Integrated evaluation system under randomness and fuzziness for groundwater contamination risk assessment in a little town, Central China

Abstract

An integrated evaluation system under randomness and fuzziness was developed in this work to systematically assess the risk of groundwater contamination in a little town, Central China. In this system, randomness of the parameters and the fuzziness of the risk were considered simultaneously, and the exceeding standard probability of contamination and human health risk due to the contamination were integrated. The contamination risk was defined as a combination of “vulnerability” and “hazard”. To calculate the value of “vulnerability”, pollutant concentration was simulated by MODFLOW with random input variables and a new modified health risk assessment (MRA) model was established to analyze the level of “hazard”. The limit concentration based on environmental-guideline and health risk due to manganese were systematically examined to obtain the general risk levels through a fuzzy rule base. The “vulnerability” and “hazard” were divided into five categories of “high”, “medium-high”, “medium”, “low-medium” and “low”, respectively. Then, “vulnerability” and “hazard” were firstly combined by integrated evaluation. Compared with the other two scenarios under deterministic methods, the risk obtained in the proposed system is higher. This research illustrated that ignoring of uncertainties in evaluation process might underestimate the risk level.

Keywords

integrated evaluation / randomness / fuzziness / modified health risk assessment / uncertainty / manganese

References

[1] FinizioA, VillaS. Environmental risk assessment for pesticides: A tool for decision making [J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2002235-248

[2] HuE BPractical techniques and methods for environmental risk assessment [M], 2000, Beijing, China Environmental Science Press: 163-164

[3] RosenL, WladisD, RamaekersD. Risk and decision analysis of groundwater protection alternatives on the European scale with emphasis on nitrate and aluminium contamination from diffuse sources [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1998, 61: 329-336

[4] LoI M C, LwaW K W, ShenH M. Risk assessment using stochastic modeling of pollutant transport in landfill clay liners [J]. Water Science and Technology, 1999, 39: 337-341

[5] ArunragN S, MandalS, MaitiJ. Modeling uncertainty in risk assessment: An integrated approach with fuzzy set theory and Monte Carlo simulation [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2013, 55: 242-255

[6] ChenD J, DahlgrenR A, ShenY N, LuJ. A Bayesian approach for calculating variable total maximum daily loads and uncertainty assessment [J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2012, 430: 59-67

[7] HouY, BurkhardB, MullerF. Uncertainties in landscape analysis and ecosystem service assessment [J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2013, 127: 117-131

[8] SchlatherM, HuweB. A risk index for character rising flow pattern in soils using dye tracer distributions [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2005, 79: 25-44

[9] StenemoF, JorgensenP R, JarvisN. Linking a one-dimensional pesticide fate model to a three-dimensional groundwater model to simulate pollution risks of shallow and deep groundwater underlying fractured till [J]. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 2005, 79: 89-106

[10] DarbraR M, EljarratE, BarceloD. How to measure uncertainties in environmental risk assessment [J]. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 2008, 27: 377-385

[11] BaciocchiaR, BerardibS, VerginlliI. Human health risk assessment: Models for predicting the effective exposure duration of on-site receptors exposed to contaminated groundwater [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010, 81: 226-233

[12] DurmusogluaE, TaspinarbF, KarademiraA. Health risk assessment of BTEX emissions in the landfill environment [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010, 176: 870-877

[13] LiuY, ZhengB H, FuQ, MengW, WangY Y. Risk assessment and management of arsenic in source water in China [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009, 170: 729-734

[14] HungM L, WuS Y, ChenY C. The health risk assessment of Pb and Cr leachated from fly ash monolith landfill [J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009, 172: 316-323

[15] ZengG M, GuoS L, ShiL. Patial analysis of human health risk associated with ingesting manganese in Huangxing Town, Middle China [J]. Chemosphere, 2009, 77(3): 368-75

[16] MohamedA M O, CoteK. Decision analysis of polluted sites-a fuzzy set approach, Waste Manage [J]. Waste Management, 1999, 19: 519-533

[17] UricchioV F, GiordanoR, LopezN. A fuzzy knowledge-based decision support system for groundwater pollution risk evaluation [J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2004, 73: 189-197

[18] RoselloM J P, MartinezJ M V, NavarroB A. Vulnerability of human environment to risk: case of groundwater contamination risk [J]. Environment International, 2009, 35(2): 325-335

[19] US EPAIntegrated Risk Information System: Manganese (CASRN 7439-96-5) [R], 2008

[20] FranssenH J H, StaufferF, KinzelbachW. Joint estimation of transmissivities and recharges-application: stochastic characterization of well capture zones [J]. Journal of Hydrology, 2004, 294: 87-102

[21] LiuB D, ZhaoR Q, WangGUncertain programming with application [M], 2003, Beijing, Tsinghua University Press

[22] LiJ B, HuangG H, ZengG M, MaqsoodI, HuangY F. An integrated fuzzy-stochastic modeling approach for risk assessment of groundwater contamination [J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2007, 82: 173-188

[23] EPA U SRisk assessment guidance for superfund, vol. I: Human health evaluation manual (Part A) [R], 1989, Washington, DC, US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA 540/1-89/002

[24] 600Z-92/001, Guidelines for Exposure Assessment [S].

[25] LiL, YangL, LiaoR. Study on body mass index of adults in Chengdu area [J]. Journal of Preventive Medicine Information, 2001, 17(2): 241-243

[26] PassarellaG, VurroM, DagostinoV, GiulianoG, BarcelonaM J. A probabilistic methodology to assess the risk of groundwater quality degradation [J]. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2002, 79: 57-74