /
- risk intervention /
- characteristic pollutants /
- land use

HTML全文

参考文献(40)

[1]	生态环境部. 土壤环境质量建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准:GB 36600—2018[S]. 北京: 生态环境部, 2018.
[2]	United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Soil Screening Guidance: Technical Background Document (EPA/540/R95/128)[R]. Washington DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, 1996.
[3]	United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites (OSWER 9355.4-24)[R]. Washington DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, 2002.
[4]	American Society for Testing of Materials (ASTM). Standard Guide for Risk-based Corrective Action Applied at Petroleum Release Sites (E1739-95)[R]. Conshohocken: American Society for Testing of Materials, 1995.
[5]	American Society for Testing of Materials (ASTM). Standard Guide for Risk-based Corrective Action (E2081-00)[R]. Conshohocken: American Society for Testing of Materials, 2000.
[6]	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Environment Agency (DEFRA and EA). The Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment Model (CLEA): Technical Basis and Algorithms[R]. Bristol: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Environment Agency, 2002.
[7]	Environment Agency (EA). Updated Technical Background to the CLEA Model (SC050021/R3)[R]. Bristol: Environment Agency, 2009.
[8]	Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments (CL: AIRE). SP1010-Development of Category 4 Screening Levels for Assessment of Land Affected by Contamination[R]. London: Contaminated Land: Applications in Real Environments, 2014.
[9]	Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM). Circular on Target Values and Intervention Values for Soil Remediation[R]. Amsterdam: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, 2000.
[10]	Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). Interim Canadian Environmental Quality Criteria for Contaminated Sites[R]. Winnipeg: Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1991.
[11]	Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). A Protocol for Deriving Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines[R]. Winnipeg: Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1996.
[12]	Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). A Protocol for the Derivation of Environmental and Human Health Soil Quality Guidelines[R]. Winnipeg: Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 2006.
[13]	北京市质量技术监督局. 建设用地土壤环境风险评价筛选值: DB11/T 811—2011[S]. 北京: 北京市质量技术监督局, 2011.
[14]	上海市环境保护局. 上海市建设用地土壤环境健康风险评估筛选值[S]. 上海: 上海市环境保护局, 2015.
[15]	重庆市质量技术监督局. 场地土壤环境风险评估筛选值: DB50/T 723—2016[S]. 重庆: 重庆市质量技术监督局, 2016.
[16]	深圳市市场监督管理局. 建设用地土壤污染风险筛选值和管制值: DB4403/T 67—2020[S]. 深圳: 深圳市市场监督管理局, 2020.
[17]	江西省市场监督管理局. 建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准(试行): DB36/1282—2020[S]. 南昌: 江西省市场监督管理局, 2020.
[18]	广西壮族自治区市场监督管理局. 建设用地土壤污染风险筛选值和管制值: DB45/T 2556—2022[S]. 南宁: 广西壮族自治区市场监督管理局, 2022.
[19]	河北省市场监督管理局. 建设用地土壤污染风险筛选值: DB13/T 5216—2022[S]. 石家庄: 河北省市场监督管理局, 2022.
[20]	四川省市场监督管理局. 四川省建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准: DB51/2978—2023[S]. 成都: 四川省市场监督管理局, 2023.
[21]	宋静, 陈梦舫, 骆永明, 等. 制订我国污染场地土壤风险筛选值的几点建议[J]. 环境监测管理与技术, 2011,23(3):26-33.
[22]	张斌, 邹卉, 肖杰, 等. RAG-C和RBCA模型中场地特征参数的差异及其启示[J]. 环境工程, 2015,33(9):130-133 ,99.
[23]	骆永明, 夏家淇, 章海波, 等.中国土壤环境质量基准与标准制定的理论和方法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2015.
[24]	陈梦舫, 韩璐, 罗飞. 污染场地土壤与地下水风险评估方法学[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017.
[25]	陈梦舫, 韩璐, 罗飞. 污染场地土壤与地下水精细化风险评估理论与实践[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2022.
[26]	赵彬, 彭天玥, 张昊, 等. 汞污染场地特征识别与健康风险研究[J]. 环境工程, 2023,41(4):205-212.
[27]	生态环境部. 建设用地土壤污染风险评估技术导则: HJ 25.3—2019[S]. 北京: 生态环境部, 2019.
[28]	生态环境部. 土壤环境质量建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准(试行)(征求意见稿)编制说明[R]. 北京: 生态环境部, 2018.
[29]	United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)[EB/OL]. http://www.epa.gov/IRIS/. 2019-5-21.
[30]	United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). Regional Screening Levels for Chemical Contaminants at Superfund Sites[EB/OL]. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls. 2019-5-21.
[31]	Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). Texas Risk Reduction Program: Protective Concentration Levels[EB/OL]. http://www.tceq.texas.gov/remediation/trrp/trrppcls.html. 2018-4-18.
[32]	陈梦舫, 罗飞, 韩璐, 等. 污染场地健康与环境风险评估软件(HERA, Version 1.1)[CP]. 南京: 中国科学院南京土壤研究所, 2014.
[33]	香港环境保护署. 按风险厘定的土地污染整治标准的使用指引[S]. 香港: 香港环境保护署, 2007.
[34]	住房和城乡建设部. 城市用地分类与规划建设用地标准: GB 50137—2011[S]. 北京: 住房和城乡建设部, 2011.
[35]	深圳市人民政府. 深圳市城市规划标准与准则[S]. 深圳: 深圳市人民政府, 2013.
[36]	周友亚, 颜增光, 周光辉, 等. 制定场地土壤风险评价筛选值中关注污染物的预筛选方法[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2011,1(3):264-269.
[37]	杨龙, 孙长虹, 李珊珊, 等. 典型行业环境地表灰尘重金属污染比较研究[J]. 环境工程, 2015,33(2):122-125.
[38]	刘臣辉, 付玲玲, 申雨桐, 等. 欧盟水框架指令优先污染物筛选方法的应用[J]. 环境工程, 2015,33(10):126-129.
[39]	深圳市人居环境委员会. 深圳市建设用地土壤环境调查评估工作指引(试行)[S]. 深圳: 深圳市人居环境委员会, 2018.
[40]	罗飞, 宋静, 潘云雨, 等. 典型滴滴涕废弃生产场地污染土壤的人体健康风险评估研究[J]. 土壤学报, 2012,49(1):26-35.