福州市工业区和商业居住区大气PM2.5中多环芳烃特征的变化及其健康风险

Variations and health risk of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient PM2.5 in industrial and residential areas in Fuzhou City

  • 摘要:
    背景 PM2.5污染已经成为广泛关注的环境卫生问题,多环芳烃(PAHs)是PM2.5的主要有害成分之一,其来源及致癌风险值得关注。
    目的 分析福州市工业区和商业居住区大气PM2.5中的PAHs的污染来源,评估其经呼吸途径对人群健康的潜在致癌风险。
    方法 在福州市仓山(工业区)和台江(商业居住区)两个区设置采样点,于2017—2020年每月10—16日通过滤膜采样法采集PM2.5。通过称重法测定大气中PM2.5质量浓度,采用超高效液相色谱-二极管阵列检测器-荧光检测器检测萘(NAP)、苊烯(ACY)、苊(ACE)、芴(FLU)、菲(PHE)、蒽(ANT)、荧蒽(FLT)、芘(PYR)、苯并a蒽(BaA)、䓛(CHR)、苯并b荧蒽(BbF)、苯并k荧蒽(BkF)、苯并a芘(BaP)、茚并1,2,3-cd芘(IcdP)、二苯并a,h蒽(DahA)和苯并g,h,i苝(BghiP)共16种PAHs的质量浓度(后称浓度)。比较两区PM2.5及PAHs浓度以及不同季节大气PM2.5中PAHs浓度。采用特征产物比值FLT/(FLT+PYR)、IcdP/(IcdP+BghiP)、BaA/(BaA+CHR)和BaP/BghiP 法和正定矩阵因子(PMF)分析法判断福州市大气PM2.5中PAHs污染来源,并运用超额致癌风险评估模型评估通过呼吸暴露的PAHs的潜在致癌风险。
    结果 2017—2020年福州市仓山区和台江区大气PM2.5浓度的MP25P75)分别为35.0(25.0,47.5)μg·m−3和34.0(25.5,46.0)μg·m−3,PM2.5超标率分别为2.68%和4.17%,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。仓山区PM2.5中PAHs总浓度(ΣPAH)浓度的MP25P75)为5.03(3.07,7.67)ng·m−3,高于台江区的浓度3.20(2.05,5.59)ng·m−3P<0.05)。仓山区PM2.5中,除ACY、FLU、ACE三者以外,其余13种PAH单体的浓度均高于台江区(P<0.05)。仓山区春、夏、秋、冬大气PM2.5中ΣPAHs浓度也均高于台江区相应的浓度(P<0.05);两个区冬季PAHs浓度均高于其他3个季节(P<0.05)。特征比值法结果显示两个采样点FLT/(FLT+PYR)中位数均在0.4~0.5之间,IcdP/(IcdP+BghiP)中位数在0.2~0.5之间,BaA/(BaA+CHR)中位数在0.2~0.35之间,BaP/BghiP比值中位数小于0.6。在仓山区采样点PMF分析得到4种因子比例依次为:37.9%、13.2%、24.0%、24.9%;4种因子的主要负载成分:因子1为 FLT、PHE、PYR;因子2为FLU、ACY和ACE;因子3为DahA;因子4为BghiP、IcdP和BaP。在台江区采样点,4种因子比例依次为:23.6%、19.3%、22.0%、35.1%;4种因子的主要负载成分:因子1为DahA;因子2为BghiP;因子3为FLT、PHE、PYR;因子4为IcdP、BaP、BbF、BkF、CHR、BaA。仓山区和台江区PM2.5中PAHs的总等效致癌毒性分别为1.87 ng·m−3和1.61 ng·m−3,两区经吸入途径暴露PAHs的超额致癌风险分别为3.83×10−6和3.30×10−6
    结论 福州市大气PM2.5中PAHs污染来源复杂,包括扬尘、机动车排放、工业排风等等,两区的污染来源也有所差别,PAHs对人群健康有一定的潜在致癌风险。

     

