28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Ranking Cancer Risks of Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants in the United States

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          In this study we compared cancer risks from organic hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) based on total personal exposure summed across different microenvironments and exposure pathways.

          Methods

          We developed distributions of personal exposure concentrations using field monitoring and modeling data for inhalation and, where relevant, ingestion pathways. We calculated risks for a nonoccupationally exposed and nonsmoking population using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) unit risks. We determined the contribution to risk from indoor versus outdoor sources using indoor/outdoor ratios for gaseous compounds and the infiltration factor for particle-bound compounds.

          Results

          With OEHHA’s unit risks, the highest ranking compounds based on the population median are 1,3-butadiene, formaldehyde, benzene, and dioxin, with risks on the order of 10 −4–10 −5. The highest risk compounds with the U.S. EPA unit risks were dioxin, benzene, formaldehyde, and chloroform, with risks on a similar order of magnitude. Although indoor exposures are responsible for nearly 70% of risk using OEHHA’s unit risks, when infiltration is accounted for, inhalation of outdoor sources contributed 50% to total risk, on average. Additionally, 15% of risk resulted from exposures through food, mainly due to dioxin.

          Conclusions

          Most of the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, benzene, acetaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene risk came from outdoor sources, whereas indoor sources were primarily responsible for chloroform, formaldehyde, and naphthalene risks. The infiltration of outdoor pollution into buildings, emissions from indoor sources, and uptake through food are all important to consider in reducing overall personal risk to HAPs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references83

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants.

          Because human activities impact the timing, location, and degree of pollutant exposure, they play a key role in explaining exposure variation. This fact has motivated the collection of activity pattern data for their specific use in exposure assessments. The largest of these recent efforts is the National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS), a 2-year probability-based telephone survey (n=9386) of exposure-related human activities in the United States (U.S.) sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The primary purpose of NHAPS was to provide comprehensive and current exposure information over broad geographical and temporal scales, particularly for use in probabilistic population exposure models. NHAPS was conducted on a virtually daily basis from late September 1992 through September 1994 by the University of Maryland's Survey Research Center using a computer-assisted telephone interview instrument (CATI) to collect 24-h retrospective diaries and answers to a number of personal and exposure-related questions from each respondent. The resulting diary records contain beginning and ending times for each distinct combination of location and activity occurring on the diary day (i.e., each microenvironment). Between 340 and 1713 respondents of all ages were interviewed in each of the 10 EPA regions across the 48 contiguous states. Interviews were completed in 63% of the households contacted. NHAPS respondents reported spending an average of 87% of their time in enclosed buildings and about 6% of their time in enclosed vehicles. These proportions are fairly constant across the various regions of the U.S. and Canada and for the California population between the late 1980s, when the California Air Resources Board (CARB) sponsored a state-wide activity pattern study, and the mid-1990s, when NHAPS was conducted. However, the number of people exposed to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in California seems to have decreased over the same time period, where exposure is determined by the reported time spent with a smoker. In both California and the entire nation, the most time spent exposed to ETS was reported to take place in residential locations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Sources of fine organic aerosol. 2. Noncatalyst and catalyst-equipped automobiles and heavy-duty diesel trucks

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Concentration and size distribution of ultrafine particles near a major highway.

              Motor vehicle emissions usually constitute the most significant source of ultrafine particles (diameter <0.1 microm) in an urban environment, yet little is known about the concentration and size distribution of ultrafine particles in the vicinity of major highways. In the present study, particle number concentration and size distribution in the size range from 6 to 220 nm were measured by a condensation particle counter (CPC) and a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS), respectively. Measurements were taken 30, 60, 90, 150, and 300 m downwind, and 300 m upwind, from Interstate 405 at the Los Angeles National Cemetery. At each sampling location, concentrations of CO, black carbon (BC), and particle mass were also measured by a Dasibi CO monitor, an aethalometer, and a DataRam, respectively. The range of average concentration of CO, BC, total particle number, and mass concentration at 30 m was 1.7-2.2 ppm, 3.4-10.0 microg/m3, 1.3-2.0 x 10(5)/cm3, and 30.2-64.6 microg/m3, respectively. For the conditions of these measurements, relative concentrations of CO, BC, and particle number tracked each other well as distance from the freeway increased. Particle number concentration (6-220 nm) decreased exponentially with downwind distance from the freeway. Data showed that both atmospheric dispersion and coagulation contributed to the rapid decrease in particle number concentration and change in particle size distribution with increasing distance from the freeway. Average traffic flow during the sampling periods was 13,900 vehicles/hr. Ninety-three percent of vehicles were gasoline-powered cars or light trucks. The measured number concentration tracked traffic flow well. Thirty meters downwind from the freeway, three distinct ultrafine modes were observed with geometric mean diameters of 13, 27, and 65 nm. The smallest mode, with a peak concentration of 1.6 x 10(5)/cm3, disappeared at distances greater than 90 m from the freeway. Ultrafine particle number concentration measured 300 m downwind from the freeway was indistinguishable from upwind background concentration. These data may be used to estimate exposure to ultrafine particles in the vicinity of major highways.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Health Perspect
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
                0091-6765
                August 2007
                15 May 2007
                : 115
                : 8
                : 1160-1168
                Affiliations
                [1 ] KTL, National Public Health Institute, Department of Environmental Health, Kuopio, Finland
                [2 ] Harvard School of Public Health, Department of Environmental Health, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
                [3 ] University of Massachusetts, Lowell, Department of Work Environment, Lowell, Massachusetts, USA
                [4 ] University of California, Davis, Department of Public Health Sciences, Davis, California, USA
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to M.M. Loh, KTL, National Public Health Institute, Department of Environmental Health, P.O. Box 95, 70701 Kuopio, Finland. Telephone: +358 17 201 394. Fax: +358 17 201 184. E-mail: miranda.loh@ 123456ktl.fi

                The authors declare they have no competing financial interests.

                Article
                ehp0115-001160
                10.1289/ehp.9884
                1940102
                17687442
                49506eec-06d2-4ae6-9f5c-59e4e7758972
                This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original DOI
                History
                : 6 November 2006
                : 15 May 2007
                Categories
                Research

                Public health
                personal exposure,polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons,risk assessment,volatile organic compounds,hazardous air pollutants

                Comments

                Comment on this article