A Fuzzy Modeling Approach for Human Health Risk Assessment of Organic Contamination in Groundwater

Abstract:

This study was performed to develop a fuzzy model for human health risk assessment of organic contamination of groundwater to quantify the uncertainties inherent in risk assessment processes. The fuzzy model was constructed based on the fuzzy set theory and traditional risk assessment approach. Triangular fuzzy number was used to describe the variability of parameters associated with traditional risk assessment and α-cut sets was taken to transform fuzzy numbers to intervals that can be fairly taken into arithmetic operation of lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) and hazard index (HI) which respectively denotes the carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks. Considering the exposure routes of drinking and showering, the developed fuzzy model yields risks at different memberships as well as the expectation of risks. The model was applied to a site in China with organics-contaminated groundwater. It was found that tetrachloroethylene (PCE) posed the most risks, followed by trichloroethylene (TCE), while carbon tetrachloride (CT) posed the smallest. Results also showed drinking, compared with showering, is the major exposure route and boiling is important for reducing health risks of groundwater.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 1010-1012)
• Pages: 237-243
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1010-1012.237
• Online since: August 2014
• Authors: Sheng Lin Tan, Shuai Guan, Zu Fa Liu*
• Keywords: Fuzzy Set Theory, Ground Water, Health Risk Assessment, Organic Contamination

References

[1] D.J. Lapworth, N. Baran, M.E. Stuart, &R.S. Ward. Emerging organic contaminants in groundwater: a review of sources, fate and occurrence. Environmental Pollution, 163 (2012) 287-303.

DOI: 10.1016/j.envpol.2011.12.034

[2] D. Maekay, T.M. Vogel. Ground water contamination by organic chemicals. Proceedings of the Second Canadian/American Conference on Hydrology, 1056 (1986) 50-59.

[3] P.J. Squillace, J.C. Scott, M.J. Moran, B.T. Nolan, & D.W. Kolpin. VOCs, pesticides, nitrate, and their mixtures in groundwater used for drinking water in the United States. Environmental science & technology, 36, No. 9 (2002) 1923-(1930).

DOI: 10.1021/es015591n

[4] G.K. Folkard. The significance, occurrence and removal of volatile chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents in groundwaters. Water pollution control, 85, No. 1 (1986) 63-70.

[5] M.O. Rivett, D.N. Lerner, J.W. Lloyd, & L. Clark. Organic contamination of the Birmingham aquifer, UK. Journal of Hydrology, 113, No. 1 (1990) 307-323.

DOI: 10.1016/0022-1694(90)90181-v

[6] C.R. Gao, J.T. Wang. Research on Groundwater Organic Contamination Characteristics in 69 Cities of China. Acta Geoscientica Sinica, 32, No. 5 (2011) 581-591.

[7] T. Hirata, O. Nakasugi, M. Yoshioka, & K. Sumi. Ground Water Pollution by Volatile Organochlorines in Japan and Related Phenomena in the Subsurface Environment. Water Science & Technology, 25, No. 11(1992) 9-16.

DOI: 10.2166/wst.1992.0267

[8] S. Ferson. What Monte Carlo methods cannot do. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, 2, No. 4 (1996) 990-1007.

DOI: 10.1080/10807039609383659

[9] USEPA. Human Health Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC, (1998).

[10] I.M. Khadam, & J.J. Kaluarachchi. Multi-criteria decision analysis with probabilistic risk assessment for the management of contaminated ground water. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 23, No. 6 (2003) 683-721.

DOI: 10.1016/s0195-9255(03)00117-3

[11] C. Shakhawat, H. Tahir, & B. Neil. Fuzzy rule-based modelling for human health risk from naturally occurring radioactive materials in produced water. Journal of environmental radioactivity, 89, No. 1 (2006) 1-17.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2006.03.002

[12] J.L. Jin, S. Wang & Y.M. Wei. Ideal interval method based model for water quality evaluation. Natural and Science, 2, No. 1 (2004) 24-28.

[13] D. Guyonnet, B. Come, P. Perrochet & A. Parriaux. Comparing two methods for addressing uncertainty in risk assessments. Journal of environmental engineering, 125, No. 7 (1999) 660-666.

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0733-9372(1999)125:7(660)

[14] USEPA. Risk assessment guidance for superfund, vol. I: Human health evaluation manual. Washingtonee, DC, (1989).

[15] L.A. Zadeh. Fuzzy sets. Information and control, 8, No. 3 (1965) 338-353.

[16] R.E. Giachetti & R.E. Young. Analysis of the error in the standard approximation used for multiplication of triangular and trapezoidal fuzzy numbers and the development of a new approximation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 91, No. 1 (1997) 1-13.

DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0114(96)00118-2

[17] A. Kaufmann, M.M. Gupta & A. Kaufmann. Introduction to fuzzy arithmetic: theory and applications. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, (1985).

[18] D. Dubois & H. Prade. The mean value of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy sets and systems, 24, No. 3 (1987) 279-300.

DOI: 10.1016/0165-0114(87)90028-5

[19] S. Heilpern. The expected value of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 47, No. 1 (1992) 81-86.

DOI: 10.1016/0165-0114(92)90062-9

[20] B. Han, J.T. He, H.H. Chen, H.W. Chen, J.H. Shi. Primary study of health-based risk assessment of organic pollution in groundwater. Earth Science Frontiers, 13, No. 1 (2006) 224-229.

[21] USEPA. Risk-based concentration table. U.S. EPA Region 3, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, (2004).

[22] R.Z. Li. Assessment for environmental health of urban water supply source based on uncertain information. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 38, No. 8 (2006) 895-900.