A Deterministic Method for Deriving Site-Specific Human Health Assessment Criteria for Contaminants in Soil

Nathanail, Paul; McCaffrey, C.; Earl, Naomi; Foster, Neil D.; Gillett, A. G.; Ogden, Richard

doi:10.1080/10807030590925650

Cited by 32 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When there is no standard, the government policies considered here [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] tend to neglect the soil pollutant involved. This may lead to a divergence between risk as established by governments and actual risks.…”

Section: Absence Of Quality Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These risks are expressed in terms of negative effects and chances between 0 and 1 that such negative effects will occur. Examples of areas where riskoriented policies are applied to soil pollution include the United States of America [1,2], Canada [3], and countries in the European Union [4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Historically, these riskoriented policies have followed the abandonment of policies aimed at restoring soils to their original "clean" state (e.g., [5]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Risk-based criteria have been applied to decisions about soil remediation in the form of soil cleanup standards [2,9,10], to the use of soils for specific purposes [11,12], and in the United States also to sediment management [13]. The risk-oriented policies considered here [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13], assume that background exposure to pollutants carries no risk and that a specified level of soil pollution carries a maximum tolerable or maximum acceptable risk for organisms living locally. The latter is the main basis for standard setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Are Soil Pollution Risks Established by Governments the Same as Actual Risks?

Reijnders

2009

Applied and Environmental Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Though soil pollution policies in North America and the European Union increasingly use risk-based standards, the construction and application of such standards are often deficient in taking account of actual risks. Standards refer to total concentrations of substances and not to the biologically available amount. A number of countries neglect “background” exposure, and assumptions regarding routes of exposure to soil pollution can be very different and at variance with empirical data. Recent dose-effect studies are neglected in a number of cases. The application of standards does not take account of the overall risk of soil pollution but rather leads to the decision whether or not there is violation of at least one standard for a specified (group of) substance(s). Standards for soil pollutants are often based on the assumption that only effect addition can occur, whereas dose addition, antagonism and synergism, and indirect effects may in fact apply. Several remedies for current shortcomings are proposed.

show abstract

Section: Absence Of Quality Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are Soil Pollution Risks Established by Governments the Same as Actual Risks?

Reijnders

2009

Applied and Environmental Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the United Kingdom (UK) these criteria are usually referred to as Generic/Site specific Assessment Criteria (GAC/SSAC) (Environment Agency 2004, 2009b or Soil Screening Levels (SSL) (DEFRA 2014). According to Nathanail (2005) GAC "should represent contaminant concentrations below which there is no unacceptable risk to human health", these criteria provide a cautious approach to any risk assessment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Assessment criteria derived using bioaccessibility data for the ingestion pathway in the UK, are an effective basis for reducing conservatism in risk assessment, and over the past decade or so have gained broad regulatory acceptance (Environment Agency 2009b;Nathanail et al 2005). In vivo bioavailability As, Cr, Pb apportionment Glasgow soils data are expensive and raise important ethical issues (Denys et al, 2012;Wragg et al 2011), so in response, in vitro bioaccessibility tests have been developed, which, although costlier than analysis of the total PHE, assist in providing a surrogate for in vivo bioavailability data.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Linkage between solid-phase apportionment and bioaccessible arsenic, chromium and lead in soil from Glasgow, Scotland, UK

Wragg

Broadway²,

Cave

et al. 2017

Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Socie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As, Cr, Pb apportionment Glasgow soils Abstract The chemical composition of soil from the Glasgow (UK) urban area was used to identify the controls on the availability of potentially harmful elements (PHE) in soil to humans. Total and bioaccessible concentrations of arsenic, chromium and lead in 27 soil samples, collected from different land uses, were coupled to information on their solid phase partitioning derived from sequential extraction data.The total element concentrations in the soils were in the range <0.1-135 mg kg -1 for As; 65-3680 mg kg -1 for Cr and 126-2160 mg kg -1 for Pb, with bioaccessible concentrations averaging 27, 5 and 27% of the total values respectively. Land use does not appear to be a predictor of contamination, however the history of the contamination is critically important. The CISED (Chemometric Identification of Substrates and Element Distribution) sequential chemical extraction and associated self modelling mixture resolution (SMMR) analysis identified three sample groupings and 16 geochemically distinct phases (substrates). These were related to Fe (n = 3), Al-Si (n = 2), Ca (n = 3), P (n = 1), Mg (n = 3), Mn (n = 1) and easily extractable (n = 3) which was predominantly made up of Na and S. Arsenic, Cr and Pb were respectively found in 9, 10 and 12 of the identified phases with bioaccessible As predominantly associated with easily extractable phases, bioaccessible Cr with the Mg-dominated phases and bioaccessible Pb with both the Mg-dominated and Al-Si phases. Using a combination of the UBM to measure the bioaccessibility of PHE and CISED to identify the geochemical sources has allowed a much better understanding of the complexity of PHE mobility in the Glasgow urban environment. This approach can be applied to other urban environments and soil contamination, and made part of land use planning.

show abstract

Environmental Remediation

Stein¹,

Kerle²

2008

Encyclopedia of Quantitative Risk Analysis and Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This entry gives an overview of environmental remediation, with an emphasis on soil issues. The concept of risk is defined, followed by different ways of modeling (deterministic, probabilistic, and hybrid). A distinction is made between in situ and ex situ remediation and issues of spatial statistics are included. The issue is illustrated with an example on an environmental cost model.

show abstract

A Deterministic Method for Deriving Site-Specific Human Health Assessment Criteria for Contaminants in Soil

Cited by 32 publications

References 10 publications

Are Soil Pollution Risks Established by Governments the Same as Actual Risks?

Are Soil Pollution Risks Established by Governments the Same as Actual Risks?

Linkage between solid-phase apportionment and bioaccessible arsenic, chromium and lead in soil from Glasgow, Scotland, UK

Environmental Remediation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About