Pollution of hazardous substances in industrial construction and demolition wastes and their multi-path risk within an abandoned pesticide manufacturing plant

Sheng Huang, Xin Zhao, Yanqiu Sun, Jianli Ma, Xiaofeng Gao, Tian Xie, Dongsheng Xu, Yi Yu, Youcai Zhao

PDF(501 KB)
PDF(501 KB)
Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. ›› 2017, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (1) : 12. DOI: 10.1007/s11783-017-0901-2
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Pollution of hazardous substances in industrial construction and demolition wastes and their multi-path risk within an abandoned pesticide manufacturing plant

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Pollution pattern of metals and organic pesticide in demolition waste is studied.

Organophosphorus pesticide can be everlasting on surface of demolition waste.

Leaching potential of pollutants from simulated and onsite waste varies spatially.

Direct oral and dermal ingestion, leaching potential into water exceed the limit.

Implications for demolition waste management in industrial plants are proposed.

Exploration of heavy metals and organic pollutants, their leaching capacity along with health and environmental risks in contaminated industrial construction and demolition waste (ICDW) within a pesticide manufacturing plant were investigated. A maximum content of 90.8 mg·kg−1 Cd was found present in the wastes, which might originate from phosphorus rocks and industrial sulfuric acid used in pesticide production processes. An average concentration of 979.8 mg·kg−1 dichlorovos and other 11 organophosphorus pesticide were also detected. Relatively high leaching rates of around 4.14‰ were obtained from laboratory simulated ICDW using both glacial acetic acid- sodium hydroxide and deionized water. Pesticide pollutants had the strongest tendency to retaining on dry bricks (leaching rate 1.68‰) compared to mortar-coatings, etc. due to their different physical characteristics and octanol-water partioning coefficient. Mobility of pesticide from on-site ICDW by water was spatially correlated to waste types, process sections and human activities, with a flux of leaching rate between 5.9‰ to 27.4%. Risk-based corrective action (RBCA) model was used to simulate the risk of contaminated ICDW debris randomly scattered. Oral and dermal ingestion amount by local workers was 9.8 × 10−3 and 1.9 × 10−2 mg·(kg·d)−1, respectively. Potential leaching risk to aquatic systems exceeded the limit for nearly 75% waste. Environmental and health risk exceedance was found in most ICDW, while the risk value of the most severely contaminated brick waste was 660 times beyond critical level. Implications for waste management involving construction and deconstruction work, waste transferring and regulation supplying were also provided.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Industrial demolition wastes / Heavy metals / Pesticides / Leaching characteristics / Risk assessment / Waste management

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Sheng Huang, Xin Zhao, Yanqiu Sun, Jianli Ma, Xiaofeng Gao, Tian Xie, Dongsheng Xu, Yi Yu, Youcai Zhao. Pollution of hazardous substances in industrial construction and demolition wastes and their multi-path risk within an abandoned pesticide manufacturing plant. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(1): 12 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-017-0901-2

