Advertisement

Health Risk Assessment of Some Dominant Heavy Metal Species Detected in Subsurface Water Near Kolkata MSW Landfill Site

  • Vandana Parth
  • Somnath Mukherjee
Chapter

Abstract

A pollution monitoring study has been conducted to assess the extent of heavy metal/metalloid contamination in subsurface water in the neighbourhood of municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal site in Kolkata metropolitan city, India. On the basis of observed experimental data, the associated carcinogenic and non carcinogenic risks were quantitatively estimated. Water samples (n = 36) were collected and analysed for its toxic metal content by dynamic reaction cell inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (DRC-ICP-MS). The average concentration of metal μgL−1 in subsurface water is found as Cr-74.14, Mn-75.78, Pb-19.96, Fe-615.60, Ni-26.71, Co-5.13, Cu-16.33, Zn-750.50, As-42.03, Cd-3.80. The carcinogenic risk is articulated as the likelihood of cancer manifestation through exposure to site related pollutants. Among tested chemicals, arsenic is established to induce cancer in residents of study area. Cancer risk owing to ingestion and dermal exposure is 8.12E04 and 4.32E06 respectively. The total value of incremental lifetime cancer risk (ILCR) for resident is found as 8.16E04. The cumulative hazard index for non carcinogenic risk (Σ HI = dermal and ingestion) for child (1.03E+01) and adult (6.21E+00) reveals that toxic risk is beyond tolerable limit (HQ > 1.00). Alarming values of such hazardous inorganic compounds addresses that there is a risk factor in all kinds of environmental receptors and concerning stake holders. The risk assessment data provides a rational tool for decision makers in corporation level to take up risk management strategies at the polluted site.

Keywords

Carcinogenic risk Hazard index Subsurface water Heavy metal 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the University Grants Commission, New Delhi, India.

References

  1. 1.
    He J, Charlet L (2013) A review of arsenic presence in China drinking water. J Hydrol 492:79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leung CM, Jiao JJ (2006) Heavy metal and trace element distributions in groundwater in natural slopes and highly urbanized spaces in mid-levels area, Hong Kong. Water Res 40:753–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mohanraj R, Azeez PA, Priscilla T (2004) Heavy metals in airborne particulate matter of urban Coimbatore. Contam Toxicol 47:162–167Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zereini F, Alt F, Messerschmidt J, Wiseman C, Feldmann I, von Bohlen A, Muller J, Liebl K, Puttmann W (2005) Concentration and distribution of heavy metals in urban airborne particulate matter in Frankfurt, Germany. Environ Sci Technol 39:2983–2989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li P, Qian H (2011) Human health risk assessment for chemical pollutants in drinking water source in Shizuishan City, Northwest China. J Environ Health Sci Eng 8:41–48Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu P, Huang S, Wang ZA, Lagos G (2006) Daily intakes of copper, zinc and arsenic in drinking water by population of Shanghai, China. Sci Total Environ 362:50–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Badr EAE, Agrama AAE, Badr SAE (2011) Heavy metals in drinking water and human health, Egypt. Nutr Food Sci 41:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Demir V, Dere T, Ergin S, Cakr Y, Celik F (2015) Determination and health risk assessment of heavy metals in drinking water of Tunceli, Turkey. Water Resource 42:508–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bakis R, Tuncan A (2011) An investigation of heavy metal and migration through groundwater from the landfill area of Eskisehir in Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 176:87–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    El Khatib R, Lartiges BS, El Samrani A, Faure P, Houhou J, Ghanbaja J (2012) Speciation of organic matter and heavy metals in urban wastewaters from an emerging country. Water Air Soil Pollut 223:4695–4708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) (2000) Strategic environmental assessment for water use Mhlathuze catchment—KZN. Report No. SEA-01/2000, DWAF: Pretoria, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) (2002) Water quality issues in the Usutu-Mhlathuze: review of water quality status and issues in the WMA; DWAF: Pretoria, South Africa, p 27Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Howd RA, Fan AM (2008) Risk assessment for chemicals in drinking water. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rodriguez Proteau R, Grant RL (2005) Toxicity evaluation and human health risk assessment of surface and groundwater contaminated by recycled hazardous waste materials. In: Handbook of environmental chemistry, vol 2 (Part F), Springer, Berlin, pp. 133–189Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    USEPA (2000) Science policy council’s risk characterization handbook (Office of Science Policy, Washington, DC 20460, EPA 100-B-00-002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matzke A, Sturdevant D, Wigal J (2011) Human health criteria issue paper—toxics rulemaking. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nguyen VA, Bang S, Viet PH, Kim KW (2009) Contamination of groundwater and risk assessment for arsenic exposure in Ha Nam province. Vietnam Environ Intl 35(3):466–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Balaram V (1993) Characterization of trace elements in environmental samples by ICP-MS. At Spectrosc 6:174–179Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    USEPA (1989) Risk assessment guidance for superfund, vol 1 (Human health manual-part A), EPA/540/1-89/002Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    USEPA (1992) Definitions and general principles for exposure assessment. Guidelines for exposure assessment, Washington, DC: Office of Pesticide Programs, USAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    USEPA (1996) Quantitative uncertainty analysis of super fund residential risk path way models for soil and groundwater. White Paper. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Oak Ridge, TN, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    USEPA, IRIS (2011) US Environmental Protection Agency’s Integrated Risk Information System. http://www.epa.gov/iris/
  23. 23.
    Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) (2011) Risk based chemicals for individual chemicals, environmental cleanup and tanks program. Revision September 15Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    USEPA (2011) Regional screening levels (RSL) summary table. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    WHO (2006) Drinking water guidelines. World Health Organization Standard, Geneva, p 6Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vandana Parth
    • 1
  • Somnath Mukherjee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations