=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2534/53_short_paper
|storemode=property
|title=Criteria of urban air quality for carcinogenic substances
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2534/53_short_paper.pdf
|volume=Vol-2534
|authors=Ekaterina N. Bel'skaya,Ulyana S. Ivanova,Olga V. Taseiko
}}
==Criteria of urban air quality for carcinogenic substances==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2534/53_short_paper.pdf
Criteria of urban air quality for carcinogenic substances
Ekaterina N. Bel'skaya1, Ulyana S. Ivanova2, Olga V. Taseiko1,2
1
Reshetnev Siberian State University of Science and Technology, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation, ketrin_nii@mail.ru
2
Institute of Computational Technologies SB RAS, Krasnoyarsk, Russian Federation, taseiko@gmail.com
Abstract. A quantitative assessment of human health risk is carried out, at influence of
carcinogenic chemicals with using their annual concentrations. The calculated values of air
quality standards for priority carcinogenic substances are offered to different categories of
the population.
Keywords:urban air pollution, risk assessment, air quality standards, carcinogenic
substances.
Environmental pollution is one of the significant factors contributing to poor health and high mortality [1-3]. About
50% of the population lives in ecologically unfavorable regions in Russia, and air pollution causes up to 17.5% of the
total mortality of the urban population [1.4]. In European cities, polluted air causes up to 23 thousand additional deaths
per year [5].
To the air quality assessment in Russian cities today uses hygienic standards. In the Russian Federation, more than
1000 AQS (air quality standards) have been approved and this is the most extensive of the existing national air quality
standardization systems [6]. The system of criteria that determines the safe state of the environment, including AQS, is
imperfect and does not allow determining the measure of human exposure and damage to public health if the
established standards are exceeded [7]. An alternative to the AQS concept is a risk assessment system. A number of
parameters are introduced for risk assessment - risk markers, which make it possible to assess the danger of toxic
symptoms with short-term, long-term or chronic effect (exposure) of certain pollution levels (concentration of
pollutants) for different population groups.
According to the "Guidelines for assessing the risk to public health under the influence of chemicals polluting the
environment. R 2.1.10.1920-04" (approved by the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of the Russian Federation 05.03.2004)
[8] the assessment of the risk to human health is a quantitative and / or a qualitative description of the harmful effects
that can develop as a result of the influence of environmental factors on a specific group of people under specific
exposure conditions.
Currently, the concept of risk assessment in all countries of the world and international organizations is considered
as the main mechanism for the development and adoption of managerial decisions both at the international, state or
regional levels, and at the level of an individual production or other potential source of environmental pollution [8].
Despite the obvious advantages of the risk assessment methodology, which allows one to take into account, among
other things, non threshold of the effects of carcinogenic substances on public health, it is difficult to manage the use of
maximum permissible concentrations when implementing programs for monitoring air quality in settlements. Therefore,
there is a need to take into account health risks when determining the levels of hygiene AQS.
The following tasks were solved in the work:
- on the example of some cities of the Siberian Federal District, air quality standards were calculated based on the
concept of a methodology for assessing inhalation risk to public health using actual average annual concentrations of
priority harmful substances with a carcinogenic effect;
- proposed AQSs for priority carcinogenic substances are proposed taking into account acceptable risk levels for
different categories of the population.
The actual average annual concentrations of priority carcinogens used in the calculation of individual carcinogenic
risk in the cities of Krasnoyarsk, Kemerovo, Omsk and Chernogorsk were obtained from air pollution monitoring posts
of the Middle Siberian, West Siberian and Ob-Irtysh UGMS and the Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and
Environmental Monitoring [10] for 2008-2018, and from the posts for monitoring atmospheric pollution by the Khakass
center for hydrometeorology and monitoring of a branch of the FSBI Srednesibirsky UGMS for 2010-2017.
Figure 1 shows the dynamics of the average annual concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene and formaldehyde for 2010-
2017 for four cities in the Siberian Federal District.
The highest content of benzo(a)pyrene is observed in the cities of Krasnoyarsk and Chernogorsk (Republic of
Khakassia), the highest formaldehyde content in Krasnoyarsk and Kemerovo. Moreover, in all cities examined, the
content of these substances exceeds the annual air quality standards of populated areas.
Copyright © 2019 for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0
International (CC BY 4.0).
Benzo(a)pyrene Formaldehyde
8E-06. 0.04
6E-06. 0.03
4E-06. 0.02
2E-06. 0.01
0E+00. 0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Krasnoyarsk Kemerovo Omsk Chernogorsk Krasnoyarsk Kemerovo Omsk Chernogorsk
Figure 1. Average annual concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene and formaldehyde in some cities
of the Siberian Federal District
Unit risk, according to [8], is calculated according to formula 1, using the values of carcinogenic potential factors SF
and standard values of a person’s body weight (BW=70 kg), daily air consumption (DAC=20 m3 / day).
1 1
𝑈𝑅𝑖 = 𝑆𝐹𝑖 ∙ 𝐵𝑊 ∙ 𝐷𝐴𝐶 = 𝑆𝐹𝑖 ∙ 70 ∙ 20 (1)
Calculation of individual carcinogenic risk is carried out according to formula 2, using data on the magnitude of
exposure and values of a single risk. As a rule, for carcinogenic chemicals, the additional likelihood of developing an
individual cancerogenic risk throughout life (ICR) is estimated using a unit risk (UR) value as follows:
𝐼𝐶𝑅 = 𝐶 ∙ 𝑈𝑅, (2)
where C is the average concentration of the substance in the studied environmental object for the entire period of
exposure averaging (air, mg / m3); UR - single risk for air (risk per 1 mg / m3).
Table 1 shows the results of the calculation of ICR by averaged average annual concentrations of carcinogenic
chemicals.
Table 1. Individual cancerogenic risk
Krasnoyarsk Kemerovo
substance
year/
Formalde
Formalde
Benzo(a)
Benzo(a)
Ethylben
Benzene
Aniline
pyrene
pyrene
Lead
hyde
hyde
zene
2010 5,57·10-6 1,83·10- 1,44·10-6 1,80·10-5 2,08·10- 3,79·10- 1,43·10-4 <1,6·10-
4 4 6 3
2011 4,68·10-6 2,54·10- 2,04·10-6 1,70·10-5 1,84·10- 4,29·10- 3,15·10-4 <1,6·10-
4 4 6 3
2012 4,68·10-6 2,47·10- 2,04·10-6 1,70·10-5 2,32·10- 3,45·10- 4,03·10-4 1,6·10-3
4 4 6
2013 3,90·10-6 1,95·10- - 1,70·10-5 2,72·10- 2,67·10- 4,16·10-4 <1,6·10-
4 4 6 3
2014 6,57·10-6 1,59·10- - 1,40·10-5 1,68·10-4 1,67·10- 1,04·10-4 1,6·10-3
4 6
2015 4,12·10-6 1,56·10- - 7,00·10-6 1,92·10- 2,34·10- 0,91·10-4 <1,6·10-
4 4 6 3
2016 5,74·10-6 2,47·10- - 3,00·10-6 9,60·10- 2,34·10- 0,78·10-4 1,6·10-3
4 5 6
2017 4,64·10-6 2,34·10- - - - 3,45·10- 0,78·10-4 1,60·10-
4 6 3
2018 - - - - - 3,79·10- 0,78·10-4 0
6
year/ Chernogorsk Omsk
subst. Benzo(a)pyrene Formaldehyde Benzo(a)pyrene Formaldehyde
2008 5,24·10-6 9,62·10-5 2,01·10-6 1,43·10-4
2009 6,80·10-6 9,10·10-5 2,56·10-6 8,97·10-5
2010 7,58·10-6 8,19·10-5 2,45·10-6 8,97·10-5
2011 5,68·10-6 1,01·10-4 2,45·10-6 7,80·10-5
2012 4,29·10-6 1,11·10-4 2,23·10-6 8,58·10-5
2013 - 1,17·10-4 1,34·10-6 9,36·10-5
2015 6,50·10-6 - - -
2016 6,13·10 -6
2,34·10 -5
8,91·10 -7
4,68·10-5
2017 7,91·10-6 3,12·10-5 1,00·10-7 2,73·10-5
Note: «-» no data; the allocated risk values exceed the level of acceptable risk for the population.
An individual risk of developing carcinogenic effects is considered acceptable if its values do not exceed 10 -6 year-1
for the population (one victim per million people) [8] and for professional groups from 10 -4 year-1 (for functioning
facilities) to 10-5 year-1 (for newly constructed facilities) [9].
The risk to public health from inhalation exposure, exceeding an acceptable level, is formed under the influence of
benzo(a)pyrene, ethylbenzene and lead in all considered cities of the Siberian Federal District. In general, for the same
substances, the levels of individual carcinogenic risks in different cities differ insignificantly.
Given the levels of acceptable individual risk of carcinogenic effects of 10 -6 year-1 for the population and 10-4 year-1
for professional groups, a ratio of 3 was obtained to determine the AQS of the above substances:
𝐵𝑊
𝐴𝑄𝑆𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 𝐼𝐶𝑅 ∙ 𝑆𝐹∙𝐷𝐴𝐶 (3)
The calculation results of the AQScalculated are given in table 2.
Table 2.Information on hazard indicators of cancerogenic effects and threshold concentrations [8, 10, 11]
Substance/ Benz(a)pyrene Formaldehyde Lead Ethylben- Benzene Aniline
indicator zene
IARC 2А 2A 2А 2B 1 3
ЕРА В2 B1 В2 D А В2
Carcinogenic potencial
factor (inhalation) 3,9 4,6·10-2 4,2·10-2 3,9·10-3 2,7·10-2 5,7·10-3
SFi, ((kg ·day) / mg)-1
Single risk (inhalation)
URi (m3/mg) 1,114 1,3·10-2 1,2·10-2 1,0·10-3 8,0·10-3 1,6·10-2
Hazardclass 1 2 1 3 2 2
AQS
(daily average) 1,0·10-6 3,0·10-3 3,0·10-4 2,0·10-3 0,1 3,0·10-2
(mg / m3)
AQS - 3,5·10-2 1,0·10-3 4,0·10-2 0,3 5,0·10-2
(maximal-times),
(mg/m3)
Reference concentrations
for chronic inhalation 1,0·10-6 3,0·10-3 5,0·10-4 1 3,0·10-2 1,0·10-3
exposure (mg/kg)
AQScalculated 8,97·10-7 7,61·10-5 8,3·10-5 9,1·10-4 1,3·10-4 6,1·10-4
for the population
(mg/m3)
AQScalculated
for professional groups 8,97·10-5 7,61·10-3 8,3·10-3 9,1·10-2 1,3·10-2 6,1·10-2
(mg/m3)
Note:
classifications of agents using IARC – International Agency for Research on Cancer
- Group 1 –The agent is carcinogenic to humans, Group 2A – The agent is probably carcinogenic to humans, Group 2B
– The agent is possibly carcinogenic to humans, Group 3: The agent is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to
humans.
Standard US EPA Cancer Classification:
- Group A: "Human Carcinogen", Group B1: "Probable Human Carcinogen", Group B2: "Probable Human
Carcinogen", Group D: "Not Classifiable as to Human Carcinogenicity"
SFi-carcinogenic potency slope(mg/kg/day);
URi -unit inhalation risk for 1 mg/ m3.
Table 2 shows the main hazard indicators for the development of carcinogenic effects - information established by
various hygienic regulatory documents: a single risk for the inhalation route of intake, daily and maximum single doses,
reference concentrations for the above substances, and also established revised AQS values for the population and
professional groups, taking into account the acceptability of the risk.
The standards for the content of pollutants in the air, taking into account their impact on public health, determined in
accordance with the methodology for assessing public health risks, are less than the AQS established for the relevant
substances by 1-3 orders of magnitude. The greatest difference between the current AQS level and the calculated one,
based on the direct effect of the substance on human health, was revealed for benzene. At the same time, benzene is one
of the priority substances in the study of the environmental impact on public health. Underestimation of the levels of
urban air pollution by this substance can lead to an increase in the number of pathological conditions associated with its
effect, such as blood diseases and cancer [12].