    Abstract:
    Background PM2.5 pollution has become a widely concerned environmental health problem. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs) are the main harmful components of PM2.5, and their sources and carcinogenic risk deserve attention.
    Objective To analyze the source apportionment of PAHs in ambient PM2.5 in Fuzhou, and to evaluate the potential carcinogenic risk through inhalation due to exposure to PAHs.
    Methods In this study, two sampling sites were set up in Cangshan (industrial area) and Taijiang (commercial and residential area) districts in Fuzhou City. PM2.5 was collected from 10th to 16th of each month from 2017 to 2020 by membrane filtration method. The concentrations of ambient PM2.5 were measured by weighing, and the concentrations of 16 PAHs, including naphthalene(NAP), acenaphthylene(ACY), acenaphthene(ACE), fluorene(FLU), phenanthrene(PHE), anthracene(ANT), fluoranthene(FLT), pyrene(PYR), benzoaanthracene(BaA), chrysene(CHR), benzobfluoranthene(BbF), benzokfluoranthene(BkF), benzoapyrene(BaP), indeno1,2,3-cdpyrene(IcdP), dibenzoa,hanthracene(DahA), and benzog,h,iperylene(BghiP), were determined by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled with diode array detector and fluorescence detector. The concentrations of PM2.5 and PAHs were compared in the two districts and the concentrations of PAHs were also compared in different seasons. The diagnostic ratio FLT/(FLT+PYR), IcdP/(IcdP+BghiP), BaA/(BaA+CHR), and BaP/BghiP method and positive matrix factorization (PMF) analysis were used to determine the sources of PAHs in PM2.5 in Fuzhou. The excess carcinogenic risk (ECR) model was used to assess the potential health risk of inhalation exposure to PAHs.
    Results During 2017–2020, the M (P25, P75) concentration of ambient PM2.5 in Cangshan and Taijiang districts of Fuzhou were 35.0 (25.0, 47.5) and 34.0 (25.5, 46.0) μg·m−3 respectively, and the percentages of PM2.5 exceeding the national standard in Cangshan and Taijiang were 2.68% and 4.17%, respectively, without significant differences (P>0.05). The M (P25, P75) concentrations of ΣPAHs in Cangshan was 5.03 (3.07, 7.67) ng·m−3, higher than that in Taijiang, 3.20 (2.05, 5.59) ng·m−3 (P<0.05). The M (P25, P75) concentrations of PAHs monomers except ACY, FLU, and ACE in Cangshan were higher than those in Taijiang (P<0.05). The concentrations of ΣPAHs in PM2.5 in four seasons in Cangshan were higher than those in Taijiang (P<0.05). In both districts, the concentration of ΣPAHs in winter was higher than those in spring, summer, and autumn (P<0.05). According to the diagnostic ratio method, the median ratios of FLT/(FLT+PYR) in the two districts ranged from 0.4 to 0.5, and those of IcdP/(IcdP+BghiP), BaA/(BaA+CHR), and BaP/BghiP were from 0.2 to 0.5, from 0.2 to 0.35, and less than 0.6, respectively. The results of PMF analysis showed the proportions of four factors in Cangshan were 37.9%, 13.2%, 24.0%, and 24.9%, respectively. The major load contributors to factor 1 included FLT, PHE, and PYR; to factor 2, FLU, ACY, and ACE; to factor 3, DahA; to factor 4, BghiP, IcdP, and BaP. The proportions of four factors in Taijiang were 23.6%, 19.3%, 22.0%, and 35.1%, respectively. The main load contributor to factor 1 was DahA; to factor 2, BghiP; to factor 3, FLT, PHE, and PYR; to factor 4, IcdP, BaP, BbF, BkF, CHR, and BaA. The benzoapyrene equivalences (BEQ) in Cangshan and Taijiang districts were 1.87 ng·m−3 and 1.61 ng·m−3, respectively. The excess carcinogenic risks of PAHs through inhalation exposure was 3.83×10−6 and 3.30×10−6, respectively.
    Conclusion The complex sources of PAHs in ambient PM2.5 include dust, vehicle emissions, industrial emissions in Fuzhou, and are different in selected two districts. The level of PAHs in ambient PM2.5 may pose a potential carcinogenic risk to local population.

     

/

返回文章
返回