References

[1]
Jang Y C, Townsend T G. Occurrence of organic pollutants in recovered soil fines from construction and demolition waste. Waste Management, 2001, 21: 703–715
[2]
Gao X, Gu Y, Xie T, Zhen G, Huang S, Zhao Y. Characterization and environmental risk assessment of heavy metals in construction and demolition wastes from five sources (chemical, metallurgical and light industries, and residential and recycled aggregates). Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2015, 22(12): 9332–9344
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[3]
Huang S, Zhao X, Sun Y, Ma J, Gao X, Xie T, Xu D, Yu Y, Zhao Y. Spatial distribution of organic pollutants in industrial construction and demolition waste and their mutual interaction on an abandoned pesticide manufacturing plant. Environmental Science. Processes & Impacts, 2016, 18(4): 482–492
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[4]
Khan F I, Abbasi S. Major accidents in process industries and an analysis of causes and consequences. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1999, 12(5): 361–378
CrossRef Google scholar
[5]
Townsend T, Tolaymat T, Leo K, Jambeck J. Heavy metals in recovered fines from construction and demolition debris recycling facilities in Florida. Science of the Total Environment, 2004, 332(1-3): 1–11
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[6]
Heasman L, van der Sloot H, Quevauviller P. Harmonization of Leaching/Extraction Tests. The Netherlands: Elsevier, 1997
[7]
Kosson DS, van der Sloot HA. Intergration of testing protocols for evaluation of contaminant release from monolithic and granular wastes. Studies in Environmental Science, 1997, 71: 201–215
[8]
Enell A, Reichenberg F, Warfvinge P, Ewald G. A column method for determination of leaching of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from aged contaminated soil. Chemosphere, 2004, 54(6): 707–715
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[9]
Hansen J, Grøn C, Hjelmar O. Leaching tests for non-volatile organic compounds–development and testing. Report for Nordtest, 2004: 1643–1603
[10]
ASTM E. 1739–95. Standard guide for risk-based corrective action applied at petroleum release sites. American Society for Testing and Materials, USA, 1995
[11]
McKone T. CalTOX, a multimedia total exposure model for hazardous-waste sites. Part III: The multiple pathway exposure model. The Office of Scientific Affairs Department of Toxic Substances Control California Environmental Protection Agency Sacremento, CA, 1993
[12]
Wang B, Huang J, Deng S, Yang X, Yu G. Addressing the environmental risk of persistent organic pollutants in China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 2012, 6(1): 2–16
CrossRef Google scholar
[13]
NEN N. Determination of the availability for leaching of inorganic components from granular materials. NEN-7371, 2004
[14]
Gao X, Gu Y, Huang S, Zhen G, Deng G, Xie T, Zhao Y. Comparison of alternative remediation technologies for recycled gravel contaminated with heavy metals. Waste Management & Research, 2015, 33(11): 1005–1014
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[15]
TCLP E. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching procedure (Method 1311). Washington, USA, 1992
[16]
SPLP E. Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure (Method 1312). Washington, USA, 1994
[17]
CEPA. Environmental quality standard for soils (GB15618–2008).CEPA, Beijing, China, 2008 (in Chinese)
[18]
WDOE. Sediment management standards aurata. Washington State Legislature, Washington, US, 1995: 173–204–320
[19]
Grant C A. Influence of phosphate fertilizer on cadmium in agricultural soils and crops. Phosphate in soils: interaction with micronutrients. Radionuclides and Heavy Metals, 2015, 2: 123
[20]
Kwonpongsagoon S, Waite D T, Moore S J, Brunner P H. A substance flow analysis in the southern hemisphere: cadmium in the Australian economy. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 2007, 9(3): 175–187
CrossRef Google scholar
[21]
Lu R K, Shi Xiong L M.Z YXiong L M. Cadmium contents of rock phosphates and phosphate fertilizers of China and their effects on ecological environment. Acta Geologica Sinica, 1992, 29: 150–157 (in Chinese)
[22]
Rentería-Villalobos M, Vioque I, Mantero J, Manjón G. Radiological, chemical and morphological characterizations of phosphate rock and phosphogypsum from phosphoric acid factories in SW Spain. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010, 181(1-3): 193–203
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar
[23]
Mar S S, Okazaki M. Investigation of Cd contents in several phosphate rocks used for the production of fertilizer. Microchemical Journal, 2012, 104: 17–21
CrossRef Google scholar
[24]
Larsen T A, Udert K M, Lienert J. Source separation and decentralization for wastewater management. IWA Publishing, 2013
[25]
de Livera J, McLaughlin M J, Beak D, Hettiarachchi G M, Kirby J. Release of dissolved cadmium and sulfur nanoparticles from oxidizing sulfide minerals. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 2011, 75(3): 842–854
CrossRef Google scholar
[26]
Kossoff D, Hudson-Edwards K A, Dubbin W, Alfredsson M A. Incongruent weathering of Cd and Zn from mine tailings: a column leaching study. Chemical Geology, 2011, 281(1-2): 52–71
CrossRef Google scholar
[27]
Gaines T P, Gaines S. Soil texture effect on nitrate leaching in soil percolates. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 1994, 25(13-14): 2561–2570
CrossRef Google scholar
[28]
Kramers G, Holden N, Brennan F. Water content and soil type effects on accelerated leaching after slurry application. Vadose Zone Journal, 2012, 11:
CrossRef Google scholar
[29]
Gao X, Gu Y, Xie T. Simulation of gaseous mercury adsorption of different building materials. Journal of Civil. Architectual & Envrionmental Engineering, 2014, 36: 112–118
[30]
Townsend T, Dubey B, Tolaymat T. Interpretation of synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP) results for assessing risk to groundwater from land-applied granular waste. Environmental Engineering Science, 2006, 23(1): 239–251
CrossRef Google scholar
[31]
Bauw D, De Wilde P, Rood G, Aalbers T G. A standard leaching test, including solid phase extraction, for the determination of PAH leachability from waste materials. Chemosphere, 1991, 22(8): 713–722
CrossRef Google scholar
[32]
Reemtsma T, Mehrtens J. Determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) leaching from contaminated soil by a column test with on-line solid phase extraction. Chemosphere, 1997, 35(11): 2491–2501
CrossRef Google scholar
[33]
Environment A. Alberta Tier 1 soil and groundwater remediation guidelines. 2009. Available online at: http:// environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/7751.pdf
[34]
Maximum allowable concentrations (MAC) and tentative allowable concentrations (TAC) of pesticides and other substances in soil in the Soviet Union. 1984
[35]
Strömqvist J, Jarvis N. Sorption, degradation and leaching of the fungicide iprodione in a golf green under Scandinavian conditions: measurements, modelling and risk assessment. Pest Management Science, 2005, 61(12): 1168–1178
CrossRef Pubmed Google scholar

Acknowledgements

The funding of this study was provided by the Public Interest Program of the Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection (No. 201309025) and the Beautiful Tianjin Major Project (No. 14ZCDGSF00033).
Funding
 

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2017 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(501 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/