Another difference of the proposed standards from the current AQSs is that the maximum permissible
concentrations used in our country are not always justified by the effects directly related to health: 53% of the AQS for
water bodies (maximum permissible concentration) are based on the organoleptic sign of harmfulness and 20% -
according to the general sanitary indicator; 30% of the AQS of populated areas is established by human reflex reactions
[13]. While the risk assessment used in this approach is based solely on criteria reflecting the direct impact of chemicals
on the health of the most sensitive populations. In addition, the regulated AQSs refer to the average daily standards,
while the proposed standards are average annual standards.
A comparison of the proposed standards for average annual maximum permissible concentration with the observed
level of pollution in industrial centers of Siberia shows a significant excess of the main indicators of the carcinogenic
hazard of atmospheric air for public health, such as benzo(a)pyrene, formaldehyde, lead, benzene and ethylbenzene.
In the course of further studies, the calculated average annual AQS standards will be determined taking into account
the real effect of pollution on public health for other substances of a carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic effect that enter
the human body not only by inhalation, but also by oral route. In addition, the proposed approach can be used to revise
the industrial exhaust standards and clarify the amount of damage associated with the effects of air pollution on public
health.
The reported study was funded by Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Government of Krasnoyarsk
territory, Krasnoyarsk Regional Fund of Sciences to the research project№18-47-240006: «Methods and
information technologies for risk assessment of the development of social-natural-technogenic systems in an
industrial region».
References
[1] Akimov V.A., Lapin V.L., Popov V.M. and others. Reliability of technical systems and technological
risk. M.: CJSC FID "DelovoyExpress", 2002. 368 p.
[2] Akimov V.A., Lesnykh V.V., Radaev N.N. Fundamentals of risk analysis and management in natural and man-
made areas. M.: CJSC FID "BusinessExpress", 2004. 352 p.
[3] Alymov V.T., Krapchatov V.P., Tarasova N.P. Man-made risk analysis. M .: Allyear, 2000. 160 р.
[4] Baldin K.V., Vorobev S.N. Management of risks. M .: UNITY-DANA, 2005. 511 p.
[5] Security of Russia. Legal, socio-economic and scientific-technical aspects. Regional security issues. Krasnoyarsk
region. M .: Knowledge, 2001.576 p.
[6] Taseyko O.V., Mikhalyuta S.V., Lezhenin A.A., Justification of standards of quality of atmospheric air in the city
// Ekologiya and industry of Russia, 2013. P. 56-61.
[7] Safety of Russia. Functioning and development difficult narodokhozyaystvennykh, technical, power, transport
systems, communication systems and communications. M.: Knowledge, 1998. 448 p.
[8] "Guidelines for assessing the risk to public health under the influence of chemicals polluting the environment. R
2.1.10.1920-04" (approved by the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of the Russian Federation 05.03.2004)
[9] Declaration of the Russian scientific organization of risk analysis "About establishment of maximum permissible
risk level". http://www.sra-russia.ru
[10] Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring. The average annual concentration of
benzo(a)pyrene in cities in Russia.
http://voeikovmgo.ru/?option=com_content&view=article&id=683:27042015aq32&catid=15&Itemid=11&lang=e
n
[11] Hygiene standards 2.1.6.3492-17 "Air quality standards (AQS) of air pollutants in urban and rural settlements"
(as amended on May 31, 2018). http://docs.cntd.ru/document/556185926
[12] "The guide to complex prevention of ecologically caused diseases on the basis of risk assessment". M. 2017. 68p.
https://static-3.rosminzdrav.ru/system/attachments/attaches/000/036/600/original /Rukovodstvo.pdf? 1512992582
[13] MosMR 2.1.9.004-03 "Criteria for evaluation of risk for health of the population of the priority chemicals
polluting the environment". http://docs.cntd.ru/document/3715847